She should jollywell give them an ultimatum
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
Why can these countries accept that the UK is happy to take their money but simply doesn't want their people? Why are they so anglophobic?
The buffoon couldn't run a tap.https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/nov/07/theresa-may-visa-offer-india-citizens-uk
The economist Jonathan Portes said it was a “fantasy” to expect India to suddenly give Britain everything it wanted in trade terms. “They’ve never hidden the fact that as far as they’re concerned they regard access to the UK labour market for skilled workers, through the work permit system, as a key priority.
“I don’t think there’s remotely any prospect of a free trade agreement with them.”
The economist Jonathan Portes said it was a “fantasy” to expect India to suddenly give Britain everything it wanted in trade terms. “They’ve never hidden the fact that as far as they’re concerned they regard access to the UK labour market for skilled workers, through the work permit system, as a key priority.
“I don’t think there’s remotely any prospect of a free trade agreement with them.”
surely the 12 year old workers in india should have a say in things
Yeah, cos we don't have any of them
You've been trying to control the immigration flow for many many years, which is quite ridiculous considered that you were never shy in putting your hands into India's wealth
Good god, this thread gets worse every day
These anti-terrorism posters echo Nazi propaganda:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/07/anti-terrorism-posters-nazi-propoganda
Yeah we have that in Hammersmith, so the bus gets stuck behind some fatso freewheeling along at 4mph. With the Vauxhall one, there is no pavement after the zebra crossing, so
Fair point, albeit it was not long out of the Economic Steel & Community programme. Horrid economic backdrop in the 70s, maybe an easier sell?
The UK in the late sixties and early seventies was a right mess, seems people want to head back to the good old days
These anti-terrorism posters echo Nazi propaganda:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/07/anti-terrorism-posters-nazi-propoganda
Looks more like an anti-public masturbation campaign.
Come on guys, there's no legitimate reason for someone to wear a big coat right now, as we approach the cold depths of winter.
Yup, IMF bailouts, winter of discontent. Here we go again. Stagflation misery round the corner with a bond/equity/property price bubble overhang to boot.
Much depends upon the precise details, but a strong Brexit can allow us to make concessions on trade that would not otherwise have been possible. The country will still be working toward a sustainable annual figure of course, however there will no longer exist the handicap of our immigration policy being determined by the 6%.
The oddity here is not those of Leave wishing to depart from FoM with Brussels, it is Remainers insisting upon a status quo which hinders our dealings with most of this planet. The world grows smaller year-by-year, and a Brexit Britain can better embrace this future than its old guise of a nation uncommitted to the European Union project.
EU net immigration is 180,000 and likely to increase in the years ahead if it goes unchecked. There is defintie scope to both trim and reallocate many 10,000s from such a figure IMO.
Last edited:
I think he's muddling his religious stereotypes. The Nazis did some great posters tbf, so too did the Soviets.
These anti-terrorism posters echo Nazi propaganda:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/07/anti-terrorism-posters-nazi-propoganda
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=n...AUIBygB&biw=360&bih=615#imgrc=Ju0vx0rhft48FM:
There is no room to manoeuvre on migration, the target is 100000 or less, more than EU or non EU migration alone. Both groups will be crushed to make the xenophobes happy
Which countries are the UK going to make concessions on trade with.
You haven't mentioned the 190,000 net non-EU immigrants - what is the plan to reduce this as it has nothing to do with the UK being in the EU
Additionally emigration was falling.
There is also a high possibility that immigration from the EU may increase whilst the UK is still in the EU, to get in before the doors are closed
Last edited:
@Nick 0208 Ldn
Out of interest, are you pro-Scottish independence? Or do you want to keep the UK intact?
Out of interest, are you pro-Scottish independence? Or do you want to keep the UK intact?
The 100,000 figure is not realistic in either the short or medium term, and this should be made clear to the electorate. Nor would i seek a significant reduction of the non-EU figure, indeed it might have to rise a little in the immediate aftermath of Brexit.
When i mentioned concessions, i was alluding to travel and work arrangements for the citizens of a certain country with whom the UK is negotiating (be it India, China, Canada, Australia).
My natural inclination is for maintaining the union, and i should be disappointed if Scotland votes for independence. However we can't turn back the clock an enact devolution properly, or produce better governance from Westminster, so the momentum for a breakaway could be unstoppable. Yet had the Scots voted 52-48 i certainly wouldn't have called for my local MP to act the nuisance.
There might still be the potential to salvage the UK as it is presently constituted, although it would require a uniform federal settlement for all four home nations to stand any chance in my view.
Brexiters won't accept a change in target. You've got too many crazies on your side who hate all migration. This pledge destroyed Cameron and it'll hurt May as well
More evidence that migration is all that matters
Last edited:
Projecting your image of Leavers, and those with a differing stance on immigration policy, certainly does seem to be all that matters to you. Unfortunately, my response did not conform with your prejudices.
Brexiteers will be far happier when the UK is operating a global immigration policy, and one which allows us to stem the increases of recent times. The EU immigration figure is totally disproportionate, its workers easier to replace over time.
Yes it should have been made clear to the electorate but it wasn't, like everything else and they've voted in the expectancy that immigration will drastically fall, and as you say the likelihood is that immigration will actually increase because of Brexit and emigration will fall and those who have emigrated may return because their pension is becoming worthless.
The EU classified immigrants would then join the non-EU immigrants to become a new classification of non-UK immigrants, but the Uk plans on continuing to accept immigrants from outside the EU but refuse entry to those from inside the EU
As you may note with the initial approach to India, they are not going to bow to the demands of the UK. As for China , you may have noticed that a lot of products already have "Made in China" on them. Doubtful many products in China have "Made in Britain" on them. They do not need to bow down to the Uk's demands.
Those two countries alone make up about 40% of the world, add the USA with TTIP, Canada with a 7 year long discussion for a country with a population the size of Poland and Australia which have a grand total of 23million.
Yet the UK wish to give up around 50% of their trade because of freedom of movement which in all likelihood will be part of any deal with other countries.
When the UK leave, they will have no trade deals in place. It's like starting a new company and they'll be begging to get some deals, from a very weak point. The Uk are so proud to have the 5th largest economy , what if they become the 15th largest economy or worse.
If I'm projecting it so too are the government. Or maybe they pursuing policies that hammer migration because they know thas what Brexit was mostly about
They will be probably be replaced by British expats in Europe, most of whom elderly people whose been living off on someone else NHS. They will be the ones who'll be hardly hit by the pound's freefall + less rights and would certainly return home because of it. I wonder how the NHS will cope with them.
Meanwhile India has posed the same criteria that the EU did. No freedom of movement of people = no preferential access to its market. Unlike the EU, India have quite a history with the Brits. Which means they will probably love to get one past you.
I guess the UK is far less influential to the great scheme of things then it thought
What is all this bowing down nonsense? We're an open-minded trading partner and we shall seek a fir deal, it is as simple as that. And how the devil are we going to lose 50% of our trade? Did you help to write the Treasury's Brexit report, perchance?
A fiction worthy of prosecution by the CPS, if Leave is to be brought up on charges.
I think you well understood my categorisation of immigration by the way, the terms being those which exist presently. EU immigrants will not be unfairly targeted, quite the contrary; they just won't have an unwarranted advantage over the other 90% of the world.
But the stricter controls were imposed by Remainers, no? They were too severe, and i've said as much on this forum multiple times, however Brexit can put all prospective migrants on an even footing. This is all rather ironic you know; the parochial and all too conservative outlook of continentally focused Remainers.
Not everyone walks around with your chip on their shoulder, sneering at the world.
I must confess however, that i have yet to find a report n which India demands full FoM for its entire population.
Definitely the case. It also now has an unproven leader to compound that. Might have thrown her weight around on immigration as Home Secretary, but other countries don't have to eat her shit on such issues.
I am directly effected by the current system but I have no desire to make people suffer like I have when it comes to getting their spouse into the country.
Your Brexiters will make the system equally shit for everyone, they will not make it any easier
The only route to a truly fair immigration system is by leaving the EU, unless a person favours open borders for all. And as most of us have recognised this is an event with far-reaching consequences, well beyond what May chooses to enact as PM. Maybe we'll have a Lab-Lib coalition come 2025, but they wont' have the chance to alter anything so long as we are bound by the existing rules on FoM.
50% of your trade is with the EU, if you wish to carry on with the same trade, you have to accept the FoM - if you're under the illusion that you can carry on the same without it you are even more delusional than I thought.
If the UK go for a hard Brexit - you're on your own, just because you're British doesn't mean you're going to get any more favourable deals
2025, so in the mean time we must suffer a system designed to appease the Brexiters, yeah great.
Xenaphobia and Racism has dictated how we treat non EU migrants, not FOM
Isn't this the problem though? You have to project Leavers as a homogenous group who agree on everything (and in this case youre just as guilty in your second paragraph of projecting your thoughts on Brexit onto Leavers as a whole as those youre calling out) because the margin was so slim that as soon as you start subdividing the group the 'mandate' of the referendum disappears.
So will 'Brexiters' be happy if we operate a 'global immigration policy'? Surely the answer is 'it depends'. And for a huge amount of people, that you may or may not be a part of, the only policy they'll be happy with is one that significantly reduces migration regardless of where it comes from.
Besides, how is it right to dictate to the electorate that 100,000 is unrealistic and the electorate should suck it up, but it's not right to say that what the electorate thinks they can get from Brexit is unrealistic? Surely you're being completely hypocritical there.
Given that you both seem more comfortable talking to yourselves, or some avatar of Leaver which suits your preconceptions, i'm not sure that there is a great deal of point in continuing this.
Some days ago a poster asked how the referendum was reflected among constituencies, well this tweet from Change Britain breaks down the numbers:
Some days ago a poster asked how the referendum was reflected among constituencies, well this tweet from Change Britain breaks down the numbers:
You surely can't really believe what you have written here? Unless by "global" you mean Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the US.
Because one policy is designed to honour their vote, and permit a reduction in immigration, whilst the other is mostly seeking to achieve the opposite. The Government can reduce immigration and by a noticeable amount, but it can't undo fifteen years change over night. It would be my contention that the electorate will have greater respect for attainable declines, than the pure rhetoric being spouted by Cameron on the matter. Either way, the 50% of EU immigration aided by FoM constrains our ability to reform.
As i recall, even UKIP were struggling to meet the 100,000 pledge during the 2015 GE.
Ah yes, The Three Brexiteers, about to embark on their swashbuckling adventure to get away from that pesky EU.
And...nothing. I simply recalled a poster asking the question and saw that on Twitter. The earlier remarks in that reply were not directed at yourself by the way.
I know, i know, we're all supposed to be xenophobic scum.
Why did you list those countries in particular? Pleas don't say something racially motivated, it would shatter all of my illusions about Remainers.
But then we come back to the question of what constitutes an acceptable Brexit don't we?
For example if, hypothetically, the government decides the best deal they can get out of the EU is an EEA deal with a brake on migration should the electorate be told to suck up and take that because it was in the spirit of the vote?
And...nothing. I simply recalled a poster asking the question and saw that on Twitter. The earlier remarks in that reply were not directed at yourself by the way.
I know, i know, we're all supposed to be xenophobic scum.
Why did you list those countries in particular? Pleas don't say something racially motivated, it would shatter all of my illusions about Remainers.
I just think it's a bit disingenuous to feed the data of a referendum into what (do we agree on this for once? I think we might) is an archaic system and argue for a stronger mandate than actually exists. Besides if recent polling on 'Bregret' is to be believed then that graph would flip.