Send them to live next door to remainers

[vetran]

I love the way Brexiters, without fail, go off on a tangent when possibly inconvenient truths and reality intrude on their fantasy.
There's something about the education system in this country that encourages infantilism.

So what do you think vetran, will a hard Brexit benefit the common man?

Not seen many inconvenient truths lots of unsubstantiated lies from remainers.

In the long term yes assuming we negotiate Brexit properly.

But lets turn the question around how would have remaining in an organisation modeled on one of the most oppressive in modern history benefited the common man? Do please try to come up with something truthful.

One of the reason's the leave vote won was because we tried to negotiate with the EU and they just slammed the door in our face. How do you think they would behave when they have even more power?

Maybe the rest of the EU will start thinking (?)rexit and the EU might lose some of its arrogance then negotiate?

[SueEllen]

You might want to look up 'Little Englander' it doesn't mean what you think it does.

It suits the carp you are shouting to a tee like below.

Zero hour contracts have been around for decades the EU has done nothing to stop them, big multinationals like them. The EU won't fight it because it pushes up employment, the elephant in the room is that sooner or later all these jobs will be mechanised and we will have a low skilled workforce with nothing to do.

Now an over supply of cheap and effectively subsidised labour has encouraged this abuse in the UK imagine what it will be like when the robots, drones etc take off.

The UK government cares about its electorate far more than the EU does about its victims

https://euobserver.com/justice/122955

Corrupt European countries costing EU nearly £800bn a year, says study | The Independent

This is nothing to do with the EU but everything to do with UK government policy over the decades.

And I was around when a well-known retailer thought this brand "new" method of working was a great one. Oddly they couldn't find anyone at the time to take the roles as people had sufficient employment protection then.

[SueEllen]

Not seen many inconvenient truths lots of unsubstantiated lies from remainers.

In the long term yes assuming we negotiate Brexit properly.

But lets turn the question around how would have remaining in an organisation modeled on one of the most oppressive in modern history benefited the common man? Do please try to come up with something truthful.

One of the reason's the leave vote won was because we tried to negotiate with the EU and they just slammed the door in our face. How do you think they would behave when they have even more power?

Maybe the rest of the EU will start thinking (?)rexit and the EU might lose some of its arrogance then negotiate?

Negotiating Brexit "properly" will take decades as we aren't Greenland. Even some of your beloved Brexiteer ministers admit this.

[sasguru]

Not seen many inconvenient truths lots of unsubstantiated lies from remainers.

The fall in the pound is real and already affecting people's expenditure as things become dearer.
That will accelerate next year.
There is evidence that businesses have suspended investment, again the effects will kick in next year.
I would imagine that Article 50 kick off would lead to a further fall in the pound.

In the long term yes assuming we negotiate Brexit properly.

So you're backing a soft Brexit? Negotiating assumes non-hard Brexit. Hard Brexit is when we say, stuff this, do your worst and lets see what happens :-)

But lets turn the question around how would have remaining in an organisation modeled on one of the most oppressive in modern history benefited the common man? Do please try to come up with something truthful.

One of the reason's the leave vote won was because we tried to negotiate with the EU and they just slammed the door in our face. How do you think they would behave when they have even more power?

One of the concessions Dave got was that Britain would NEVER join any further political union of the EU. This was going to be in the treaty in perpetuity. Seems like a good deal, keep the economic benefits and forget the political bollox. Many (most) remainers don't want to join the Euro or any further political stuff.

Maybe the rest of the EU will start thinking (?)rexit and the EU might lose some of its arrogance then negotiate?

On the contrary Brexit has made them double down. And only in the tabloids is there the slightest hint of other countries exiting. There could well be referendums in other places but given the closeness in the UK (the most Euroskeptic country only won 52:48) it's fair to say other referendums, were they to be held, will be for the EU.
The economic shenningans that the UK jas already endured and will endure is causing the Eurosceptics to lose ground.

[vetran]

It suits the carp you are shouting to a tee like below.


This is nothing to do with the EU but everything to do with UK government policy over the decades.

And I was around when a well-known retailer thought this brand "new" method of working was a great one. Oddly they couldn't find anyone at the time to take the roles as people had sufficient employment protection then.

it really doesn't. Look it up.

They found no one was willing to take it up because there was no shortage of jobs or benefits. Things have changed, can you tell me why?

[xoggoth]

Certainly it will benefit the common man most.

Basic maths, you do not raise an average by adding more of average quality. Migrants do increase the nation's wealth but, if you then divide that increased wealth by a similarly increased population, nobody is any better off. Migrants create their own demands. No point having more doctors if you similarly increase the number of patients or more house builders if the houses are just meeting increased demand due to immigration. The downsides of free migration are huge, pressures on infrastructure, schools, housing, roads etc. which we cannot possibly expand at the same rate. Some things, like our diminishing countryside, cannot be increased to match.

People spout this stuff about hard working migrants taking jobs Brits don't want to do but competition is not selective, it necessarily makes job finding more difficult for everyone at the bottom. It is the businesses owners that benefit, they reap more profits with cheaper staff and the costs of supporting low paid workers who don't pay enough tax or NI to match their cost to the state are picked up by the rest of us. Migration is not a sensible solution to an ageing population or supposed "lazy Brits". Migrants get old too and will end up just as lazy if we don't fix the causes.

As for the USSR, a better comparison is Yugoslavia. Look how that turned out, forty years did not eliminate the national differences. The Zealots in the EU are repeating the same mistake, pushing ahead much too fast and putting their ideals above the real concerns of ordinary people.

[BlasterBates]

it really doesn't. Look it up.

They found no one was willing to take it up because there was no shortage of jobs or benefits. Things have changed, can you tell me why?

You mean when there was high unemployment in the 80's and 90's.

[sasguru]

Certainly it will benefit the common man most.

Basic maths, you do not raise an average by adding more of average quality. Migrants do increase the nation's wealth but, if you then divide that increased wealth by a similarly increased population, nobody is any better off. Migrants create their own demands. No point having more doctors if you similarly increase the number of patients or more house builders if the houses are just meeting increased demand due to immigration. The downsides of free migration are huge, pressures on infrastructure, schools, housing, roads etc. which we cannot possibly expand at the same rate. Some things, like our diminishing countryside, cannot be increased to match.

People spout this stuff about hard working migrants taking jobs Brits don't want to do but competition is not selective, it necessarily makes job finding more difficult for everyone at the bottom. It is the businesses owners that benefit, they reap more profits with cheaper staff and the costs of supporting low paid workers who don't pay enough tax or NI to match their cost to the state are picked up by the rest of us. Migration is not a sensible solution to an ageing population or supposed "lazy Brits". Migrants get old too and will end up just as lazy if we don't fix the causes.

As for the USSR, a better comparison is Yugoslavia. Look how that turned out, forty years did not eliminate the national differences. The Zealots in the EU are repeating the same mistake, pushing ahead much too fast and putting their ideals above the real concerns of ordinary people.

All the evidence is that migrants don't lower the lowest wages by much, particulalry as there's a minimum wage.
But I agree that immigration was not controlled properly under Labour.
Free movement can be curtailed by requiring bureaucratic hoops.
I've worked in Switzerland recently and it's not easy to do the paperwork, plus for the first 5 years (I believe) if you don't have a job, you don't have the right to stay. Now this seems acceptable to the EU.

But whatever the benefits or not of immigration, the common man will be affected by permanently higher prices and fewer job opportunities as the econoimy shrinks/has permanently lower growth. It is unrealistic to think (hope?) that Britains weak, indebted, mainly services economy will be unaffected by Brexit.

[vetran]

You mean when there was high unemployment in the 80's and 90's.

the benefits were far less restrictive.

People need to be desperate and plentiful supply to be abused by zero hour contracts. In the 80s I worked for agencies on effective zero hour contracts and was frequently treated & paid better than staff because there weren't enough people who wanted to work.

I never had any trouble finding work neither did my mates with no qualifications they did however use benefits as a feather bed to work out of.

[vetran]

All the evidence is that migrants don't lower the lowest wages by much, particulalry as there's a minimum wage.
But I agree that immigration was not controlled properly under Labour.
Free movement can be curtailed by requiring bureaucratic hoops.
I've worked in Switzerland recently and it's not easy to do the paperwork, plus for the first 5 years (I believe) if you don't have a job, you don't have the right to stay. Now this seems acceptable to the EU.

But whatever the benefits or not of immigration, the common man will be affected by permanently higher prices and fewer job opportunities as the econoimy shrinks/has permanently lower growth. It is unrealistic to think (hope?) that Britains weak, indebted, mainly services economy will be unaffected by Brexit.

according to the ONS until you earn £40K you aren't a net contributor. Even if migrants take bottom end jobs and double the pool of people paid below £40k they still are an effective drain. We have added 10% more population and 20-30% more lower paid workers that higher rate tax payers have to subsidise (before anyone goes off on one its reasonable the higher paid should subsidise the lower paid ones its just a question of numbers).