Off Topic Impact of Brexit on Football

Hampshire bor, thanks for the explanation, wondered what IIRC meant. You learn something new every day. Good win tonight, nice to see our players chasing back and putting the opposition under pressure.

Hi bors, another example of manipulation by those in favour of our remaining in the EU. Assuming of course the Telegraph is not conducting a scaremongering campaign.

The Telegraph.

The EU is poised to ban high-powered appliances such as kettles, toasters, hair-dryers within months of Britain’s referendum vote, despite senior officials admitting the plan has brought them “ridicule”.

The European Commission plans to unveil long-delayed ‘ecodesign’ restrictions on small household appliances in the autumn. They are expected to ban the most energy-inefficient devices from sale in order to cut carbon emissions.

The plans have been ready for many months, but were shelved for fear of undermining the referendum campaign if they were perceived on an assault on the British staples of tea and toast.

A sales ban on high-powered vacuum cleaners and inefficient electric ovens in 2014 sparked a public outcry in Britain.

Now if they are really serious and want to contain greenhouse gases why not ban all vehicles that use petrol and diesel, particularly those manufacturers who falsified emission output.

 

Some very pertinent points, and also good knowledge of Fleet being Hampshire!!

 

Frogmore bor, have spent time in your area. Do they still have that Junkers 52 at Blackbush. I believe they also had the fuselage of a NA Mitchell.

 

A collectors item JKC, I agree that this is one of the good things the EU does. That said, they probably just failed to grease the right palms.

Bah!

 

Brexit and the impact of immigration on the UK

 Between 1995 and 2015, the number of immigrants from other European Union (EU) countries living in the UK tripled from 0.9 million to 3.3 million. In 2015, EU net immigration to the UK was 172,000, only just below the figure of 191,000 for non-EU immigrants.
All imigration though allows people with vested interests to hire cheaper foreign workers instead of investing in training the indiginous population
 The big increase in EU immigration occurred after the ‘A8’ East European countries joined in 2004. In 2015 29% of EU immigrants were Polish.
I think everyones fear is Turkey joining and another glut of imigrants of a very different culture joining on mass as well as once the refugees have spent some time even been given citizenship they will all then also be able to flood west
 EU immigrants are more educated, younger, more likely to be in work and less likely to claim benefits than the UK-born. About 44% have some form of higher education compared with only 23% of the UK-born. About a third of EU immigrants live in London, compared with only 11% of the UK-born.
I have no great objection to cherry picking workers from abroad who fill areas the UK population is not able to fill in the short term but we should be working harder to make these oportunities available to the UK born. Not imigrants fault entirely, our education system must work harder to ready our young for these roles.
 Many people are concerned that immigration reduces the pay and job chances of the UKborn due to more competition for jobs. But immigrants consume goods and services and this increased demand helps to create more employment opportunities. Immigrants also might have skills that complement UK-born workers. So we need empirical evidence to settle the issue of whether the economic impact of immigration is negative or positive for the UK-born.
In my oppinion it does reduce the chances for UK born, why would the NHS train nurses when they can import them? I know we live in a country now dominated by the service industry but buying a lot of stuff that benefits corperations, most of whom pay little tax is benefiting the population how? i know they will buy Uk stuff too but I would rather we improved the prospects of our own through training than keep letting more immigrants in.
 New evidence in this Report shows that the areas of the UK with large increases in EU immigration did not suffer greater falls in the jobs and pay of UK-born workers. The big falls in wages after 2008 are due to the global financial crisis and a weak economic recovery, not to immigration.
I cannot easily argue against this. I do not have sources or grand studies, just anectotal statements from individuals who feel it has had an effect. Builders being amoungst those who feel they have been undercut by foreign firms. That said as you say it could easily be the weak economy that has had a bigger influence
 There is also little effect of EU immigration on inequality through reducing the pay and jobs of less skilled UK workers. Changes in wages and joblessness for less educated UKborn workers show little correlation with changes in EU immigration.
Minimum wage will have the greatest influence, but I can understand a perception that oportunities are being more limited by foreign workers. That the foreign workers work is positive, especially in less desirable roles
 EU immigrants pay more in taxes than they take out in welfare and the use of public services. They therefore help reduce the budget deficit. Immigrants do not have a negative effect on local services such as crime, education, health, or social housing
But the Uk nationals who had those jobs could pay those taxes, I simply refuse to believe the other statistics; The BBc had a recent documentary that esentially stated that ethnic minorities of which many are foreign nationals are perpetrating higher crime rates and that the police are afraid in the main to say this on account of it being racist. As for education try talking to teachers in schools where classes are held back because there is a significant preportion of Non or limited english speakers. Then there are the translator costs in both schools and in the justice survices. If the NHS / health services are not being impacted then why is there so much anectotal evidence in the press of health tourism ? Admitedly I think giving anyone from the EU life saving treatment over a boobjob for a wannabe p3 skank is better spent but but often spent it is. As for social housing if one is living in social housing ahead of a UK national that is in need, it is one too many
 European countries with access to the Single Market must allow free movement of EU citizens whether in the EU (like the UK) or outside it (like Norway and Switzerland).
At this point this is true, but we take a larger economy out and perhaps with support from other nations like Norway and Switzerland could effect change to that end
 The refugee crisis has nothing to do with EU membership. Refugees admitted to Germany have no right to live in the UK. The UK is not in the Schengen passport-free travel agreement so there are border checks on migrants.
Until they gain citezenship in Germany or other EU nations, if you believe they will all get sent back to syria and the other nations frrom wence they came, I think you sre being a tad naive.

Bah!

 

Junkers 52? Really?!
I'm pretty sure not, but can't be certain. How far are you going back?

 

Fleet bor, around the 1985s IIRC (wow used it). have a photo taken when I was there.

 

No offence Melchy, but if you're going to say "I refuse to believe the statistics", and phrases like that, there is no point discussing this with you.

I refuse to believe the points table by the way. We won the PL this year IMO.

 

OK perhaps I should have said that I refuse to accept their interpretation of the statistics. Because frankly if you look around the country there is plenty of evidence contrary to what they report. I would suggest that they have a vested interest in the ststus quo and have damn lied to their own agenda.

Bah!

 

Leave Campaign chastises Remain Campaign for 'scaremongering',

Boris say the EU is literally Hitler

 

"Literally?" WTF, talk about a storm in a teacup the analagy was that an evil Dictator tried to create a European Empire/Superstate by genocide, while the modern day EU is trying to do so by stealth and that my friend is the truth of the matter

#voteleave #brexit

 

I suppose it was inevitable, as with all things, that someone would invoke Godwin eventually.
Of course, it was always more likely that the Leave Campaign would be the side to do it

 

Livingstone started it!

Bah!

 

Apologies for the wall of text, but this is just what I've been thinking recently regarding Brexit. Obviously feel free to completely ignore it. It's basically just a stream of consciousness:


One of the reasons I’m now leaning (fairly heavily) towards ‘Remain’ is that I strongly believe the EU has a greater interest and ability in protecting the personal liberties of the average citizen than the UK Parliament.

Our position in the EU has become an agent of reform – people seem to want a more democratic Europe, and that involves removing competencies from bureaucrats and indirectly elected officials such as those who sit on the European Council. Even before this most recent threat of Brexit, I remained in favour of a bigger EU with an even bigger democratic mandate and I would have probably supported the idea of a directly elected European President if such a thing was proposed.

I'm incredibly dubious that withdrawal from such an institution would increase the bargaining power of the average member of the UK public. This is primarily because the EU has traditionally been more responsive to lobbying by the under-represented than any UK institution.

Prior to TTIP (which is looking increasingly like it will fall by the wayside), the EU has had an excellent record of being anti-corporatism and pro-liberty, generating support from civil liberty groups and unions. It's also far better at fixing regional divides than the UK, which is helped by the fact that it is fundamentally a multi-polar organisation with no way to please a single interest group to the exclusion of others and come out better for it. Very basic things like food regulations and roaming charges elimination clearly show that the EU fulfills a thankless but valuable task in making the nitty-gritty details of British life more convenient for the average member of the public.

I really worry that the Tories (and probably Labour too) would take advantage of national isolation to implement unusual or undesirable policies. Furthermore, I think that our Parliament would be unable to deal with the legislative load that it'd inherit from the EU, and would fail to keep pace with granular change that unfolds far more quickly in the EU's comparatively slick legalistic machine. I do not believe our own civil service would be able to administer a sufficiently detailed system of regional and local support to underprivileged communities across our country, without encountering roadblocks in the form of personal prejudice or government interference.

As much as I am wary of extensive free trade, I don't think there is any value to shying away from free trade and globalisation in the context of EU membership when the tide of history seems to be moving ever more in that direction.

People might be right when they say that the Commission holds too much power, but very few of these people would be content with the solution - an executive of elected officials (either directly or from the legislature) who have ultimate oversight of departments, based purely on their merit as politicians (and not because there needs to be one bureaucrat for each country).


Frankly, I think this whole thing is a perfect advertisement of why we should avoid holding referenda in future. Indirect democracy could well be a better system when the general public are dismally misinformed.

 

Some very good points in that wee essay JKC and I think none but the blindest of us can see no good comes of the EU. It really is a decision of lesser evils for me. You say you in favour of a bigger EU and an even bigger democratic mandate and would have probably supported the idea of a directly elected European President if such a thing was proposed.But here's the thing. Every new state that joins is poorer than the last and less able to join on an equal footing. So to end in anything other than mass imigration to the more affluent west of europe you have to give them the same quality of living. That costs, and who foots the bill? the tax payers of the western states of europe, WSofE. So instead of our taxes paying to try to plug holes in our sinking ship we are handing over money to other nations to live better, have better industry (Which will start to take our trade by the way). So should we be selfish and hold on to what we have or live a little worse each year so that our children will have less and less so Johnny Turk can either come hear and pinch our kids jobs or have more oportunities at home?
I think the most pertinent question for us all in the end is;

Are we European?

The only way the EU moves forward is if the answer to that from us and all other member states is a resounding YES.
I and most people though are British, French, German etc etc first and European second. It can't and won't work that way. So I'm out. I would vote in to a WSofE. Comparable; economies, values and development. That could have worked. The current and expanding EU will not and we could just miss the best chance of ripping that up now before leaving becomes impossible as we all get dragged down. I don't think it's possible to change enough from within, to much cronyism. I think it takes all the worst things of the political elite, no true representation, no accountability, no connection with those that they serve.

Bah!

 

I am.



Oh, and ta for reading my ramblings

 

Excellent post General and like you I am most definitely British and NOT European

 

JKC bor, of course we read your ramblings and that is just what they are, idealistic ramblings.

One of the reasons I’m now leaning (fairly heavily) towards ‘Remain’ is that I strongly believe the EU has a greater interest and ability in protecting the personal liberties of the average citizen than the UK Parliament.

It has??? Lets look at this protection you think the EU offers the citizens of this country. It will defend this country if attacked, if that is the case where was that help when we had to go to war against Argentina to protect British nationals living in the Falklands. It has not got an army to fall back on if an EU country is attacked, so much for protecting its members states. Its only weapon is trade and a fat lot of good that will do against an invading force. It is NATO that protects Europe and several members of NATO are not even in the EU.

Our Prime Minister said the EU has been instrumental in preventing war in Europe. He conveniently forgot the loss of Crimea to the Ukraine and the war fought in Kosovo but then he has a habit of not knowing what he is talking about, re his forgetfulness not receiving benefit from that overseas trust and then having to admit he got that wrong.

You have been given the right to vote for what you believe in, but just remember that right didn't come from the EU, it came from your forefathers long before the EU was even in existence.

People might be right when they say that the Commission holds too much power, but very few of these people would be content with the solution - an executive of elected officials (either directly or from the legislature) who have ultimate oversight of departments, based purely on their merit as politicians (and not because there needs to be one bureaucrat for each country).

You are not speaking for other people, you are expressing your opinion, its the part that say "very few" I take exception to. Where is the evidence to back up that statement, have you taken a poll of the people to make that statement or is it just a figment of your imagination? The governing of this country is exactly as you have described it, elected politicians having oversight of departments under its control, with the exception of the removal of the word ultimate because we as members of the EU no longer have ultimate control of our elected government.

There is one phrase of that statement that puzzles me, elected officials (either directly or from the legislature) by directly elected I take it you mean the electorate of each country and legislature to be by MPEs. How do you propose to elect a government taking the vote of every person in the EU to form this government. I think that would take too long to undertake. A bit too idealistic.

Frankly, I think this whole thing is a perfect advertisement of why we should avoid holding referenda in future. Indirect democracy could well be a better system when the general public are dismally misinformed.

This is the statement I like. The general public is dismally misinformed. I could not have put it better. Misinformation spun out constantly by the Remain protagonists (who incidentally are the direct democratic elected government of this country) !!!



















 

I still fail to see how saying 'NATO defends Europe' is an argument for leaving the EU. When has the EU ever claimed to be protecting its members in a military sense (and don't quote Cameron, he's full of rubbish as indeed are both sides of the establishment-led campaign)? I was talking about protecting personal liberties and rights of UK citizens (those which I believe - yes believe, yes my opinion - will be under threat from the UK Parliament without EU protection). You decided to tiresomely bring up the Falklands again rather than mention such liberties and rights.

You've said something along these lines before and I'm not sure exactly what you mean by it. I don't see how the fact that the EU wasn't around to install and protect UK suffrage rights is an argument for leaving it.

Well let me put it this way; how do you feel about people in power who are only good at electioneering? Do you think it is sensible to have every aspect of governance and legislature made up of such people? Do you think that 100% democratically elected bodies are the best way to achieve appropriate checks and balances?

I have been in favour of more democracy in the EU, like I said, but lately I'm increasingly unsure.

Come on Norkie, you're not that naive to think that it's only the Remain Campaign that is misinforming. It's both sides. Take a step back from the campaigns.

The electorate is often bemoaned for being misinformed, but then some people also bemoan the EU for being full of unelected bureaucrats. You can't have it both ways.



Just to confirm, and correct me if I'm wrong (as I'm sure you're champing at the bit to do), you will be voting Leave because of 'OUR SOVEREIGNTY™' , right?
Oh, and maybe to 'STOP THE BLOODY IMMIGRANTS' too?