Off Topic EU deabte. Which way are you voting ?

[Tobes]

Aye, you know what we all think better than us.

Talking to a Scot today that had voted remain, and after an initial period of concern, is now settled with how thing are.

You must really hang around with some nervy reactionary types. You're hiding from the reality more than the others that take it for what it is.

I think you're feeling insecure at the realisation that you're actually out of step with the majority in the UK.

Haha what utter bullshit.

I was completely 'in step' with those who had a job, or a mortgage, a degree or were studying for one. The feckless and the aged made the difference in that vote, as the sectors I mentioned all heavily voted in favour of remain. As I said, you obviously hang round with dead beats, but you're from Hull, so hardly a shocker

 

[Zanjinho]

... I wouldn't normally do this but it's "Europe's" ... now about that uneducated point ...

I had to remove the ' to achieve that level of irony (on phone so auto correct kicks in)

 

[afcftw]

A good question mate.

There are many variables here. Firstly the deal that is struck, if the insistence is that freedom of movement is excluded, then that'll leave us with a tariff that far out weighs our current payment to the EU - without doubt - and the deal itself will take ****ing years to conclude.

In the interim and then post an agreement being agreed, any global company seeking a European base is going to swerve the UK as its preferred choice. As if you're seeking to penetrate the EU market then you'll choose to place yourself within it.

Combine that with the companies who are currently based within the UK who might consider their mere presence here a risk due to the years of uncertainty and the potential damage to their potential growth within the Union, that might come from the mere association.

All of this will lead to us being on the outside looking in, we'll be an isolated island on the periphery of the EU landmass, with what exactly to attract external investment? What's the draw? Where's the advantage in staying here for a global business? Therefore how does any of this lead to an expanding economy?

Add to that the simple fact that the vast majority of our economic development projects in this country has been funded by EU funds for a generation, where's the cash coming from to continue that within a shrinking economy who's public purse will be reduced? It's therefore a fair assumption that it'll simply cease.

That's before we get onto the University research projects that spin off into innovation and thus economic development, that have virtually ALL, been funded by EU funds. All of which will simply disappear.

The entire spectrum of economic growth and development will be damaged and restricted in the short to medium term. Beyond that, I don't see where the growth in GDP is going to come from to undo the damage caused, and re-create what we already have in place.

If the people at the negotiating table decide our borders are more important than the economic deal we get then God help us all. But I think the early signs are that freedom of movement will be compromised on.

Good post

 

[FosseFilberto]

I had to remove the ' to achieve that level of irony (on phone so auto correct kicks in)

...I'm on my phone... are you using a cheap European one assembled by Polish people?

 

[Spurlock]

Anyone who voted based on what he promised them is a moron.

Which reminds me where is Custard?

 

[Zanjinho]

...I'm on my phone... are you using a cheap European one assembled by Polish people?

Do you not understand English?



Posted using a Samsung

 

[FosseFilberto]

Which reminds me where is Custard?

..googling 'moron' ...

 

[Treble]

Yes but quite obviously the people negotiating aren't going to choose to **** off the economy to keep out the immigrants... They aren't that stupid! And all of the Tory MPs who have spoken so far have said access to the common market will be the most important thing and they recognise there will be compromises attached to it. Yes some racists are going to be unhappy, but that's how it will go.

Fair enough IF you're accepting immigration will be a compromise, but that kind of defeats the purpose of 'voting out' for many. I'm not just talking about the racists, but many others who stated that they weren't racist but were simply concerned about open borders, the pressure on our services such as hospitals, schools etc and a loss of identity.

Plus, I really can't see how UKIP, the party you supported tbf, would be happy with that either.

 

[Spurlock]

 

[Spurlock]

**** outa way Treble..that was for Fosse.

 

[Tobes]

If the people at the negotiating table decide our borders are more important than the economic deal we get then God help us all. But I think the early signs are that freedom of movement will be compromised on.

Good post

Mate, if the people at the negotiating table believe the consensus of opinion within the leave camp was that immigration was the key factor - which Cameron has supposedly already said, then it makes freedom of movement a non negotiable. Which in turn means we'll be at that table for literally years. We'll be royally ****ed if that's the stance they take, but conversely, if they're right (which I think they definitely are) then to come back with free trade and free movement makes the entire process a complete nonsense in terms of it delivering what the populous seemingly wanted.

No wonder Cameron lobbed the grenade into Boris's hands.

It's a complete mess. Leave have said they had no strategy for any of this post the actual vote ffs! I mean what the actual ****

 

[DMD]

Haha what utter bullshit.

I was completely 'in step' with those who had a job, or a mortgage, a degree or were studying for one. The feckless and the aged made the difference in that vote, as the sectors I mentioned all heavily voted in favour of remain. As I said, you obviously hang round with dead beats, but you're from Hull, so hardly a shocker

Off the top of my head, over a dozen were professionals with degrees, others were businessmen, but you know best.

I'm possibly meeting some with some foreigners and students tomorrow, if I do, I'll let you know what they say.

Love the bigoted generalisations by the way, when you put it like that, it's quite remarkably that Liverpool bucked your trend. . No wonder you only want European, mainly white immigrants, rather than those dark, commonwealth types.

 

[pieguts]

Yes but quite obviously the people negotiating aren't going to choose to **** off the economy to keep out the immigrants... They aren't that stupid! And all of the Tory MPs who have spoken so far have said access to the common market will be the most important thing and they recognise there will be compromises attached to it. Yes some racists are going to be unhappy, but that's how it will go.

I have a genuine question around free movement. One of the problems for me, is that the UK benefits system will attract immigration. My own view is we could reduce immigration by making the UK less attractive (in terms of benefits), however this needs to be across the board and include our own "work shy" population, (this is a further debate for another day!!).
I know Cameron, last year managed to negotiate some concessions, but they didn't meet his initial demands.
If free movement is the price to pay for access to trade, are we now able to impose restrictions to benefits to discourage economic migrants?

 

[Spurlock]

Yes!!

A ****ing argument to read whilst I'm chillaxing in bed.

Wouldn't stand for that **** @Tobes

 

[NSIS]

I completely agree RE free movement and it's something I said repeatedly before the referendum vote.

I also agree short term it's about how long the uncertainty persists and how deep that cuts.

But as you've conceded, if we get continued access to the common market there won't be any significant tragedy of the economy in the long term and in fact with more freedom to negotiate trade deals outside of the common market it stands to reason that we have the potential to do better over the long term. I appreciate it isn't a done deal, but I strongly feel that we will get continued access to the common market and that seems to be the key point for all of the Tory MPs who have so far spoken about what comes next.

As I've said, it will leave a lot of voters pissed off that immigration hasn't changed. But, it's either that of we will have to accept that there will be tarriffs involved.

If we get completely unfettered trade with Europe - sort of associate member status, possibly we won't suffer as much. But, damage has already been done and some of it is probably irreparable.

But it's more than that, the EU has ploughed a lot of money into the UK to support various projects. That will all go. Projects like crossrail I think are ****ed TBH!

Mainly, I ask myself why? Why have we traded, particularly at this time of fragility in the economic cycle, the recovery we had going nicely for all this chaos and uncertainty.

I very much hope, for the UK's sake that this bright new future actually exists. But, I must say that I'm highly sceptical.

 

[Treble]

Mate, if the people at the negotiating table believe the consensus of opinion within the leave camp was that immigration was the key factor - which Cameron has supposedly already said, then it makes freedom of movement a non negotiable. Which in turn means we'll be at that table for literally years. We'll be royally ****ed if that's the stance they take, but conversely, if they're right (which I think they definitely are) then to come back with free trade and free movement makes the entire process a complete nonsense in terms of it delivering what the populous seemingly wanted.

No wonder Cameron lobbed the grenade into Boris's hands.

It's a complete mess. Leave have said they had no strategy for any of this post the actual vote ffs! I mean what the actual ****

THIS! What the hell was the point of going through ALL of this turmoil (the referendum campaign and its aftermath), if you're going to turn around and say one of the key tenets of the OUT campaign is going to be ignored. Just don't see any logic to this.

 

[afcftw]

Fair enough IF you're accepting immigration will be a compromise, but that kind of defeats the purpose of 'voting out' for many. I'm not just talking about the racists, but many others who stated that they weren't racist but were simply concerned about open borders, the pressure on our services such as hospitals, schools etc and a loss of identity.

Plus, I really can't see how UKIP, the party you supported tbf, would be happy with that either.

I supported them to achieve an EU referendum because of factors not linked to immigration. It seemed the most likely way to achieve a route out of the EU. I'm not a UKIP voter in the way people seem to declare themselves for the tories or labour and vote that way regardless and identify with some kind of social status because of it. I'm happy to switch parties to achieve what I think is best for the country and I couldn't care less if people aren't happy with a compromise on free movement.

I completely accept there will be lots of angry people when inevitably the compromise is made. And despite being a supporter of leaving the EU I did try to point this out to people before the referendum took place.

 

[Tobes]

Off the top of my head, over a dozen were professionals with degrees, others were businessmen, but you know best.

I'm possibly meeting some with some foreigners and students tomorrow, if I do, I'll let you know what they say.

Love the bigoted generalisations by the way, when you put it like that, it's quite remarkably that Liverpool bucked your trend. . No wonder you only want European, mainly white immigrants, rather than those dark, commonwealth types.

Professionals with degrees who were retired or who worked in Maccies D's?

Don't bother letting me know about the students pal, as I already know their general consensus in the Yorkshire region

Hull is a backwater full of inbred, spineless, **** house, bigots, I lived there for years. When the Eastern Europeans moved into the Avenues and Beverley Road, the local feckless population weren't chuffed to say the least we're they

 

[DMD]

What idiots. There's some top analysts and bankers on TV and they're saying the financial sector was due to shrink and head into turmoil for any one of a number of reasons anyway, so they are well prepared, and they reckon we're set well for a more stable future. What do they know?

Now of course, they could just be saying that to create calm and confidence and reduce the volatility, but wouldn't that make them liars? Are they right, or have they simply got it wrong?

They did say the US bankers are loving it, as it should leave them in a position to expand their power base in Europe.

 

[Treble]

I have a genuine question around free movement. One of the problems for me, is that the UK benefits system will attract immigration. My own view is we could reduce immigration by making the UK less attractive (in terms of benefits), however this needs to be across the board and include our own "work shy" population, (this is a further debate for another day!!).
I know Cameron, last year managed to negotiate some concessions, but they didn't meet his initial demands.
If free movement is the price to pay for access to trade, are we now able to impose restrictions to benefits to discourage economic migrants?

What about the many hundreds of thousands that come for jobs? I don't think restrictions on benefits will have much of an impact. It's economic migration that we kept being told was the main problem. Now that's changed?