The EU debate - Part III

Given you're new to the debate here mate and you're also a business owner, simple question for you;

Would you put control of our borders i.e. the end of our free movement agreement with the EU, over access to the single market?

 

It's the concept that anyone unemployed or on benefits is a sponger that is the false construct. Not that there are people who choose not to work.

 

I'd disagree with this too. The people ( taxpayers) elect the government to represent their wishes, in very basic terms.

In my view, if you're not happy with the way they are using your money, you are entitled to make some noise about it.

 

And elect another lot who will favor their 'few'

 

You voted for it, but don't know what it means?

 

Disabled people who are physically unable to work are not spongers, no.
That will one day be me, as I have a degenerative muscular disease that will probably leave me wheelchair bound by the time I hit my 50's.
I work 46 hours a week, and up until a couple of years ago me and my wife were claiming Child benefit, until my pay went up and priced us out of eligibility.

 

That cost extra. Anyway, I put up a picture so it must be mine.

 

Difficult question.

Economy is more important to me over immigration.

My decision with Brexit was based on decision making, whom its by, accountability and our ability to make our own laws - as I put in one of my posts an hour or so back.

Immigration never played a key point for me. I made my mind up on the EU years ago when doing a law module and finding out even the top of level of our courts is no longer in the UK. I feel uncomfortable with people outside of the UK making decisions on all matters which effect me and are very personal.

But, I understand you're saying you cannot have one without affecting the other.

For me its now down to our politicians to get the absolute best on new trade deals moving forward.

A compromise with immigration would be fine with me but as long as we contribute and our hands are not tied.

I don't personally trade directly with the EU - some materials I import, bit of labour.

 

Then that's on us!

They should teach politics at schools man.
Bollocks to most of the **** they teach, they should teach kids to manage money and to get interested in politics.

 

Cheers for the answer.

I think that's what it'll end up boiling down to mate, and I've always thought the same.

I don't think we'll be able to negotiate having our cake and eating it, the end game will be which one do you want the most?

Given you import some raw materials, you'll have seen your unit costs increase with the pound crashing then I take it?

 

My actual job is at the moment an estimator although I'm usually a quantity surveyor.

So technically its not my materials - I'm working with someone else's money.

Not seen a change it quoted prices yet which I would presume may come - I think a lot of companies will use this as a chance to increase their profits rather than as a result of their rising costs - as I'm sure most of us predict.

Overall not seen a lot of change but then a lot of people are working on building projects which are years in duration and thus based on prices received from several years ago.

Always takes time for the building industry to catch up.

We're all in a sort of phoney war until the article gets dealt with and people review the deals we put in place moving forward.

Immigration least important to me but I have my ideas!

 

It's not even a choice!
Keep Free movement or lose access to the single market?

Only a ****ing idiot would completely **** this country over economically in order to cure a non existent immigration issue.

If its to be one or the other, then we HAVE to stay in the single market! And I would hope any member of our current government would be smart enough to realise this.

 

You're encroaching in Two-Kitchen Pete levels of ****ness with that analogy

 

So would I. However, certain senior members of this Gvt seem intent on economic suicide!..

 

I doubt he's on his own there somehow.

 

That's actually the usage I'm objecting to. My rights as a VOTER don't depend on whether or to what extent I pay TAXES. Taxpayers' money is an oxymoron since the moment taxes are paid the money belongs to all of us.

 

I see taxpayers as a collective. In fact, there's a taxpayers alliance.

People go on about Gvt money. The Gvt doesn't have any money. It's our money that we allow them to take by voting for them.

We should also hold them to account as to how it's used.

 

Absolutely they exist, but since they do I'd much rather they were at home with their feet up doing no damage rather than being at work messing things up!

 

The fact that there is a taxpayers alliance proves my point that 'they' want to have more influence than just a vote. I'm all for people holding the Government to account by using their vote but all these pressure groups are anti-democratic

 

I think the opposite. I think they're an example of democracy in action. Yes, they all have various different aims, but that's democracy.

You vote for a Gvt that you think will best reflect your interests. And, yes, you pay taxes to that Gvt. However, I disagree that you have somehow forfeited the right to have any further say, if you're unhappy at the way the Gvt is using your money.