Should We Leave the EU?

[DarloRich]

You may have chosen to permit freedom of movement but this referendum will be the first test as to whether the general electorate agree with you and the EU,

With respect we have all chosen it by voting in both our governmental and in European elections.

Would that I had the power to decide for you all! Sadly, the last time I checked, the government were yet to ratify my position as supreme overlord of Great Britain and Northern Island. I could simply take it but one would like a manadate.

As an aside are you saying you haven't taken advantage of the principle of free movement within Europe?

 

[radamfi]

I'm not sure I see the problem, I don't have free movement to Australia and if I wanted to go there I would have to meet certain criteria and quite rightly so.

The point is, we are currently very privileged to be allowed to live in countries that are much better than the UK and we may lose that right. I don't see how that can be a good thing, for us Brits. Just because another country blocks us doesn't make it right.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Tiny compared to NI and Income Tax, how much VAT do you reckon an Eastern European living 10 to a room and working cash in hand contributes to the economy ?

The numbers have been quantified and it comes out positive. Your gut instinct, which seems to base all of your opinions, is wrong.

 

[DarloRich]

This is lazy. I've never expressed an opinion as to British retirees in Spain. I don't know what the people and authorities in Spain think of that situation. I've never suggested that Britons should expect to have free movement if that is withdrawn from Europeans coming here.

By the same token that is lazy. You are happy to criticise those deciding to exercise their right to free movement within the EU by deciding to come here but don't seem to be wiling to consider those seeking to exercise their free movement rights by leaving the country. I wonder why?

What's clear though is that they haven't been sent / exported there. A government is responsible for its country's entry requirements. It is not responsible for preventing people leaving - that is up to the recipient country to decide.

But then no one has been exported here. They exercised the same right Britons use to decide to live in France and Spain. Would you agree? How can one set of people exercising their rights be bad and another exercising the same rights not even merit an opinion?

PS: How dare you attribute words like 'dirty Eastern Europeans' to me? Do the decent thing and retract that please.

No. I didn't attribute any words to you other than those in your own quote.

 

[Barn]

By the same token that is lazy. You are happy to criticise those deciding to exercise their right to free movement within the EU by deciding to come here but don't seem to be wiling to consider those seeking to exercise their free movement rights by leaving the country. I wonder why?

I have never criticised anybody for exercising their rights. Talking about whether a general free movement policy makes macroeconomic sense for the future is not the same thing as criticising immigrants (in either direction) for having perfectly legally exercised their rights thus far. I have never criticised the social impact of immigration (because I don't feel it has been negative). I have never called for any immigrant to be removed - in fact I have said on this topic that if this were ever suggested I would vote Remain to stop it. I have never said that any immgrant would be wrong to want to come here.

You are inventing words that I have never said and, worse, you have parodied what you believe me to have said using racist language . You really must withdraw the phrase 'dirty Eastern Europeans' as it bears no resemblance to anything I have said.

 

[tony_mac]

The city boundary of Liverpool is quite narrowly defined and the corporation built many post war and sixties estates in areas which are outside the city boundary. Quite often the boundary is just a line drawn in suburbs. Although there has been decline you should really add about three quarters of the population of Sefton and all the population of Knowsley to get an overall figure for what is generally regarded as being Liverpool.

Yes, that's true, we have seen the population spread out; but the argument was about being 'overcrowded', so I think the population decline in the city itself is at least somewhat relevant (but obviously not the whole picture).
At least Bootle, Southport, and Huyton also had significant populations in the 1930s. You could add these to compare, but it would still show a significant decline overall in the city region.
Anyway, this is probably far enough off-topic - I'm sure nobody really wants to discuss verifiable facts when we could be calling each other names instead!

 

[DarloRich]

I have never criticised anybody for exercising their rights. Talking about whether a general free movement policy makes macroeconomic sense for the future is not the same thing as criticising immigrants (in either direction) for having perfectly legally exercised their rights thus far. I have never criticised the social impact of immigration (because I don't feel it has been negative). I have never called for any immigrant to be removed - in fact I have said on this topic that if this were ever suggested I would vote Remain to stop it. I have never said that any immgrant would be wrong to want to come here.

So your argument is that you DONT have a view on people leaving but DO have a view on people coming here? How can it not be hypocritical to hold that position?

Can you bring yourself to consider the position in Spain where our elderly expats take up housing stock, resources etc which is the exact thing you ( and others) criticise Europeans for doing here. Why are one set better than the other?

You are inventing words that I have never said and, worse, you have parodied what you believe me to have said using racist language . You really must withdraw the phrase 'dirty Eastern Europeans' as it bears no resemblance to anything I have said.

I have done know such thing. I have put a position to you which you refute. It is your view ( on my interpretation) that too many Europeans use their rights to come here yet you have no view on British people seeking to use their rights to live in other countries within the European Union. I chose a deliberately provocative statement to do that. You will find that I am more direct than others on this board but please report the post if you think forum rules have been broken.

 

[Barn]

Immigration has both positive and negative effects on a country's economy and public services. It for the recipient country's government and people to decide how best to manage those effects - how to promote the advantages and mitigate the costs.

The reason why I have no particular opinion on immigration policies of other countries is because I don't live there. I don't understand enough about pensions and recharging healthcare costs and the spending power of pensioners in the local economy to know what effect they are having. But more to the point, it is none of my business.

It is for the British to decide what immigration policy we want and it is for the Spanish to decide what they want to do. As I've said, if we place major restrictions on Spaniards coming to the UK (I don't think we will, by the way) then they would be perfectly in order to do the same back to us.

Far from being hypocritical, I feel that I have no right to hold an opinion on a matter which affects another country but doesn't affect me.

Nothing I have said has been a moral judgement on people deciding to move countries. I don't necessarily feel that too many Europeans have come here so far. I do believe that free movement does not give us the tools to adequately plan for the future.

If you will not at least acknowledge the hurt you have caused with your 'dirty Eastern European' phrase then this will be my last post.

 

[DarloRich]

If you will not at least acknowledge the hurt you have caused with your 'dirty Eastern European' phrase then this will be my last post.

It was not intended to cause hurt and I will apologise if you are upset.

However, I maintain you are holding a hypocritical position by classing one set of migrants above another set of migrants and that by declining to hold an opinion on British migrants moving abroad you are indicating that they are better than Europeans coming here. I am disappointed you will not even consider how they may have an impact on their new countries which is similar to the impact which European migrants are accused of creating here.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

That figure has been debunked - see the BBC's reality check report:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36046900

Just hijacking your post to make a slightly different point (not particularly aimed at you):

Taking the corrected figures, and looking up the stats for numbers of EU citizens in the UK

We find:

• 1.2 million UK citizens resident in the EU (outside the UK)
• 2.9 million EU citizens resident in the UK (2014 figures)

The difference is 1.7 million, or around 2.7% of the UK's 64M population.

So it appears that, for all the scaremongering from the Brexit side about free borders, the population of the UK is just 2.7% higher than it would have been if no migration had been possible between the EU and the UK during the last 40 years [*]. Granted that most of that will have happened in the last 10 years, but that's still a relatively insignificant population increase for that timescale.


[*] You can argue that the figures aren't quite right because they wont' account for people migrating then adopting citizenship etc., but I can't see that having a very significant impact on the figures. Free movement means that there's very little incentive for EU citizens to apply for UK citizenship, unlike non-EU residents, for whom the tight immigration controls give a very strong motivation to apply for UK citizenship as soon as possible.

Tiny compared to NI and Income Tax, how much VAT do you reckon an Eastern European living 10 to a room and working cash in hand contributes to the economy ?

I'm sure people living as you describe will pay very little tax or VAT directly. However, they will spend most of their earnings within the UK. That then goes to UK businesses and indirectly to employees of those businesses - who therefore paying more tax as a result.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It is true but I'm not going over it all again, I even included youtube footage of the late Bob Crowe saying pretty much the same thing.

Ah, so you're denying most of the self-evident impacts of EU migration. You are apparently denying even that EU migrants need to buy food when they are in the UK (since you've refused to accept that their spending money is one thing that will happen). How do you think migrants in the UK stay alive? Do you think people from the EU have some magical ability to stay alive without ever eating or drinking?

You're denying that EU migrants ever set up businesses? I guess that means the Polish grocers a couple of miles from my house that I pass every time I go to the gym is but a figment of my imagination?

And the justification you're giving for these utterly absurd beliefs is that Bob Crowe has said it?

Gosh!

 

[Barn]

It was not intended to cause hurt and I will apologise if you are upset.

However, I maintain you are holding a hypocritical position by classing one set of migrants above another set of migrants and that by declining to hold an opinion on British migrants moving abroad you are indicating that they are better than Europeans coming here. I am disappointed you will not even consider how they may have an impact on their new countries which is similar to the impact which European migrants are accused of creating here.

When have I held British expats in such high esteem? I have never expressly approved of their decisions. I haven't said that countries should be grateful to have them. They might well have a negative effect. I have never disapproved of the decisions made by migrants to come here. I certainly haven't ever claimed that one set of migrants are better than another.

My view is that immigration policy (as opposed to an individual migrant's decisions) is a matter for the state in question to decide. Isn't that just a continuation of my general view that matters of policy should be decided by democratic national measures rather than European measures? Wouldn't I be hypocritical if I advocated for Brexit and national decision-making and then started to express opinions on how other countries should manage their affairs.

This really isn't a difficult issue but despite the apology in your first paragraph you immediately go on to accuse me of 'indicating that [Britons] are better than Europeans coming here'. I have done no such thing and never will do so.

You may wonder why I'm so bothered about this. The answer is that I am not racist and I am sickened by even minor suggestions that I am. It's just not worth it. I'm out of here.

 

[Muttley]

With respect we have all chosen it by voting in both our governmental and in European elections.

NO !
41 years ago we were offered a vote on staying in a common market. Nobody voted for what it's turned into.
Likewise, what we're offered now is not what we've got, it's further European integration.

 

[miami]

I DO have a problem with over population. Everyone has fallen for the business mantra of continual year on year growth, increased profits etc etc. This country is overcrowded, the more people who arrive the more uncomfortable it becomes for all of us - pressure on housing, services etc. Immigration is the key where this referendum will be won or lost - it may not change when we leave the EU but the EU are offering us no solutions just even more of an unbridled population shift from East to West. It's quite simple you cannot go on importing another 330'000 people (I'm pretty sure it's a lot more than that in reality) year in year out with out creating a climate of unrest.

I agree.

Over the year to Mid 2014 (the latest mid-year estimates available - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33266792), UK population grew by 491,100. Over half of this was natural growth, and of the net migration over half was from outside the EU - having immigrated on a points system.

Even if all EU migration was stopped overnight (and nobody from the EU passed the point system), and no illegal EU migration occured, and the net number of brits leaving the UK (40k) was unaffected, population would still be growing, just by 300k rather than 490k. Many people are voting brexit thinking that it will stop population growth, it won't, it will barely slow it down.

There's a reason that we're importing 188,000 non-EU people every year, our society is based on population growth. You don't like it, I don't like it, but baring Logans Run style genocide of the elderly I'm not sure what the solution is.

We are not importing skilled workers or scientists - on the whole we are importing desperate, struggling people.

Oh but we are, most international arrivals -- accoridng to left wing think tank migrationwatchuk - are non-EU, and thus pass the points test. Our hospitals are full of international migrants, hardly unskilled workers.

The answer lies in regeneration of nations not mass population shift - in this the EU has got it disastrously wrong and has totally failed the people of Europe. Of course it will be difficult at first but only by rejecting this crazy EU policy will there be any hope of change.

I'd like to see a larger EU budget, with more contribution from rich areas like London and Manchester and Stockholm, to fund poor areas like the Welsh Valleys, Cornwall, and parts of Poland. Todays globalised world is one when jobs can be moved at the drop of a hat from continent to continent. It matters not where your iphone is made, it matters not where the software is written, it matters not where the professional gamblers of the city of london make their wagers. As jobs become easier to automate we lead to a world where 70% of us are useless, and that number just increases.

 

[Antman]

Just hijacking your post to make a slightly different point (not particularly aimed at you):

Taking the corrected figures, and looking up the stats for numbers of EU citizens in the UK

We find:

• 1.2 million UK citizens resident in the EU (outside the UK)
• 2.9 million EU citizens resident in the UK (2014 figures)

The difference is 1.7 million, or around 2.7% of the UK's 64M population.

So it appears that, for all the scaremongering from the Brexit side about free borders, the population of the UK is just 2.7% higher than it would have been if no migration had been possible between the EU and the UK during the last 40 years [*]. Granted that most of that will have happened in the last 10 years, but that's still a relatively insignificant population increase for that timescale.


[*] You can argue that the figures aren't quite right because they wont' account for people migrating then adopting citizenship etc., but I can't see that having a very significant impact on the figures. Free movement means that there's very little incentive for EU citizens to apply for UK citizenship, unlike non-EU residents, for whom the tight immigration controls give a very strong motivation to apply for UK citizenship as soon as possible.



I'm sure people living as you describe will pay very little tax or VAT directly. However, they will spend most of their earnings within the UK. That then goes to UK businesses and UK employers who will be earning more and therefore paying more tax as a result.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Ah, so you're denying most of the self-evident impacts of EU migration. You are apparently denying even that EU migrants need to buy food when they are in the UK (since you've refused to accept that their spending money is one thing that will happen). How do you think migrants in the UK stay alive? Do you think people from the EU have some magical ability to stay alive without ever eating or drinking?

You're denying that EU migrants ever set up businesses? I guess that means the Polish grocers a couple of miles from my house that I pass every time I go to the gym is but a figment of my imagination?

And the justification you're giving for these utterly absurd beliefs is that Bob Crowe has said it?

Gosh!

This is just getting ridiculous now, the bare facts are that we have millions unemployed, we have masses of people homeless and all sorts of other infrastructure problems ie schools, healthcare etc. The last thing we need is more people coming into the UK.

 

[miami]

A doctor from Australia has no right of entry but a jobless unskilled dosser from Bulgaria can breeze straight into our large and expanding black economy to pay no tax and have a right to use the NHS.
When freedom of movement was originally suggested it was meant to be for workers not just for people to wander into a country and contribute nothing.

Err, in 2003 Polish migrants were illegally living in London, working on the black market. I know, I lived with some for a few weeks when I migrated to London before I found a squalid bedsit.

Now many of these once-illegal workers are paying taxes and are harder to exploit.

Leaving the EU will make the black market worse, not better.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Tiny compared to NI and Income Tax, how much VAT do you reckon an Eastern European living 10 to a room and working cash in hand contributes to the economy ?

How would leaving the EU stop these people?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

NO !
41 years ago we were offered a vote on staying in a common market. Nobody voted for what it's turned into.
Likewise, what we're offered now is not what we've got, it's further European integration.

If 51% of the country had voted UKIP, we'd be out of europe already

Heck if 36% of the country had voted UKIP, we'd be out of europe already

 

[DarloRich]

NO !
41 years ago we were offered a vote on staying in a common market. Nobody voted for what it's turned into.
Likewise, what we're offered now is not what we've got, it's further European integration.

So I dreamt voting in the recent general election then?

By taking part in the democratic process and electing UK governments you passed judgement on our relationship with the EU, however indirectly. To say that you didn't get a choice is wrong. Until now the direct choice on the EU hasn't been included in the policy agenda of any credible party.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If 51% of the country had voted UKIP, we'd be out of europe already

Heck if 36% of the country had voted UKIP, we'd be out of europe already

But they didn't. They did vote for a referendum as party of the Conservative policy agenda and in doing so passed judgement on the EU.

 

[miami]

But they didn't. They did vote for a referendum as party of the Conservative policy agenda and in doing so passed judgement on the EU.

Yes, about 50% voted for Tory and UKIP combined.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

This is just getting ridiculous now, the bare facts are that we have millions unemployed, we have masses of people homeless and all sorts of other infrastructure problems ie schools, healthcare etc. The last thing we need is more people coming into the UK.

Indeed, there are millions of unemployed and there are many homeless and we do have many infrastructure problems, all these issues are serious problems that IMO desperately need solving. However all the evidence indicates that immigration has caused at best a marginal contribution to these problems, and it is simply not correct to blame these problems solely or even mainly on immigration.

And none of that gives any truth value to your ridiculous, and patently false, assertion that lowering wages is the only thing that EU migration causes - when the facts are clearly that depressing some salaries is but one of a huge number of effects (some good, some bad) that result from EU migration.

 

[DarloRich]

Yes, about 50% voted for Tory and UKIP combined.

but they didnt stand on a combined ticket did they?

 

[Jonny]

but they didnt stand on a combined ticket did they?

No, but that's not the point. Their tickets did have an EU referendum in common though.

 

[TheKnightWho]

This is just getting ridiculous now, the bare facts are that we have millions unemployed, we have masses of people homeless and all sorts of other infrastructure problems ie schools, healthcare etc. The last thing we need is more people coming into the UK.

Blame the government for not making use of the additional tax revenue. Don't blame the people who are just trying to make a better life for themselves. Assuming immigrants must be a net drain is not a good foundation for voting for Brexit - it's just the Tories shifting the blame for their failings.

 

[Antman]

Blame the government for not making use of the additional tax revenue. Don't blame the people who are just trying to make a better life for themselves. Assuming immigrants must be a net drain is not a good foundation for voting for Brexit - it's just the Tories shifting the blame for their failings.

Oh I don't blame the people themselves, I blame the system that has allowed this to happen.

 

[Aldaniti]

This is just getting ridiculous now, the bare facts are that we have millions unemployed, we have masses of people homeless and all sorts of other infrastructure problems ie schools, healthcare etc. The last thing we need is more people coming into the UK.

Quite. And with an average of 300,000 new arrivals every year, we are going to have to take action at some point, it might as well be now. It is simply unsustainable and will leave a legacy of problems for this country to deal with for decades to come. Cheap immigrant labour holds wages down at the lower end of the earnings scale, and it increases profits for big business. Immigration is stretching services and infrastucture - in some areas - to breaking point. We have 2 million plus unemployed, we should help them into work first rather than support the undeserving rich and the sneering elite for whom the EU works very, very well. On 23rd June, we have the opportunity to say enough is enough. Not just to the EU, but to the way politics is done in this country. As a bonus, we can get also get rid of Cameron at the same time. Surely that's worth a punt? This is a fairly useless Prime Minister who helped cause another world problem in Libya, with all the consequences we still see today, a PM who sends billions abroad every year, but won't fund certain types of cancer care drugs for his own people, leaves others homeless on the streets, has decimated police numbers, created another NHS mess, slashed spending on defence so much that in some cases we have to look to other countries for assistance, yet whilst he's been in goverment the total debt has rocketed! The electorate have an opportunity to take back some control from the politicians on 23rd June and show them who is the boss - a rare opportunity - and I can only hope that enough people have the vision to see where all this is going and vote accordingly.

 

[deltic]

Quite. And with an average of 300,000 new arrivals every year, we are going to have to take action at some point, it might as well be now. It is simply unsustainable and will leave a legacy of problems for this country to deal with for decades to come. Cheap immigrant labour holds wages down at the lower end of the earnings scale, and it increases profits for big business. Immigration is stretching services and infrastucture - in some areas - to breaking point. We have 2 million plus unemployed, we should help them into work first rather than support the undeserving rich and the sneering elite for whom the EU works very, very well. On 23rd June, we have the opportunity to say enough is enough. Not just to the EU, but to the way politics is done in this country. As a bonus, we can get also get rid of Cameron at the same time. Surely that's worth a punt? This is a fairly useless Prime Minister who helped cause another world problem in Libya, with all the consequences we still see today, a PM who sends billions abroad every year, but won't fund certain types of cancer care drugs for his own people, leaves others homeless on the streets, has decimated police numbers, created another NHS mess, slashed spending on defence so much that in some cases we have to look to other countries for assistance, yet whilst he's been in goverment the total debt has rocketed! The electorate have an opportunity to take back some control from the politicians on 23rd June and show them who is the boss - a rare opportunity - and I can only hope that enough people have the vision to see where all this is going and vote accordingly.

But on the 23rd June you are not voting for a new government. The same party will be in power on 24 June implementing the same policies as now - there will be no change in that respect regardless of the result.

 

[Johnuk123]

In the event of a Leave vote Osborne today says mortgages will rise by up to £1,500.
Last week Osborne said leaving would cause up to an 18% fall in house prices therefore making new mortgages cheaper.

 

[EM2]

But on the 23rd June you are not voting for a new government. The same party will be in power on 24 June implementing the same policies as now - there will be no change in that respect regardless of the result.

And Gove said yesterday that even in the event of a Leave vote, we wouldn't have left the EU by the end of the Parliament.

 

[yorksrob]

In the event of a Leave vote Osborne today says mortgages will rise by up to £1,500.
Last week Osborne said leaving would cause up to an 18% fall in house prices therefore making mortgages cheaper.

Yes, this caught my eye as well. I'm sure that last week the remain campaign were saying that Brexit would lead to a recession, which would lead to interest rates remaining lower for longer.

Presumably he's now implying that Brexit would lead to an increase in the cost in imports, leading to inflation, leading to higher interest rates. Yet even if this were the case, its hard to see how increasing interest rates would have much effect on reducing import generated inflation. (Higher interest rates seem to be better at stopping people borrowing to invest in domestically generated bubbles such as housing, whereas they won't effect the cost of things made elsewhere).

 

[DynamicSpirit]

In the event of a Leave vote Osborne today says mortgages will rise by up to £1,500.
Last week Osborne said leaving would cause up to an 18% fall in house prices therefore making new mortgages cheaper.

That's not at all what he said. You are massively twisting his words. His previous remarks were that leaving would hit house prices (which may mean that they'd fall, but may mean that they'd rise by less than otherwise, and that simultaneously there would be a rise in interest rates. So he's not contradicting himself - he's saying basically the same this week as he said before.

If his prediction is correct, then people who already own houses will be worse off - since they've already bought their houses and will be paying higher interest on their existing mortgages. People who have yet to buy probably won't be any better off: Prices for them will be lower but that will be offset by higher mortgage rates.

The prediction of higher interest rates is based on the near certainty that the value of the pound will crash in the event of a Brexit, and the Bank of England will be forced to raise interest rates substantially to try to offset that. But as yorksrob rightly points out, at the same time, the Bank of England will be under pressure to keep interest rates low to minimize the effects of the recession that would likely also follow a Brexit - so the situation on interest rates isn't as clear cut as Osborne makes out. In the event of a Brexit, the Bank of England is basically going to be caught between a rock and a hard place as far as interest rates are concerned - with a move either way likely to be very damaging in different ways. It's anyone's guess what the result will actually be.

 

[miami]

Yes, this caught my eye as well. I'm sure that last week the remain campaign were saying that Brexit would lead to a recession, which would lead to interest rates remaining lower for longer.

Presumably he's now implying that Brexit would lead to an increase in the cost in imports, leading to inflation, leading to higher interest rates. Yet even if this were the case, its hard to see how increasing interest rates would have much effect on reducing import generated inflation. (Higher interest rates seem to be better at stopping people borrowing to invest in domestically generated bubbles such as housing, whereas they won't effect the cost of things made elsewhere).

The pound will fall on brexit
The government will try to keep the pound strong (to keep imports cheaper)
They do this by raising interest rates
This will cause house prices to fall, however will not make it cheaper to buy a house unless you're rich enough to not need a mortgage - double points if you have non-GBP investments that will gain in value relative to GBP.

If a house costs £300K now and you have £100k worth of USD investments, a falling pound will make that £100K be worth £200k, and the house price fall will make the £300k house worth £200k. You can buy the house at 1/3rd the cost you would have spent.

If you don't have a mortgage, the fall in your £300k house to £200k is good, if you want to upsize to a £450k house whcih falls to £300k, saving you £50k.

However for the rest of us:

If you took out a 90% 25 year mortgage 5 years ago fixed rate for £270k, you still owe £230k. The interest rate rises to make your house worth £200k, you're in negative equity, can't remortgage, and are stuck with an extra £800 a month.

 

[Howardh]

If the pound falls, maybe to even less than parity with the Euro, that may force some/many the ex-pats to return home (it happened in the 2008/9 crash to some degree, yes?) as their pensions from the UK buy less; thus adding extra strain to our services and infrastructure - which will also be facing cut-backs from the new recession we are in.
Any EU money "saved" may have to go to keeping a level economy, otherwise taxes could rise.
Of course, the pound could rise - and no recession. We don't know, isn't it a gamble?