Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

brexit

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by QPRDave View Post
    Haven't posted in here so will leave it to just this one.
    I want a govt that is answerable to me the UK voter. At the moment they take orders.
    Appledore Shipyard has just announced it will close. The main reason is because
    the UK have to put out to tender all contracts across the eu, and UK yards can't compete with foreign
    govt subsidised yards. That is what the eu brings to Britain.
    I want UK fishing boats catching our fish in our waters, and fishing ports and towns will be regenerated.
    I want a sensible immigration policy, only skilled workers that we need to come in.
    And finally I don't want to under the power of the ECJ that has given more rights to wrong doers than the wronged.
    Apparently I'm a stupid, ignorant biggoted nazi and countless other things on twitter.....Oh well
    The UK government is only answerable to the UK voter and no one else. Parliament is sovereign and can do anything they want. They don't take orders. They sign treaties and generally as country we honour our word when we give it, as do most developed countries. We could come out of the EU tomorrow if we wanted. All it needs is an act of parliament, it's just that we would be breaking a treaty that we signed.

    The EU is answerable to each member country which sends their prime ministers/heads of government, to the EU council and when there's council summits they decide stuff, together. These heads of government are answerable to their voters. There's also the EU parliament which also has a say.

    The Appledore Shipyard is not shutting down because of the EU. As far as I know it lost its contract with armed forces of Malta which is why it got into trouble. Who knows maybe Malta was worried about Brexit. I'll say it again after Brexit, our manufacturing sector and heavy industry will have to be left behind. This is what the Brexiteers themselves say.

    If you don't like tendering across the EU than you also don't want to win contracts across the EU. Believe it or not we do quite well out of it as our service sector like banks and insurance are dominant and we are reaping the profits of the single market. It's just that we don't get to hear a lot of this. Bad news travels quicker. You might lose a bit on fishing and other things but gain a lot more on the rest.

    With regards to immigration, it's all a myth and wild claims. It will not come down, it will probably go up. We will get our immigration from further afield now instead of Europe. If anyone is worried about integration and the rate of cultural change you can bet it will be worse now as non EU migration will be the bulk of the migrants now. We may now have more nurses coming in from Zimbabwe, Jamaica and the Philippines instead of Spain, Italy and Poland. MigrationWatch themselves have said as much and branded the governments post Brexit policy as going from the frying pan into the fire.

    Also over the years the majority of the immigration coming into the country has been non-EU migrants. Most years non-EU has been the vast majority of immigration. The government has always had full control over non-EU immigration and they have done nothing to reduce the numbers. The irony is that now we're coming out of EU in order to take back control and give it to the government who I suspect will do nothing about it just as their track record shows.

    You are mistaking the ECJ with the European Court of the Human Rights (ECHR) which has nothing to do with the EU. The ECJ just deals with contract law and is not to be confused with the ECHR.

    The ECHR is not an EU body. Even Russia and Moldova are part of the ECHR which are not in the EU. ECHR only deals with human rights cases and we are one of the main countries that drafted the European Convention of Human Rights (e.g. No death penalty, no torture etc). It's got Europe in the name but not part of the EU, we can come out of it and not come of the EU. It's just that we'd be compared to North Korea or Burma or something and lose face.

    I agree the name calling and all that other stuff happens a lot. It's doubly worse really as it goes on both sides. It really doesn't help when we need to bring the country together instead of apart.
    Last edited by fisnik; 01-11-2018, 10:37 PM.

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by Gtleighsr3 View Post

      U can't be a Nazi,they were european
      you're replies are in a different class

      Comment


      • #78
        Fishnik
        "The UK government is only answerable to the UK voter and no one else. Parliament is sovereign and can do anything they want"...Disagree, we take orders and spend good money doing it
        "The Appledore Shipyard is not shutting down because of the EU." ..... It's not what Union bosses are saying. Every govt contract has to go out to tender, and other EU govts subsidise their industries.
        "If you don't like tendering across the EU than you also don't want to win contracts across the EU. Believe it or not we do quite well out of it "...... Like Bombardier ?

        "With regards to immigration, it's all a myth and wild claims"
        20 Bogus Arguments for Mass Immigration


        History & Miscellaneous: MW 269
        1.Introduction

        This paper outlines the many myths that are put forward by the mass immigration lobby in support of the current levels of immigration and dispels each myth in turn. 2.‘Immigration provides great economic benefit’

        For many years the Labour government claimed that immigration added £6 billion a year to GDP. However, the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee[1], reporting in April 2008, said that what mattered was GDP per head. They concluded that:
        We have found no evidence for the argument, made by the government, business and many others, that net immigration generates significant economic benefits for the existing UK population.
        In January 2012 the Migration Advisory Committee[2] went further. They said that even GDP per head exaggerated the benefit of immigration because:
        It is the immigrants themselves rather than the extant residents who are the main gainers.
        They suggested that the GDP of residents should be the main focus. They recognised that the resident population would gain via any “dynamic effects” of skilled immigration on productivity and innovation, remarking that “these exist and may be large, but they are elusive to measure”.

        In their annual Fiscal Sustainability Report, the Office for Budgetary Responsibility concluded in August 2013:
        In our attempt to summarise the vast literature on the impact of immigration on the labour market and productivity we have not found definitive evidence on the impact of immigrants on productivity and GDP. Most of the literature seems to indicate that immigrants have a positive, although not significant, impact on productivity and GDP.[3]
        As regards EU migration, a study by the NIESR in 2011 found that the potential long-run impact of EU8 migration (Poland et al) on GDP per head was expected to be “negligible”[4] ranging from 0.17% to -0.17%. However, this result relied upon an upward ‘age adjustment’ on the assumption that migrants tended to be of working age and thus to be “net contributors to the government coffers”. Subsequent research on the fiscal contribution of migrants to the UK suggests that this assumption may well be unsound (see 3. below) 3.‘Immigrants are not a problem as they work hard and pay tax’

        Some of the limited research in this area had found that there might be a small positive fiscal impact to immigration. Nonetheless, according to the House of Lords Economic Committee “the fiscal impact (of immigration) is small compared to GDP and cannot be used to justify large-scale immigration”.

        However, the presumption of even a small fiscal benefit has been comprehensively overturned by a UCL study published in 2014 which found the fiscal impact of migrants in the UK between 1995 and 2011 was in fact a net cost of between £115 and £160 billion that is between £19 and £26 million per day.[5]

        The same study claimed that East European migrants contributed £5 billion to the Exchequer between 2001 and 2011. However that calculation was based on the assumption that they paid, from the moment of their arrival, corporate and business taxes at the same rate as lifelong UK residents. Correcting for this brought the contribution close to zero. 4.‘Migrants are less likely to claim benefits’

        Figures from the DWP show that migrants to the UK are less likely to claim out-of-work benefits. But large amounts of the total benefits bill are paid to people in work, in particular tax credits and housing benefit. Research shows that some migrant groups are much more likely to be claiming these key benefits than the general population.[6]5. ‘Britain is only the 39th most crowded country in the world’

        93% of immigrants go to England so England is what matters in this context. England is the second most densely populated country in the EU with 417 people per square kilometre, after the Netherlands (with 500 people per square kilometre) and excluding islands such as Malta.

        Excluding island states and city states like Singapore, England is the eighth most crowded country in the world, just behind India and nearly twice as crowded as Germany and three and a half times as crowded as France.

        We're never going to agree fish, so i'll not post in here again, it'll only cause arguments.
        But I will leave you with this thought, why is it most of the very wealthy and ex politicians who signed
        treaties like Maastricht (signed without peoples vote/consent) are all for this?
        Some don't even pay tax here, because they're on a nice little earner, like "farmer" Heseltine, literally getting money for nothing

        Comment


        • #79
          tbf how pple can call dave a nazi for his anti brexit views is a disgrace.I mean the nazis invented the first european union from 1938 with their tanks.
          Chelmsford City the home of Radio

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by Itsonlyagame View Post

            Fair play Johnny, it must be hard having to dumb yourself down enough to be able to come on here with us ‘men in the pub’
            Thank you Itso!.... it’s nice that some people appreciate how difficult it really is.

            Even since your comment , there have been a couple of posts on this thread where I have found myself staring into the middle distance and shaking my head......

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by Johnnykc View Post

              Thank you Itso!.... it’s nice that some people appreciate how difficult it really is.

              Even since your comment , there have been a couple of posts on this thread where I have found myself staring into the middle distance and shaking my head......
              Probably late onset Parkinsons mate, get to the quacks pronto

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by Johnnykc View Post

                Thank you Itso!.... it’s nice that some people appreciate how difficult it really is.

                Even since your comment , there have been a couple of posts on this thread where I have found myself staring into the middle distance and shaking my head......
                Whilst no doubt muttering to yourself “”thick as bloody mince”” as a lot of remainers seem to love doing.
                He'll regret it till his dying day, if ever he lives that long

                Comment


                • #83
                  I'm fed up with the patronising "you didn't know what you were voting for" ploy.
                  Yes I bloody well did,then I counter with the "give me five reasons to stay in the EU apart from cheapo holidays and roaming charges" to which as yet hasn't had a reply.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    when i voted leave,i didnt know id have to stand in the russian line when leaving cyprus
                    Chelmsford City the home of Radio

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by QPRDave View Post
                      Fishnik
                      "The UK government is only answerable to the UK voter and no one else. Parliament is sovereign and can do anything they want"...Disagree, we take orders and spend good money doing it
                      "The Appledore Shipyard is not shutting down because of the EU." ..... It's not what Union bosses are saying. Every govt contract has to go out to tender, and other EU govts subsidise their industries.
                      "If you don't like tendering across the EU than you also don't want to win contracts across the EU. Believe it or not we do quite well out of it "...... Like Bombardier ?

                      "With regards to immigration, it's all a myth and wild claims"
                      20 Bogus Arguments for Mass Immigration


                      History & Miscellaneous: MW 269
                      1.Introduction

                      This paper outlines the many myths that are put forward by the mass immigration lobby in support of the current levels of immigration and dispels each myth in turn. 2.‘Immigration provides great economic benefit’

                      For many years the Labour government claimed that immigration added £6 billion a year to GDP. However, the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee[1], reporting in April 2008, said that what mattered was GDP per head. They concluded that:
                      We have found no evidence for the argument, made by the government, business and many others, that net immigration generates significant economic benefits for the existing UK population.
                      In January 2012 the Migration Advisory Committee[2] went further. They said that even GDP per head exaggerated the benefit of immigration because:
                      It is the immigrants themselves rather than the extant residents who are the main gainers.
                      They suggested that the GDP of residents should be the main focus. They recognised that the resident population would gain via any “dynamic effects” of skilled immigration on productivity and innovation, remarking that “these exist and may be large, but they are elusive to measure”.

                      In their annual Fiscal Sustainability Report, the Office for Budgetary Responsibility concluded in August 2013:
                      In our attempt to summarise the vast literature on the impact of immigration on the labour market and productivity we have not found definitive evidence on the impact of immigrants on productivity and GDP. Most of the literature seems to indicate that immigrants have a positive, although not significant, impact on productivity and GDP.[3]
                      As regards EU migration, a study by the NIESR in 2011 found that the potential long-run impact of EU8 migration (Poland et al) on GDP per head was expected to be “negligible”[4] ranging from 0.17% to -0.17%. However, this result relied upon an upward ‘age adjustment’ on the assumption that migrants tended to be of working age and thus to be “net contributors to the government coffers”. Subsequent research on the fiscal contribution of migrants to the UK suggests that this assumption may well be unsound (see 3. below) 3.‘Immigrants are not a problem as they work hard and pay tax’

                      Some of the limited research in this area had found that there might be a small positive fiscal impact to immigration. Nonetheless, according to the House of Lords Economic Committee “the fiscal impact (of immigration) is small compared to GDP and cannot be used to justify large-scale immigration”.

                      However, the presumption of even a small fiscal benefit has been comprehensively overturned by a UCL study published in 2014 which found the fiscal impact of migrants in the UK between 1995 and 2011 was in fact a net cost of between £115 and £160 billion that is between £19 and £26 million per day.[5]

                      The same study claimed that East European migrants contributed £5 billion to the Exchequer between 2001 and 2011. However that calculation was based on the assumption that they paid, from the moment of their arrival, corporate and business taxes at the same rate as lifelong UK residents. Correcting for this brought the contribution close to zero. 4.‘Migrants are less likely to claim benefits’

                      Figures from the DWP show that migrants to the UK are less likely to claim out-of-work benefits. But large amounts of the total benefits bill are paid to people in work, in particular tax credits and housing benefit. Research shows that some migrant groups are much more likely to be claiming these key benefits than the general population.[6]5. ‘Britain is only the 39th most crowded country in the world’

                      93% of immigrants go to England so England is what matters in this context. England is the second most densely populated country in the EU with 417 people per square kilometre, after the Netherlands (with 500 people per square kilometre) and excluding islands such as Malta.

                      Excluding island states and city states like Singapore, England is the eighth most crowded country in the world, just behind India and nearly twice as crowded as Germany and three and a half times as crowded as France.

                      We're never going to agree fish, so i'll not post in here again, it'll only cause arguments.
                      But I will leave you with this thought, why is it most of the very wealthy and ex politicians who signed
                      treaties like Maastricht (signed without peoples vote/consent) are all for this?
                      Some don't even pay tax here, because they're on a nice little earner, like "farmer" Heseltine, literally getting money for nothing
                      I can see we're not going to agree. That's no problem as I will also leave it at this. Your post seems to be mainly about immigration but all I was saying was that immigration will not be reduced after Brexit. All that will happen is that the vast majority of it will be non European now. Which it has been anyway for decades but after Brexit it will be even more so. Like I said this is from Migration Watch itself which you've quoted there in your post.

                      "6. The largest source of net migration remains from countries outside the European Union, something over which the government has immediate control."

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by fisnik View Post

                        I can see we're not going to agree. That's no problem as I will also leave it at this. Your post seems to be mainly about immigration but all I was saying was that immigration will not be reduced after Brexit. All that will happen is that the vast majority of it will be non European now. Which it has been anyway for decades but after Brexit it will be even more so. Like I said this is from Migration Watch itself which you've quoted there in your post.

                        "6. The largest source of net migration remains from countries outside the European Union, something over which the government has immediate control."
                        Thanks fish it is very polarising and I appreciate and have taken the info on board.
                        Tbh I don't want to fall out Rangers fans over this, and let's face it brexit is not going to happen now anyway.
                        Btw it's not all about stopping immigration my stance, it's stopping uncontrolled benefit immigration.
                        Just to be clear

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by QPRDave View Post

                          Thanks fish it is very polarising and I appreciate and have taken the info on board.
                          Tbh I don't want to fall out Rangers fans over this, and let's face it brexit is not going to happen now anyway.
                          Btw it's not all about stopping immigration my stance, it's stopping uncontrolled benefit immigration.
                          Just to be clear
                          Why isn't it going to happen?Like it or not the EU is finished.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Just my opinion the way treason has handled it blob. Apparently tomorrow the capitulation
                            will be unveiled and we will still be members in every way except name.
                            I'm hoping the whole bloody thing implodes mate too btw.
                            More & more countries are saying they will not accept this immigrants, against the eu bosses wishes.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              To be honest, I don't think they themselves know what's going to happen. We could have a Brexit where we're still in the customs union in all but name or we could have a no deal. Don't think anyone knows.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                big movement in Italy to leave,cant see it being popular in Greece after Germany basically bankrupted them. Cracks are there.
                                Chelmsford City the home of Radio

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X