No. I explained the difference in practicality and how it is used. not the dictionary
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
Migrant isn't. expat is.
Expat is a term generally applied to OAPs seeing out their years in Spain or France.
The term immigrant is generally used for folk coming in to the country for work.
If you are talking about someone young who has left the UK to make a new life somewhere else you would say they have 'emigrated'. I don't know if it is just me but I wouldn't term people like this as 'expats' or 'immigrants'.
The term immigrant is generally used for folk coming in to the country for work.
If you are talking about someone young who has left the UK to make a new life somewhere else you would say they have 'emigrated'. I don't know if it is just me but I wouldn't term people like this as 'expats' or 'immigrants'.
You are looking for something thats not there, we're all migrants per definition. Do you think its ok for black people to use the word Nigger but not white people?
Some British people are incredibly self-important. They don't want to be classified as being the same all of those dirty immigrants who would sink the island if they were allowed to flood in as they would like to.
Not completely true. A lot of south asians in middle east are richer than the western hospitality and public relations workers.
I think the simple defn is that an expat does not intend to change his nationality while an immigrant wants to change his nationality for one reason or the other.
They are synonyms, there is no difference between them at the exception that the word immigrant is used pejoratively.
I disagree. The term expat is how British people refer to other British people with money that have chosen to live in another country as a lifestyle choice whilst the term immigrant would be used for someone coming into the country looking for work and opportunity.
They define two different migration dynamics in practical use.
They are literally synonyms, there is no agreements or disagreements.
Nah mate the quota for British Fish is mostly owned by foreigners, sold by our governments to British Fisherman who sold onwards to foreign ones.
It's a daft idea to have competition on catching fish, you allocate each country a share otherwise there will be no fish left in the ocean
The government have refused a Freedom of Information request related to releasing the letter sent to Nissan due to it being sensitive information. Obvious state aid is obvious but I expect a prominent Brexiter to come strolling in and tell me I am talking nonsense.
There is a clear demarcation that you have been priveliged/lucky enough not to see or experience. I'm not going to go further.
Sounds legit.
I think that he sees it, everyone sees it. The author could have wrote "British and EU expats" or "British and EU immigrants" but he decided to make a "qualitative" distinction.
No wonder MP's will be exempt from the Snoopers Charter. Finding out Theresa May's google searches wouldn't paint her in a good light.
"What does Brexit mean?"
"Does Brexit mean Brexit?"
"Who is Jeremy Corbyn?"
"How do you make your foreign secretary look like an idiot?"
47 years to process all non-residents applications post Brexit. They really thought this one through didn't they 
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...deportation-3-million-campaign-european-union
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...deportation-3-million-campaign-european-union
I remember being an expat on the 70s
You were an immigrant and now you are a Dutch without documents.
So, never?
Because I know, capitalism doesn't work and if some good get's more expensive but isn't essential, people will just pay the higher price. And if there is a cheaper alternative, they won't switch to that either! Neither will the suppliers of course.
Question time is a car crash for anti Brexit tonight.
Johnson and Davidson have spoken well, but the NS journalist has been fairly terrible. The quality of the debate is dreadful though.
Discovering the show, I like the tone of these people.
Dont talk out of your hole man, i am a brit living abroad. Unlike cnuts in this thread that want to stay in the uk but moan about not being able to in x years.
Its like me saying i cant just go and live in the states even tho i have no intention to
Christ on a bike
Calm down, I was joking.
Well i read in disbelief sometimes. There appears to be no mass exodus to EUrope even tho its the place to be for some on here.
Well all the evidence over the last 30 years is that in fact you do exactly that and cause major problems in the areas you now start to take fish from but hey post truth thinking about Brexit should work both ways it is only fair. Fishing out stocks of fish is now according to you a Brexit fallacy despite the fact the EU introduced quotas to stop it, go figure.
It is so easy that all around the world all the edible fish are thriving like never before because, and we heard the genius here first folks so let us put it in bold, we can just eat something else. Why oh why didn't we think of this earlier the environmental lobby who say the exact opposite in almost every survey on fish stocks can pack up and go home, we are all saved by fcbforevers magic thinking.
Next up , wars why can't we just not have any more?
Last edited:
I figured as much. Just a way to elevate themselves above what they actually are and ignore some 'dem damn immigrunts' abuse themselves.
What a load of hypocritical, racist, elitist bollocks.
I'm still referring to Germany. And yes, here we can do it. In fact, all of the EU can do that. And of nothing else but the U.K. exporting 87% of its fish to the EU, while it only makes up 2,3 of German imports, where we talking here.
And yes, people eat less fish when it is more expensive. That is the reason why overall consumption of fish in Germany has gone down considerably over the last 10 years. What the feck man, do you even try?
With the Tory party backpeddling furiously regarding FOM and the UK share in the EU budget, I won't be surprised if the UK remains part of the EU after all
It (Brexit) currently feels like something you promised to do at 2 in the morning on a boozy night out. Now the bravado is wearing off as the hangover kicks in. Commentators are speculating about a Norway/EEA solution but even that seems ridiculous given how much skin the UK has in the game. For example, the largest financial centre in Europe would not have any input into financial services legislation across the continent.
Good analogy. Although I'm note even sure there was much bravado in the first place. Just some devious wankers manipulating public sentiment for personal/political gain. They probably didn't expect to win and absolutely had no plans for dealing with the realities of of triggering Article 50.
That's certainly true of Johnson who thought this was Oxford student politics and looked genuinely petrified on the morning the results came in. I am thinking more of ideologues like David Davis who just maybe are starting to realise how difficult this is going to be. We need Graham Chapman to walk in and announce that this is all getting a bit silly.
Anyone who loves a bit of history as I do, think its far more complex then that. The UK had never been European in the first place. Since Roman times a strong Europe (or part of Europe) was always bad news for them while a fragmented Europe had allowed the UK to prosper through trade, dominance over the sea and colonialism. Its within the UK people subconscious to hate the very concept of a strong Europe as its within the European psyche to hate/be scared shit of a strong Russia even though, most of the time, a strong Russia had been good for Europe rather then a hindrance (It did stop Napoleon and Hitler and when it wasn't able to stop invaders ie like the mongols or the huns, Europe got hurt big time).
Brexit is just another attempt to break the EU down but here's the catch. Instead of breaking the EU it made countries gang up together and against the Uk. Even traditional allies to the UK (The Dutch, the Danes, the Swedes and the Maltese) seem to have made it quite clear that the EU is more important to them than the UK. That's not something the UK is used to. They are used to the divide and conquer ie pitting the French against the Germans or the Germans against the French etc. That's how things work for them and this is simply not happening despite the million and one article the Express seem to post about the end of the EU.
To make matter worse there's no US or Russia to bail them out these time round. Trump doesn't like trade deals very much and Putin doesn't have any special affection towards a country who accuses him of everything under the sun.
In my opinion the EU should push to a hard Brexit or at least the UK being relegated to an EEA deal. The aim here is not to punish the UK. In the EEA the UK will have unrestricted access to the single market which will allow London to keep its status as the financial city in the world etc. The aim here is to simply remove the UK influence in Europe. The EU can't afford having an enemy within its camp in such delicate stage of the project and we've had too much of that from the UK camp.
Last edited:
That's a fair point of view (I remember it first time round) but I don't really agree. Another 20 years and this issue would have faded away as most of the people who have grown up since the UK joining the EEC/EU don't feel this contradiction between being British and European. Some younger people are anti-EU of course (let's call them the "losers from globalisation"), but that's the same in other European countries. What tipped the UK vote was the older generations who, although they might be prosperous, have never really accepted the EU and cling to an idea of British/English exceptionalism.
As for history, England/UK has been fully connected with Europe for most of its history apart from the Empire period. It is true that it has generally tried to prevent a European hegemon arising but it is not as though the French were thrilled with the Habsburgs or the Austrians wanted Louis XIV or Napoleon to dominate the continent.
He makes a fair point in that even though the UK has, in recent years, been part of the EU there's always been that slight disconnect in that we never wanted to adopt the Euro, and arguably made the most noise about things like free movement etc. Our detachment geographically has always left us more separated from France/Germany than other surrounding countries.
I fully agree that we were not part of the core and were sometimes prickly but that's not to say we were destined to leave. The current mess is at least partially attributable to a lack of flexibility and imagination on the part of EU leaders, trying to maintain a one size fits all approach which has been disastrous in other areas. The decision to stay out of the euro was simply the UK (kudos to Brown and Ed Balls) choosing to put economic literacy ahead of politics. Without that unusually powerful Chancellor, I think Blair could have pushed it through with his huge majorities.
Late to comment on that but I wonder if you actually follow what the EP does, which rights they have and actually execute. I have no doubt that it's harder to follow that via English media but it's possible via the EU's websites, you can talk to your local MEPs, follow different EU party websites, etc. It's also possible to observe who voted in which way on which individual subject, both the Council and EP. You can see draft regulations and directives and how they evolve to the final versions, follow the legislative process etc. Therefore, I oppose that the EU isn't democratic, are not accountable or whatever.
BTW: Your comment regarding Germany is BS, sorry. It's funny to see though that some myths simply live forever.
If it was a generational thing then the uk would have been more brexit during the 90s then now. Its not the case. Anti eu sentiment increased in line to eu federalism. Once the eu started talking about becoming more of a political union the uk started getting more anti eu. I mean take the eu army as an example. What is wrong with it? Why on earth should the richest continent in the world be militarily lead by the us? But the uk go bezerk whenever talks about a eu army are discussed
I don't blame the uk to be scared shit of a unified europe. As said it made sense 4 them as a unified europe was bad news for them. However its also fair for us to move on without constantly being challenged and undermined by the enemy within. The brits wanted the cake, let them eat it