EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...

[bramling]

Is that the fault of immigration, or the fault of a government not planning and building infrastructure in addition to encouraging moves away from honeypots?

It doesn't really matter whose fault it is, fact is it's reality.

Says the true Brexiteer and Conservative with a few £££ - I'm OK so **** the rest of you.

Yes those few £££ which I've worked for and taken the trouble to save. So no guilty conscience here.

 

[Puffing Devil]

It doesn't really matter whose fault it is, fact is it's reality.

It does matter if you're citing it as a reason to leave the EU, when it's not down to being a member of the EU. It's our own government's failure to act; much like immigration could easily be controlled and restricted to those who are self-supporting. The government chose not to do that.

Yes those few £££ which I've worked for and taken the trouble to save. So no guilty conscience here.

And you're quite happy to leave consign a large number of the population to low-wage gig economy with zero job security. Shame on you.

I hope you never need to use the NHS or require any care in the future should your savings run out.

 

[Spamcan81]

It’s all very well advocating a pyramid system until space runs out. Parts of the country are already reaching the point where it is proving difficult to increase population density without negative implications.

I’ve saved for my retirement, so I have no vested interest in the pyramid.

You may not think so but should you ever need social care in the future, you'd better hope that the pyramid is still there. Wealth is no defence against many of the problems brought on by old age.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

It does matter if you're citing it as a reason to leave the EU, when it's not down to being a member of the EU. It's our own government's failure to act; much like immigration could easily be controlled and restricted to those who are self-supporting. The government chose not to do that.



And you're quite happy to leave consign a large number of the population to low-wage gig economy with zero job security. Shame on you.

Much as I don't want to end up arguing the Brexit case, I fear you may have just been caught out by your own logic there. There is no reason per se why Brexit should lead to a low-wage gig economy. There is however a strong risk that the Tory Government might choose to turn the UK into a low-wage gig economy after Brexit. And since you've just quite correctly pointed out that we shouldn't blame the EU for things that are the UK Government's choice... I assume you'd agree that we likewise shouldn't blame Brexit for things that are the UK Government's choice...

 

[Ianno87]

Re: Immigration. The argument is a near total red herring anyway.

Population is forecast to grow by around 10% over the next 10 years. If all net EU migration ended (and was not backfilled by other immigratiom). It would still increase by 8.5%. It's a complete drop in the ocean.

And with it lose the diverse range of people and skills that come with it. What a dull, joyless life you must lead if that frightens you.

I've worked with colleagues from Ireland, France, Belgium, Germany, Spain, Italy, Poland, Slovakia, Belarus, Hungary, Greece, Bulgaria, Malta, Holland and many more and wouldn't have wanted it any other way for making my life and the workplace diverse and interesting. And, most importantly, with genuinely valuable skills, doing jobs that Barry from the Dog and Duck is simply not capable of doing.

Any voting on such a basis to reduce immigration is gullible, misguided, and has been sold a total lie.

 

[Spamcan81]

Re: Immigration. The argument is a near total red herring anyway.

Population is forecast to grow by around 10% over the next 10 years. If all net EU migration ended (and was not backfilled by other immigratiom). It would still increase by 8.5%. It's a complete drop in the ocean.

And with it lose the diverse range of people and skills that come with it. What a dull, joyless life you must lead if that frightens you.

I've worked with colleagues from Ireland, France, Belgium, Germany, Spain, Italy, Poland, Slovakia, Belarus, Hungary, Greece, Bulgaria, Malta, Holland and many more and wouldn't have wanted it any other way for making my life and the workplace diverse and interesting. And, most importantly, with genuinely valuable skills, doing jobs that Barry from the Dog and Duck is simply not capable of doing.

Any voting on such a basis to reduce immigration is gullible, misguided, and has been sold a total lie.

Where is the "like" button when you need one?
An excellent post but sadly it will unlikely change the minds of racists, xenophobes and other rabid Brexiteers.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Re: Immigration. The argument is a near total red herring anyway.

Population is forecast to grow by around 10% over the next 10 years. If all net EU migration ended (and was not backfilled by other immigratiom). It would still increase by 8.5%. It's a complete drop in the ocean.

Where did you get that forecast from? A quick check on ONS says the prediction is 4.5% population growth in the ten years to 2028 (but 5% for England). But even if your figures are correct, you're claiming 15% less immigration overall if Brexit happens. That's hardly a drop in the ocean - it's nearly a million people - and that adds up to a lot less infrastructure that needs to be built to accommodate them.

I've worked with colleagues from Ireland, France, Belgium, Germany, Spain, Italy, Poland, Slovakia, Belarus, Hungary, Greece, Bulgaria, Malta, Holland and many more and wouldn't have wanted it any other way for making my life and the workplace diverse and interesting. And, most importantly, with genuinely valuable skills, doing jobs that Barry from the Dog and Duck is simply not capable of doing.

I completely agree: My experience is also that interacting with people from different countries makes life much more interesting. And for me there's also an important issue that people should - as far as reasonably practical - be able to make their own lives, including choosing where they want to live, without interference from Governments. But at the same time there are issues that too rapid population growth puts a strain on our infrastructure, while large movements in population in a small geographical area can reduce the sense of community. Realistically, 10% population growth in 10 years across the country would require a huge investment in building schools, hospitals, electricity supplies, transport links, houses, and so on - and I very much doubt that we have enough people with the required infrastructure-planning/building skills to get even close to that, even if the Government was actively prioritising building it all.

Now I'm more inclined to believe the 4.5% prediction, but even so, I think that highlights that there are reasons to be concerned about migration levels that don't have anything to do with being xenophobic or anti-foreigner. (Although to be fair, the xenophobic angle is exactly what much of the Brexit campaign during the referendum played on, which I think was appalling).

 

[Ianno87]

.

It was from the 2016 figures (https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...ationprojections/2016basedstatisticalbulletin) though I was misremembering the figures - net forecast population growth is actually about 5.5% over 10 years.

This splits about half and half between births outweighing deaths and net inward migration.

Then of the net inward migration, less than half of that is from the EU27 (sorry, can't rememver the source for that).

 

[edwin_m]

It's all well and good saying that, but rebalancing towards elsewhere hasn't happened, and is showing no sign of happening. There's little benefit in housing people in places where they don't want to be and/or can't find work. Meanwhile good luck developing the many mountainous parts of Wales, Scotland or even England.

The EU has been active in rebalancing across Europe including to the poorer regions of the UK. You may argue that this is just giving some of our own contributions back to us, but considering their usual attitude to the regions I'm unconvinced that Westminster governments would have spent it any more wisely. There seems to be a general realization that subsidies to businesses to relocate don't really work and the emphasis is now more towards investing in infrastructure to make the regions intrinsically more competitive. HS2 is the obvious example, but many of the rabid Brexiteers would be happy to abandon that, and with Brexit damaging the economy investment becomes that much more difficult anyway.

Much as I don't want to end up arguing the Brexit case, I fear you may have just been caught out by your own logic there. There is no reason per se why Brexit should lead to a low-wage gig economy. There is however a strong risk that the Tory Government might choose to turn the UK into a low-wage gig economy after Brexit. And since you've just quite correctly pointed out that we shouldn't blame the EU for things that are the UK Government's choice... I assume you'd agree that we likewise shouldn't blame Brexit for things that are the UK Government's choice...

As a member of the EU, the UK has to abide by a whole range of EU regulations including protections for workers and the environment, although some would argue these aren't strong enough. But one of the big changes from the May deal to this version is that it leaves the door open for Britain to diverge from these rules in future - this is the main reason the ERG group of Tory MPs is now supporting it. So getting out of the EU is a stepping stone to the sort of low-wage gig economy those people desire. It is not certain to happen, but that particular battle has been postponed rather than settled, and will no doubt still be dividing society in future years if we leave on this deal.

 

[bramling]

Re: Immigration. The argument is a near total red herring anyway.

Population is forecast to grow by around 10% over the next 10 years. If all net EU migration ended (and was not backfilled by other immigratiom). It would still increase by 8.5%. It's a complete drop in the ocean.

And with it lose the diverse range of people and skills that come with it. What a dull, joyless life you must lead if that frightens you.

I've worked with colleagues from Ireland, France, Belgium, Germany, Spain, Italy, Poland, Slovakia, Belarus, Hungary, Greece, Bulgaria, Malta, Holland and many more and wouldn't have wanted it any other way for making my life and the workplace diverse and interesting. And, most importantly, with genuinely valuable skills, doing jobs that Barry from the Dog and Duck is simply not capable of doing.

Any voting on such a basis to reduce immigration is gullible, misguided, and has been sold a total lie.

I think the above sums up what the remain side simply don’t grasp. The more any discussion on immigration is turned into an emotive subject, the more it encourages people to vote along such lines. I’m not “frightened” of immigration, and I’m quite content living a life where I have more things on the to-do list than hours in the day to carry them out.

It’s all very well arguing about drops in the ocean, however one could apply the same argument to climate change - at some point there will be one drop too many which will overtop the sea wall, so to speak. As regards population growth parts of the south-east aren’t massively far from that point, as anyone who has experienced the total gridlock of much of Hertfordshire when something closes the A1(M)! Brexit already seems to have brought on a slowing of house-price inflation, which most people regard as desirable (and before anyone accuses me of being self-oriented, my house is paid off so no direct benefit to me).

 

[Puffing Devil]

Much as I don't want to end up arguing the Brexit case, I fear you may have just been caught out by your own logic there. There is no reason per se why Brexit should lead to a low-wage gig economy. There is however a strong risk that the Tory Government might choose to turn the UK into a low-wage gig economy after Brexit. And since you've just quite correctly pointed out that we shouldn't blame the EU for things that are the UK Government's choice... I assume you'd agree that we likewise shouldn't blame Brexit for things that are the UK Government's choice...

Low wage, gig economy is written into BJ's WAB. Employment and environmental protections will be stripped out of UK law. That's down to the Brexit process.

 

[Puffing Devil]

I think the above sums up what the remain side simply don’t grasp. The more any discussion on immigration is turned into an emotive subject, the more it encourages people to vote along such lines. I’m not “frightened” of immigration, and I’m quite content living a life where I have more things on the to-do list than hours in the day to carry them out.

Interesting hypothesis - with no evidence to support it other than a sample population of one.

It’s all very well arguing about drops in the ocean, however one could apply the same argument to climate change - at some point there will be one drop too many which will overtop the sea wall, so to speak. As regards population growth parts of the south-east aren’t massively far from that point, as anyone who has experienced the total gridlock of much of Hertfordshire when something closes the A1(M)! Brexit already seems to have brought on a slowing of house-price inflation, which most people regard as desirable (and before anyone accuses me of being self-oriented, my house is paid off so no direct benefit to me).

In addition to having savings and your own mortgage-free home can I also assume that you have the benefit of a final salary pension, don't import or export anything and rarely travel outside of the UK?

You're perfectly insulated from the consequences of your vote and your previously declared lack of empathy means that you probably don't care about those who will really suffer as a result of this experiment. Though I doubt you spent much time thinking about them with your nicely filled to-do list taking most of your time. Perhaps you could find time to watch "I, Daniel Blake" and see the reality of a tory Britain.

 

[Peter Kelford]

"I, Daniel Blake"

A fine film indeed, but have members also considered that without hard-working immigrants, we wouldn't have enough houses to live in, enough doctors to keep us living and enough farmers to feed us?

 

[Bletchleyite]

A fine film indeed, but have members also considered that without hard-working immigrants, we wouldn't have enough houses to live in, enough doctors to keep us living and enough farmers to feed us?

I don't believe that is actually true, though our economy would need to be rebalanced somewhat and would look more like Switzerland with the cost of anything involving manual work being rather high.

 

[Ianno87]

I think the above sums up what the remain side simply don’t grasp. The more any discussion on immigration is turned into an emotive subject, the more it encourages people to vote along such lines. I’m not “frightened” of immigration, and I’m quite content living a life where I have more things on the to-do list than hours in the day to carry them out.

It’s all very well arguing about drops in the ocean, however one could apply the same argument to climate change - at some point there will be one drop too many which will overtop the sea wall, so to speak. As regards population growth parts of the south-east aren’t massively far from that point, as anyone who has experienced the total gridlock of much of Hertfordshire when something closes the A1(M)! Brexit already seems to have brought on a slowing of house-price inflation, which most people regard as desirable (and before anyone accuses me of being self-oriented, my house is paid off so no direct benefit to me).

Firstly, what is 'emotional' about the fact that EU workers bring skills and expertise to the UK, benefitting the UK? And the diversity of people I meet and do work with is a concrete benefit to myself from being in the EU.

The purpose of my post was contesting the 'facts' about immigration by those who cite them for a reason to vote leave....it's not nearly the level of isdue that some make it out to be. Lose EU migration (even with no relacement) and there will barely be a blip on population growth.

But taking your A1(M) example, that is due to a combination of lack of infrastructure investment (road/rail), too many kids being born for the last few decades, large amounts of economic activity in London and South East (London has *always* been a global economic hub - that should surprise nobody), and local population growth due to net immigration specifically attracted to the area.

You choose to fixate on the last one even though it is relatively insignificant compared to the other factors.

If EU migration stopped, the A1(M) is still going to gridlock from time to time for as long as London and the South East remains the economic powerhouse of the UK and people (including yourself) *choose* to live there for economic benefit to themselves. EU migration has sod all to do with it, really. Take the EU migrants out...others will take their places on the A1(M).

Leaving the EU* is not going to solve the 'problem' you think it will. Or perhaps you know this already.

*A 'problem' the UK government always had the power to do something itself about irrespective of EU membership...but chose not to. And that's apparently now the EU's fault, who've been sold as the scapegoat.

 

[Ianno87]

A fine film indeed, but have members also considered that without hard-working immigrants, we wouldn't have enough houses to live in, enough doctors to keep us living and enough farmers to feed us?

Crossrail was certainly built with a high proportion of EU workforce.

 

[Ianno87]

Though I doubt you spent much time thinking about them with your nicely filled to-do list taking most of your time. Perhaps you could find time to watch "I, Daniel Blake" and see the reality of a tory Britain.

Nah, that time gets spent writing repeated, long, rambling anti-Thameslink posts (in spite of facts) again and again and again every time somebody so much as sneezes on the GN

(incidentally, yes, I, Daniel Blake is undoubtedly worth watching. I've never got so genuinely angry through watching a film before)

 

[Puffing Devil]

Just in case anyone was sceptical about worker's rights being diminished by the big BJ and his happy band of Mogsters, have a look at this article in the FT, which I believe is not known for sensationalist tabloid ranting. (LINK)

The British government is planning to diverge from the EU on regulation and workers’ rights after Brexit, despite its pledge to maintain a “level playing field” in prime minister Boris Johnson’s deal, according to an official paper shared by ministers this week.
​

The reason that so many Tories in the "Elite" are behind Brexit is because of the opportunities it affords the wealthy to continue to grow and hide that wealth while the workers who were sold a better future become poorer, with insecure employment and a dive to the bottom on wages and ongoing cuts to social care and health.

That's why our PM tried to force through the WAB will zero scrutiny - a smokescreen around an enabling act for the disaster capitalists. Labour MPs voted for the "get it done" message so as not to lose their own seats, whilst selling their constituents down the river.

 

[Bantamzen]

Just in case anyone was sceptical about worker's rights being diminished by the big BJ and his happy band of Mogsters, have a look at this article in the FT, which I believe is not known for sensationalist tabloid ranting. (LINK)

The British government is planning to diverge from the EU on regulation and workers’ rights after Brexit, despite its pledge to maintain a “level playing field” in prime minister Boris Johnson’s deal, according to an official paper shared by ministers this week.
​

The reason that so many Tories in the "Elite" are behind Brexit is because of the opportunities it affords the wealthy to continue to grow and hide that wealth while the workers who were sold a better future become poorer, with insecure employment and a dive to the bottom on wages and ongoing cuts to social care and health.

That's why our PM tried to force through the WAB will zero scrutiny - a smokescreen around an enabling act for the disaster capitalists. Labour MPs voted for the "get it done" message so as not to lose their own seats, whilst selling their constituents down the river.

If this is true, and I have no reason to believe it isn't, then this should signal the end of Brexit. Of course it won't, but it should.

 

[Peter Kelford]

Just in case anyone was sceptical about worker's rights being diminished by the big BJ and his happy band of Mogsters, have a look at this article in the FT, which I believe is not known for sensationalist tabloid ranting. (LINK)

The British government is planning to diverge from the EU on regulation and workers’ rights after Brexit, despite its pledge to maintain a “level playing field” in prime minister Boris Johnson’s deal, according to an official paper shared by ministers this week.
​

The reason that so many Tories in the "Elite" are behind Brexit is because of the opportunities it affords the wealthy to continue to grow and hide that wealth while the workers who were sold a better future become poorer, with insecure employment and a dive to the bottom on wages and ongoing cuts to social care and health.

That's why our PM tried to force through the WAB will zero scrutiny - a smokescreen around an enabling act for the disaster capitalists. Labour MPs voted for the "get it done" message so as not to lose their own seats, whilst selling their constituents down the river.

This is 35% of Brexit (cutting corners), 35% was immigration and 25% was nostalgia. Only about 5% of why people voted to leave were genuine reasons founded on their interpretation of facts, though it should be said that I find the interpretation somewhat dubious.

 

[AlterEgo]

Many of the reasons for leaving were qualitative and not quantitative - like an opposition to cultural diversity.

It’s a depressing reflection of our times that Remainers can’t process that there are other reasons to vote for something than “will it make you a little richer or poorer”, and the relentless sealioning that’s gone on in this thread only confirms this to me.

(I’d still vote Remain tomorrow though).

 

[Peter Kelford]

like an opposition to cultural diversity.

Is this not a form of anti-immigration though?

 

[Puffing Devil]

Many of the reasons for leaving were qualitative and not quantitative - like an opposition to cultural diversity.

It’s a depressing reflection of our times that Remainers can’t process that there are other reasons to vote for something than “will it make you a little richer or poorer”, and the relentless sealioning that’s gone on in this thread only confirms this to me.

(I’d still vote Remain tomorrow though).

Quality of life? Funding social care? Funding the health service? Job security? Environmental Standards? Food safety? Freedom of movement? How's that for a starter for 10?

 

[AlterEgo]

Is this not a form of anti-immigration though?

I think many Brexiteers are against a specific sort of immigration, yes.

 

[DerekC]

Many of the reasons for leaving were qualitative and not quantitative - like an opposition to cultural diversity.

It’s a depressing reflection of our times that Remainers can’t process that there are other reasons to vote for something than “will it make you a little richer or poorer”, and the relentless sealioning that’s gone on in this thread only confirms this to me.

(I’d still vote Remain tomorrow though).

I think that one of the mistakes the Remain campaign made was in hardly mentioning the non-financial benefits of membership of the EU. The idea of international co-operation rather than conflict was a founding principle of the EU and (to me) is much more important than any perceived financial benefit to me personally. So please don't generalise about "Remainers can't process....". There are many many others who think the way I do …

PS - please clarify "sealioning" .. is that standing on your flippers making a loud and unintelligible noise, or being very concerned about fish? …….. Oh, OK - I looked it up. Now I understand, it's like a Gish Gallop.

 

[Spamcan81]

I think many Brexiteers are against a specific sort of immigration, yes.

Many Brexiteers I know are against immigration full stop. More than one has said they want to "send them home." Mind you, many of those whom they consider "immigrants" are actually UK citizens who just happen to have skin of a different colour.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think many Brexiteers are against a specific sort of immigration, yes.

Quite a lot of them are in my observation against a specific sort of immigration that Brexit will cause to increase, not decrease (I'm talking specifically of Muslims from the Middle East and Africa).

 

[Killingworth]

Quite a lot of them are in my observation against a specific sort of immigration that Brexit will cause to increase, not decrease (I'm talking specifically of Muslims from the Middle East and Africa).

The irony being that since the vote net EU immigration has decreased but non-EU figures seem to be up to compensate. The EU waves were abating, not least because the pool of younger people with the courage to move to a foreign land was drying up anyway. That's not the case from many populous countries around the globe, many of which teach English to a large proportion of their better educated people.

Perceptions are gained from many sources; facts get lost along the way.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I think that one of the mistakes the Remain campaign made was in hardly mentioning the non-financial benefits of membership of the EU. The idea of international co-operation rather than conflict was a founding principle of the EU and (to me) is much more important than any perceived financial benefit to me personally. So please don't generalise about "Remainers can't process....". There are many many others who think the way I do …

Yes that's interesting. And I think the irony is that the majority of strong Remain supporters are - I would say - probably not really motivated primarily by the financial arguments: In my experience, most strong Remainers are motivated at a gut level, by a feeling of international co-operation being the way forward, perhaps by a sense of being 'citizens of the World' and by a sense of disgust at the nationalist tone of much of the Leave campaign. And, although it's undoubtedly true that Brexit will leave the UK poorer financially, the focus on the economy in the campaign was probably more because that seemed to be a quick-and-easy way to convince floating voters.

On the other hand, I would say most strong leave voters are motivated at a gut level by the opposite: By a strong feeling of national identity and a sense that being an independent nation, separate from and not dependant on other countries, is important. In many (but not all) cases, that kind of viewpoint can coincide with a hostility towards foreigners. And the focus in the referendum campaign on the EU being supposedly an awful bureaucratic undemocratic institution was just - again - a convenient way to try to persuade floating voters.

 

[thejuggler]

Everyone lives in enclaves, it is natural behaviour to be with people you can relate to.

The rest of the piece has absolutely nothing to do with EU membership. You only have to see the Political declaration to see removal of employer rights is in the sights of the Conservative party. Minimum wage won't exist.