|
In order to ensure that this thread meets TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we ask that everyone please adhere to this mod note. Posts containing only Tweets or articles adds nothing to the discussions. Therefore, when providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments will be actioned upon. All in all, please continue to enjoy posting in TL General and partake in discussions as much as you want! But please be respectful when posting or replying to someone. There is a clear difference between constructive criticism/discussion and just plain being rude and insulting. https://www.registertovote.service.gov.uk |
On October 06 2016 01:23 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2016 01:15 bardtown wrote:On October 06 2016 01:01 Dan HH wrote:On October 06 2016 00:33 bardtown wrote:On October 05 2016 21:47 MyTHicaL wrote:On October 05 2016 21:29 bardtown wrote:On October 05 2016 21:23 Laurens wrote:On October 05 2016 00:14 bardtown wrote:On October 03 2016 03:51 OtherWorld wrote:On September 28 2016 03:57 Deleuze wrote:
[quote]
How does this make any sense. The Brexit lots are colossal hypocrites.
No hypocrisy here, more like pure politician skill. If Turkey joins or nearly joins the EU, anti-EU movements will grow stronger as they'll be able to claim that "the corrupt Brussels establishment wants to facilitate a Muslim invasion of Europe". In other news FTSE100 hit its all time high today. Looking forward to all the Guardian articles about how Brexit has piled billions onto the economy as they claimed it had wiped billions out on the 24th June. Classic. Your currency just hit a new 30-year low and your economy is slipping, but the Brexit voters keep grasping at straws to make it look positive xD. Classic. Services growing, construction growing, manufacturing booming, tourism booming, consumer confidence above pre-Brexit levels, markets performing well across the board, fastest growing G7 economy and there are still Belgians desperate to believe we need their godforsaken bloated mess of a political construct. The service sector is not, in fact its entire existence is based on the financial European visa. Already many firms are relocating to either Frankfurt or Paris, hell even Warsaw is trying to grab them. I wouldn't mind a hard brexit. Little England can turn into just that, Little England and stop veto'ing every goddamn left leaning bill that the EU proposes to further integrity. Consumer confidence post-brexit? Just look at your pound. Also, of course tourism is booming; all the Brits are staying to holiday at home because they simply won't get as much as before going to Europe or elsewhere. I would love Ireland to be reunited and Scotland to get independence; take back its' oil in the North Sea and leave England to continue manufacturing... not quite sure what. The UK has now dropped to 6th in ecomony, behind France so your claim that it is the fastest growing G7 economy is contradictory at best. Your comment about Brits holidaying at home is the only factual thing in your entire post. I genuinely struggled to wade through this tide of ignorance. UK service sector growing strongly: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37274279 https://www.ft.com/content/0c36c007-1437-361e-a643-a9d3cc9d321ahttp://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/september-services-growth-casts-doubt-on-new-bank-of-england-rate-cut-a7345666.htmlManufacturing growth best for 2 years: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37539019Construction growth (against all expectations): https://www.ft.com/content/a0a43d94-8f59-359b-bdb8-5d63a66e134aConsumer confidence: https://www.ft.com/content/bbfe022f-de37-3b44-adbc-8eb529327c35Consumer spending: https://www.ft.com/content/e194e464-6b65-11e6-ae5b-a7cc5dd5a28cFastest growth in G7: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/oct/04/britain-fastest-growing-g7-economy-imf-international-monetary-fund-brexit-vote Services: https://www.markiteconomics.com/Survey/PressRelease.mvc/dffd5cda1bf44d619e050b04cf7adb88Manufacturing: https://www.markiteconomics.com/Survey/PressRelease.mvc/f55855e5e87b4e9dadc0e3cbea1c285fConstruction: https://www.markiteconomics.com/Survey/PressRelease.mvc/f62130bc813d47a69386f3a2e0f8dd02Notice anything there? There's a reason why your links refer to them as rebounds rather than the tremendous growth you are playing it as. It's the biggest uptick in a few years because it follows the biggest downtick in a few years, a dip caused exclusively by hard brexit anxiety following the referendum, anxiety which has dispersed in the past two months. But if you do support a hard brexit as you sometimes hint at, you would be deluding yourself to not see that it would cause a more pronounce and longer lasting such dip. Intimations of a hard Brexit have become more and more frequent since June, and yet they are growing through it. We will see, either way. I do expect economic damage/reshuffling from a hard Brexit, but I also believe it's a price worth paying from a political perspective, and I think the figures are vindicating people who voted under the impression that the British economy had the strength to weather that shock. You may be right but your a little early claiming that the economy 'Had' the strenght to weather the shock when the shock has not happened yet and won't happen until the actual seperation some 2.5 years from now.
The 'shock' really comes from investors/markets reacting. The actual results should be more gradual unless negotiations go very badly. Then it might be decades before we see the results of new trade deals and new geopolitics (and before we see how much damage we avoid when the EU inevitably implodes, of course!)
|
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/05/theresa-may-consigns-cameron-to-history-in-populist-speech
having listened closely May recently, I have never seen such a (tempted to use 'extreme' here) right wing inherently racist govt, this now looks like 1930 more than what I have been saying 1970, and we are nearing the end of 2016.
that insane thinking on reducing foreign medical professionals just so we must have more 'local doctors' (and the solution is to raise like 70k more new doctors by sending away hundreds thousands doctors in 10years time) and that today news on go full blown out to the business owners lol. i am not sure that's the best example of an extremely delusional individual as the PM, or the person is simply a full retard (or both really).
Brexit is not enough, we must go full hard brexit, well ya, if you bloody do it 2 or 3 months ago I wouldn't have lost so much money already (bloody currency drops), and triggering the insensible official exit in 2017's march (before Holland and Germany election) will continue to crush £ so hard.
I think I need an exit strategy now
|
We finally have a common sense centrist PM and you're suggesting the govt is 'extreme right', pointing out probably the most left wing policy she has as evidence. The right wing approach to this issue is to hire all your doctors from abroad because it is cheaper. The left wing approach is to invest in training the native workforce. Exactly the same for the business issue. Releasing businesses' numbers of foreign employees is a left wing policy. IIRC it was one of Ed Miliband's policies, actually. The right wing, free market approach is to allow businesses to hire whoever they want to increase competitiveness.
I know the discourse is so degenerate that 'right wing' just means 'anti-immigrant' to most people, but that's not actually how it works. Investing in training and trying to stimulate businesses to do the same to the benefit of local people and at the expense of their profit margin is definitely not 'extreme right'.
|
On October 06 2016 17:45 bardtown wrote:
[...] The right wing approach to this issue is to hire all your doctors from abroad because it is cheaper. The left wing approach is to invest in training the native workforce. [...]
Are you for real.
The centerpiece of the referendum that May is using as grounds for her politcy is that immigration is restrictet thoroughly.
And you wanna tell me that the right wing approach is to "import" skilled foreign labour?
What am I missing here?
|
What you're missing is that the label right wing is way too broad. Both liberals (who would be pro immigration) and anti immigrant parties are called right wing while they don't have a lot in common.
|
Possibly so.
Right wing definitons may vary according to country 
btw: Yesterday on BBC Scotland some scottish doctor said she was afraid of being kicked out of the english NHS, does that make sense in that context?
|
On October 06 2016 19:08 RvB wrote:
What you're missing is that the label right wing is way too broad. Both liberals (who would be pro immigration) and anti immigrant parties are called right wing while they don't have a lot in common.
Indeed, there are some dangerously fascist undertones to the rhetoric coming out of those recent speeches. Isolationist, anti intellectualism and anti liberalism abound. While domestic policy shifts left more into labours territory, foreign policy has swung off hard to the right. Meanwhile the only opposition seems to be nutty marxist union caricatures form the 60's. It's all very 1930's, Britain is supposed to stand against this bullshit. With the babyboomers the apples have fallen far from the tree.
The Scottish situation is honestly just as messed up. For all the talk of wanting to be more inclusive, my friends in Edinburgh have been on the end of a lot of racism from nutters with the yes badges and Mel Gibson profile pictures (both educated native Scottish and international immigrants). It seems in truth the wish to be part of the EU isn't about internationalism so much as subsidy, and the EU isn't going to want that (except possibly to spite the rUK for the brexit mess).
It's all nationalism, and it doesn't go anywhere nice.
On October 06 2016 19:39 Artisreal wrote:
btw: Yesterday on BBC Scotland some scottish doctor said she was afraid of being kicked out of the english NHS, does that make sense in that context?
Kind of NHS Scottland is technically separate. But there's a lot of collaboration.
|
On October 06 2016 19:39 Artisreal wrote:Possibly so. Right wing definitons may vary according to country btw: Yesterday on BBC Scotland some scottish doctor said she was afraid of being kicked out of the english NHS, does that make sense in that context?
There is probably nowhere else in the world where the term 'right wing' is as frequently misused as it is in Germany, I'm afraid to say.
The Scottish NHS/education system is devolved from the central UK government, to some extent at least, but it seems extremely unlikely that there would be barriers to staff trained in one UK country working in another. If you have a link to where you heard it I could check - perhaps she was referring to another independence referendum or similar.
On October 06 2016 19:51 mostevil wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2016 19:08 RvB wrote:
What you're missing is that the label right wing is way too broad. Both liberals (who would be pro immigration) and anti immigrant parties are called right wing while they don't have a lot in common. Indeed, there are some dangerously fascist undertones to the rhetoric coming out of those recent speeches. Isolationist, anti intellectualism and anti liberalism abound. While domestic policy shifts left more into labours territory, foreign policy has swung off hard to the right. Meanwhile the only opposition seems to be nutty marxist union caricatures form the 60's. It's all very 1930's, Britain is supposed to stand against this bullshit. With the babyboomers the apples have fallen far from the tree.
Can you give examples? I didn't notice anything remotely isolationist or fascist.
|
On October 06 2016 19:51 mostevil wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2016 19:08 RvB wrote:
What you're missing is that the label right wing is way too broad. Both liberals (who would be pro immigration) and anti immigrant parties are called right wing while they don't have a lot in common. Indeed, there are some dangerously fascist undertones to the rhetoric coming out of those recent speeches. Isolationist, anti intellectualism and anti liberalism abound. While domestic policy shifts left more into labours territory, foreign policy has swung off hard to the right. Meanwhile the only opposition seems to be nutty marxist union caricatures form the 60's. It's all very 1930's, Britain is supposed to stand against this bullshit. With the babyboomers the apples have fallen far from the tree. The Scottish situation is honestly just as messed up. For all the talk of wanting to be more inclusive, my friends in Edinburgh have been on the end of a lot of racism from nutters with the yes badges and Mel Gibson profile pictures (both educated native Scottish and international immigrants). It seems in truth the wish to be part of the EU isn't about internationalism so much as subsidy, and the EU isn't going to want that (except possibly to spite the rUK for the brexit mess). It's all nationalism, and it doesn't go anywhere nice. Show nested quote +On October 06 2016 19:39 Artisreal wrote:
btw: Yesterday on BBC Scotland some scottish doctor said she was afraid of being kicked out of the english NHS, does that make sense in that context? Kind of NHS Scottland is technically separate. But there's a lot of collaboration.
Scottish nationalism is a lot more complicated than that. It most probably stems from roughly 800 years of English oppression. Scotland will not be a subsidy, it's insulting- yet unsurprising to see yet another Englishman comment on this.
Scotland has many things to give the EU, with 5.6million residents (only), tourism, whisky, 2nd ranked beef in the world (this is actually a major industry), fishing and finally all the oil in the North Sea which doesn't belong to Norway/other Nordic countries. If farmers could actually own their fricking land instead of it all being rented out from useless descendants of an inbred royal family, maybe the place could prosper.
As for the racism well, that will always be there; 90minute Scottish Biggot. Go to an Ibrox game and see what happens xD... though we have embarassed ourself recently (I mean result-wise).
|
On October 06 2016 20:05 bardtown wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2016 19:39 Artisreal wrote:Possibly so. Right wing definitons may vary according to country btw: Yesterday on BBC Scotland some scottish doctor said she was afraid of being kicked out of the english NHS, does that make sense in that context? There is probably nowhere else in the world where the term 'right wing' is as frequently misused as it is in Germany, I'm afraid to say. The Scottish NHS/education system is devolved from the central UK government, to some extent at least, but it seems extremely unlikely that there would be barriers to staff trained in one UK country working in another. If you have a link to where you heard it I could check - perhaps she was referring to another independence referendum or similar. [...]
I can only guess, but I think it was yesterday's Janice Forsyth Show on BBC Radio Scotland. You don' really have to skim through all the callers though
Concering misuse or not, For me the term righ wing is more closely associated with a right wing party than with a political perspective. And german right wing parties may have a "normal" policy on a political issue, though the underlying intention completely disqualify them from the political discourse.
Thus labelling something right wing, I, personally, have to assume a different perspective to understand what is meant.
Whether this applies "all germans" is something else.
|
On October 06 2016 20:13 MyTHicaL wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2016 19:51 mostevil wrote:On October 06 2016 19:08 RvB wrote:
What you're missing is that the label right wing is way too broad. Both liberals (who would be pro immigration) and anti immigrant parties are called right wing while they don't have a lot in common. Indeed, there are some dangerously fascist undertones to the rhetoric coming out of those recent speeches. Isolationist, anti intellectualism and anti liberalism abound. While domestic policy shifts left more into labours territory, foreign policy has swung off hard to the right. Meanwhile the only opposition seems to be nutty marxist union caricatures form the 60's. It's all very 1930's, Britain is supposed to stand against this bullshit. With the babyboomers the apples have fallen far from the tree. The Scottish situation is honestly just as messed up. For all the talk of wanting to be more inclusive, my friends in Edinburgh have been on the end of a lot of racism from nutters with the yes badges and Mel Gibson profile pictures (both educated native Scottish and international immigrants). It seems in truth the wish to be part of the EU isn't about internationalism so much as subsidy, and the EU isn't going to want that (except possibly to spite the rUK for the brexit mess). It's all nationalism, and it doesn't go anywhere nice. On October 06 2016 19:39 Artisreal wrote:
btw: Yesterday on BBC Scotland some scottish doctor said she was afraid of being kicked out of the english NHS, does that make sense in that context? Kind of NHS Scottland is technically separate. But there's a lot of collaboration. Scottish nationalism is a lot more complicated than that. It most probably stems from roughly 800 years of English oppression. Scotland will not be a subsidy, it's insulting- yet unsurprising to see yet another Englishman comment on this. Scotland has many things to give the EU, with 5.6million residents (only), tourism, whisky, 2nd ranked beef in the world (this is actually a major industry), fishing and finally all the oil in the North Sea which doesn't belong to Norway/other Nordic countries. If farmers could actually own their fricking land instead of it all being rented out from useless descendants of an inbred royal family, maybe the place could prosper. As for the racism well, that will always be there; 90minute Scottish Biggot. Go to an Ibrox game and see what happens xD... though we have embarassed ourself recently (I mean result-wise).
800 years of English oppression... Prior to union (under a Scottish king), through which Scotland became part of the wealthiest and most powerful country on Earth, half of Scotland was essentially parasitic on northern England. The north of England was consistently raided/invaded by Scotland. Every time England was at war with France (more or less all the time), Scotland took the opportunity to pillage it or declare their own war. And yes, with a 9% deficit Scotland would require enormous subsidies - that is, if they were eligible for them, which they aren't. The EU just cut funding to Spain/Portugal on the basis of their budget deficits, and they are less than half of Scotland's.
I don't have a problem with Scottish (or any) nationalism inherently, but please don't try to justify it with nonsense and mythology.
|
On October 06 2016 17:06 BurningSera wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/05/theresa-may-consigns-cameron-to-history-in-populist-speechhaving listened closely May recently, I have never seen such a (tempted to use 'extreme' here) right wing inherently racist govt, this now looks like 1930 more than what I have been saying 1970, and we are nearing the end of 2016. that insane thinking on reducing foreign medical professionals just so we must have more 'local doctors' (and the solution is to raise like 70k more new doctors by sending away hundreds thousands doctors in 10years time) and that today news on go full blown out to the business owners lol. i am not sure that's the best example of an extremely delusional individual as the PM, or the person is simply a full retard (or both really). Brexit is not enough, we must go full hard brexit, well ya, if you bloody do it 2 or 3 months ago I wouldn't have lost so much money already (bloody currency drops), and triggering the insensible official exit in 2017's march (before Holland and Germany election) will continue to crush £ so hard. I think I need an exit strategy now
As long as she continues to claim that the UK will both stay in the single market and have full control over EU migration, don't give much credence to the details of her pandering. At some point in the next few years the choice will have to be made, until then she'll continue to lead people by the nose through fantasyland.
|
On October 06 2016 21:32 Dan HH wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2016 17:06 BurningSera wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/05/theresa-may-consigns-cameron-to-history-in-populist-speechhaving listened closely May recently, I have never seen such a (tempted to use 'extreme' here) right wing inherently racist govt, this now looks like 1930 more than what I have been saying 1970, and we are nearing the end of 2016. that insane thinking on reducing foreign medical professionals just so we must have more 'local doctors' (and the solution is to raise like 70k more new doctors by sending away hundreds thousands doctors in 10years time) and that today news on go full blown out to the business owners lol. i am not sure that's the best example of an extremely delusional individual as the PM, or the person is simply a full retard (or both really). Brexit is not enough, we must go full hard brexit, well ya, if you bloody do it 2 or 3 months ago I wouldn't have lost so much money already (bloody currency drops), and triggering the insensible official exit in 2017's march (before Holland and Germany election) will continue to crush £ so hard. I think I need an exit strategy now As long as she continues to claim that the UK will both stay in the single market and have full control over EU migration, don't give much credence to the details of her pandering. At some point in the next few years the choice will have to be made, until then she'll continue to lead people by the nose through fantasyland.
When did she say we would stay in the single market? Seems clear that free movement will be her red line.
|
On October 06 2016 17:45 bardtown wrote:
We finally have a common sense centrist PM and you're suggesting the govt is 'extreme right', pointing out probably the most left wing policy she has as evidence. The right wing approach to this issue is to hire all your doctors from abroad because it is cheaper. The left wing approach is to invest in training the native workforce. Exactly the same for the business issue. Releasing businesses' numbers of foreign employees is a left wing policy. IIRC it was one of Ed Miliband's policies, actually. The right wing, free market approach is to allow businesses to hire whoever they want to increase competitiveness.
I know the discourse is so degenerate that 'right wing' just means 'anti-immigrant' to most people, but that's not actually how it works. Investing in training and trying to stimulate businesses to do the same to the benefit of local people and at the expense of their profit margin is definitely not 'extreme right'.
see that's exactly the kind of working mind that is happening right now at the parliament, but I don't believe they would be sensible enough to care for left or right anymore.
You are basically equating (conveniently) right wing to capitalism right there for your examples. While let's not get into the whole socio-economical + political semantics like college students, for the sake of to be able to explain what is going on currently, when I said right wing it means....you go full 'imperealism'...that's why I said this is like back to 1930, as if May etc want to go back to the glorious past that barely or no foreigner issues exist (e.g. look at her racist speeches lately and her recent approach to all the examples you mentioned).
and if you must relate capitalism to this whole mess then harsh fact, UK has been running capitalism exactly like it used to do, that's why the business owners hired foreigners in the first place, because they are more competent and cost effective? I mean it is sickening to think about that but the reality is just there.
like that goddamn sending away foreign doctors they said the other day lol, well, have a visit to the clinic and hospital, see if it is the case of English doctors nurses taking care of the 'bloody money sucking job stealing' foreigners or is it the coloured medical professionals taking care all of those obese and ill locals.
I honestly have no interest in politics, but brexit is hurting financially so much, and they have to choose to proceed with the most provoking methods. You dont go tell the business owners 'hire locals or you gtfo' ffs.
|
On October 06 2016 21:36 bardtown wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2016 21:32 Dan HH wrote:On October 06 2016 17:06 BurningSera wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/05/theresa-may-consigns-cameron-to-history-in-populist-speechhaving listened closely May recently, I have never seen such a (tempted to use 'extreme' here) right wing inherently racist govt, this now looks like 1930 more than what I have been saying 1970, and we are nearing the end of 2016. that insane thinking on reducing foreign medical professionals just so we must have more 'local doctors' (and the solution is to raise like 70k more new doctors by sending away hundreds thousands doctors in 10years time) and that today news on go full blown out to the business owners lol. i am not sure that's the best example of an extremely delusional individual as the PM, or the person is simply a full retard (or both really). Brexit is not enough, we must go full hard brexit, well ya, if you bloody do it 2 or 3 months ago I wouldn't have lost so much money already (bloody currency drops), and triggering the insensible official exit in 2017's march (before Holland and Germany election) will continue to crush £ so hard. I think I need an exit strategy now As long as she continues to claim that the UK will both stay in the single market and have full control over EU migration, don't give much credence to the details of her pandering. At some point in the next few years the choice will have to be made, until then she'll continue to lead people by the nose through fantasyland. When did she say we would stay in the single market? Seems clear that free movement will be her red line.
In both of her most recent speeches we've seen her suggest full EU migration control & 'maximum freedom' in the single market , which is of course not possible it's either one or the other
"We will do what independent, sovereign countries do. We will decide for ourselves how we control immigration. And we will be free to pass our own laws."
"We will seek the best deal possible as we negotiate a new agreement with the European Union.
I want it to involve free trade, in goods and services. I want it to give British companies the maximum freedom to trade with and operate in the single market - and let European businesses do the same here."
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-37535527
It is, of course, too early to say exactly what agreement we will reach with the EU. It’s going to be a tough negotiation, it will require some give and take. And while there will always be pressure to give a running commentary, it will not be in our national interest to do so.
But let me be clear about the agreement we seek.
I want it to reflect the strong and mature relationships we enjoy with our European friends.
I want it to include cooperation on law enforcement and counter-terrorism work.
I want it to involve free trade, in goods and services.
I want it to give British companies the maximum freedom to trade with and operate within the Single Market – and let European businesses do the same here.
But let’s state one thing loud and clear: we are not leaving the European Union only to give up control of immigration all over again. And we are not leaving only to return to the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. That’s not going to happen.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/theresa-mays-speech-conservative-party-8983265
|
On October 06 2016 21:58 Dan HH wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2016 21:36 bardtown wrote:On October 06 2016 21:32 Dan HH wrote:On October 06 2016 17:06 BurningSera wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/05/theresa-may-consigns-cameron-to-history-in-populist-speechhaving listened closely May recently, I have never seen such a (tempted to use 'extreme' here) right wing inherently racist govt, this now looks like 1930 more than what I have been saying 1970, and we are nearing the end of 2016. that insane thinking on reducing foreign medical professionals just so we must have more 'local doctors' (and the solution is to raise like 70k more new doctors by sending away hundreds thousands doctors in 10years time) and that today news on go full blown out to the business owners lol. i am not sure that's the best example of an extremely delusional individual as the PM, or the person is simply a full retard (or both really). Brexit is not enough, we must go full hard brexit, well ya, if you bloody do it 2 or 3 months ago I wouldn't have lost so much money already (bloody currency drops), and triggering the insensible official exit in 2017's march (before Holland and Germany election) will continue to crush £ so hard. I think I need an exit strategy now As long as she continues to claim that the UK will both stay in the single market and have full control over EU migration, don't give much credence to the details of her pandering. At some point in the next few years the choice will have to be made, until then she'll continue to lead people by the nose through fantasyland. When did she say we would stay in the single market? Seems clear that free movement will be her red line. In both of her most recent speeches we've seen her suggest full EU migration control & 'maximum freedom' in the single market , which is of course not possible it's either one or the other Show nested quote +"We will do what independent, sovereign countries do. We will decide for ourselves how we control immigration. And we will be free to pass our own laws."
"We will seek the best deal possible as we negotiate a new agreement with the European Union.
I want it to involve free trade, in goods and services. I want it to give British companies the maximum freedom to trade with and operate in the single market - and let European businesses do the same here." http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-37535527Show nested quote +It is, of course, too early to say exactly what agreement we will reach with the EU. It’s going to be a tough negotiation, it will require some give and take. And while there will always be pressure to give a running commentary, it will not be in our national interest to do so.
But let me be clear about the agreement we seek.
I want it to reflect the strong and mature relationships we enjoy with our European friends.
I want it to include cooperation on law enforcement and counter-terrorism work.
I want it to involve free trade, in goods and services.
I want it to give British companies the maximum freedom to trade with and operate within the Single Market – and let European businesses do the same here.
But let’s state one thing loud and clear: we are not leaving the European Union only to give up control of immigration all over again. And we are not leaving only to return to the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. That’s not going to happen. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/theresa-mays-speech-conservative-party-8983265
You've just quoted her making her red line on immigration/sovereignty, twice. I think the line about 'maximum freedom' is a pretty weak attempt to reassure businesses, but taken as a whole those speeches clearly indicate withdrawal from the single market. Isn't that the whole reason the markets have been reacting the way they have? Because she's making it more blatant that the single market isn't a realistic option.
I would say all signs point towards a Canada style approach, which was pretty overwhelmingly preferred by the public, also.
![[image loading]](https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/inlineimage/2016-08-18/Attitudes%20to%20Brexit%20scenarios-01.png)
Also with regards to foreign workers, more people strongly support the plans than slightly/strongly oppose combined:
![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CuFaHdsWgAA8Nss.jpg)
And overwhelming support for improving training for natives to reduce need for immigration:
![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CuFAZn5WIAQ7orT.jpg:large)
Pretty terrible of these fascists to do exactly what the people overwhelmingly want, though.
|
Only for the question of" supporting or opposing government proposals to make companies report how many foreign workers theya re employing" can what you are claiming from the results of the polls can be inferred. The first question has nothing to do with preferences to which you are claiming. The first question very obviously missed out asking whether staying in the EU is good or bad, and the question of which option would respect the the result of the referendum has nothing to do with what was overwhelmingly preferred by the public either. Remember, the referendum was almost a 50/50 split. The last question on increasing the skills of British workers does not ask whether they want to prevent EU freedom of movement and lose the single market, nor to pay the costs of training British workers.
Basically, you are taking the results of these polls and inferring something else. The first question is just baised in the sense it does not ask whether staying in the EU would be good or bad for UK. The other, you cannot claim that there was an overal preference for any of those options, as nearly half voted to remain. The last question makes no sense anyways, since the main arguments for reducing immigration is to grant no-skill jobs to British workers, so increasing the skills of British workers would only increase demand for foreign labour.
|
On October 06 2016 22:30 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Only for the question of" supporting or opposing government proposals to make companies report how many foreign workers theya re employing" can what you are claiming from the results of the polls can be inferred. The first question has nothing to do with preferences to which you are claiming. The first question very obviously missed out asking whether staying in the EU is good or bad, and the question of which option would respect the the result of the referendum has nothing to do with what was overwhelmingly preferred by the public either. Remember, the referendum was almost a 50/50 split. The last question on increasing the skills of British workers does not ask whether they want to prevent EU freedom of movement and lose the single market, nor to pay the costs of training British workers.
Basically, you are taking the results of these polls and inferring something else. The first question is just baised in the sense it does not ask whether staying in the EU would be good or bad for UK. The other, you cannot claim that there was an overal preference for any of those options, as nearly half voted to remain. The last question makes no sense anyways, since the main arguments for reducing immigration is to grant no-skill jobs to British workers, so increasing the skills of British workers would only increase demand for foreign labour.
The mental gymnastics.
Overwhelmingly preferred: Hard Brexit (-12), Norway model (-3), Canada model (+26). Obviously staying in the EU isn't an option because... staying in the EU isn't an option. As for the final picture I said almost exactly the same as what the picture itself says.
|
On October 06 2016 22:49 bardtown wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2016 22:30 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Only for the question of" supporting or opposing government proposals to make companies report how many foreign workers theya re employing" can what you are claiming from the results of the polls can be inferred. The first question has nothing to do with preferences to which you are claiming. The first question very obviously missed out asking whether staying in the EU is good or bad, and the question of which option would respect the the result of the referendum has nothing to do with what was overwhelmingly preferred by the public either. Remember, the referendum was almost a 50/50 split. The last question on increasing the skills of British workers does not ask whether they want to prevent EU freedom of movement and lose the single market, nor to pay the costs of training British workers.
Basically, you are taking the results of these polls and inferring something else. The first question is just baised in the sense it does not ask whether staying in the EU would be good or bad for UK. The other, you cannot claim that there was an overal preference for any of those options, as nearly half voted to remain. The last question makes no sense anyways, since the main arguments for reducing immigration is to grant no-skill jobs to British workers, so increasing the skills of British workers would only increase demand for foreign labour. The mental gymnastics. Overwhelmingly preferred: Hard Brexit (-12), Norway model (-3), Canada model (+26). Obviously staying in the EU isn't an option because... staying in the EU isn't an option. As for the final picture I said almost exactly the same as what the picture itself says.
The final question is stupidly pointless. Every country in the world would rather educate their own high skilled worker then immigrate them.
Its a question that can only really be answered by calculating the costs of training 'inhouse' vs immigration and I am willing to bet not a single person who responded did that (Because their ordinary people and not economists).
|
On October 06 2016 23:12 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2016 22:49 bardtown wrote:On October 06 2016 22:30 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Only for the question of" supporting or opposing government proposals to make companies report how many foreign workers theya re employing" can what you are claiming from the results of the polls can be inferred. The first question has nothing to do with preferences to which you are claiming. The first question very obviously missed out asking whether staying in the EU is good or bad, and the question of which option would respect the the result of the referendum has nothing to do with what was overwhelmingly preferred by the public either. Remember, the referendum was almost a 50/50 split. The last question on increasing the skills of British workers does not ask whether they want to prevent EU freedom of movement and lose the single market, nor to pay the costs of training British workers.
Basically, you are taking the results of these polls and inferring something else. The first question is just baised in the sense it does not ask whether staying in the EU would be good or bad for UK. The other, you cannot claim that there was an overal preference for any of those options, as nearly half voted to remain. The last question makes no sense anyways, since the main arguments for reducing immigration is to grant no-skill jobs to British workers, so increasing the skills of British workers would only increase demand for foreign labour. The mental gymnastics. Overwhelmingly preferred: Hard Brexit (-12), Norway model (-3), Canada model (+26). Obviously staying in the EU isn't an option because... staying in the EU isn't an option. As for the final picture I said almost exactly the same as what the picture itself says. The final question is stupidly pointless. Every country in the world would rather educate their own high skilled worker then immigrate them. Its a question that can only really be answered by calculating the costs of training 'inhouse' vs immigration and I am willing to bet not a single person who responded did that (Because their ordinary people and not economists).
Yeah, it's essentially meaningless. It would be interesting to see it as a comparison, i.e. 'Would you prioritise training British workers to reduce immigration over growth?' I also thought the rest of that picture was interesting though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
