Britain and the European Union

[Karl]

So, I haven't followed this thread at all, I don't think.

 

What are the predominating opinions here? Stay or go? Why?

 

https://ig.ft.com/sites/brexit-polling/

 

Looks tighter than I would like.

 

I am voting to stay -- unless someone shows me a stunningly cogent argument why we should not.

 

 

You realise 'voting to stay' isn't a vote for the status quo ? The EU is embarking on 'ever closer' union regardless of the British vote. Indeed, if we vote to remain, because of Camerons useless negotiations he has given away the British veto on any further interference in the EU march towards a fully federal state. That means on the 23rd we could well find ourselves in the EU but severely marginalised, unless we accept full Schengen and the adopt the Euro.

 

A lot of people are looking at the amount we pay into the club and the money that THEY decide to give us back and the pet EU supporting projects THEY decide to spend the money on. However, what seems to have slipped their minds is that it is the EU that dictates how much we pay and whether we get anything back. If the EU decides that because of our greater growth, that we must contribute more money and get less back, then that's what will happen.

 

This is before going through the sovereignty issues: we can't control European immigration, make our laws, decide on who we want to negotiate trade agreements with.

 

Or the anti-democratic nature of the leadership, or the fact that it has become a club for big crony corporates-Goldman Sachs/JP Morgan are backing the remain campaign with hard money. The crony nature of the businesses that support remain are ensuring smaller businesses cannot compete, they are also preventing third world countries from selling cheaper alternative food within the union. This prevents third world countries from finding their feet, encourages corrupt rulers and means we have to contribute a lot of aid money to prop up these corrupt ductatorships.

 

If none of those things are important to you, then one last thought, even the 'remainers' have the consensus that the EU is not fit for purpose and needs serious change, yet, despite 40 years of successive UK government promising to 'influence' Brussels, we have lost 78 out of 78 votes on things that we disagreed with. Even with the threat of leaving Cameron could change nothing significantly and managed to give away the Veto which might have a leat slowed things down.

 

In 1970 it was Britain which was the poor man of Europe, but now things have gone full circle. This time it's Europe that's losing its way, that has a declining economy, NIRP, restrictions on cash use, high unemployment (50% amongst the youth of Greece-a country that the EU has destroyed. There is the rise of the far right and left, continuous riots, strikes and instability. Europe is burning and Britain is in a better position, to stay in shackles us to a corpse.

 

 

[C T]

Its quite obvious Europe is under a big dark cloud. 

[Karl]

Its quite obvious Europe is under a big dark cloud. 

 

The global elite are seeing the financial guillotine getting closer. They are terrified of any kind of instability breaking up their cosy lifestyles which has been built on the spreading of fear of financial disaster to the 99% whilst convincing them that they have everything under control. They are stealing our money, destroying our lifestyles and ruining our futures whilst giving a few crumbs off the lords table. Brexit might create the chain reaction that exposes the fraudulent criminality of their massive scam. If Germany gets a hair cut then that damage will spread to the big global investment banks such as Goldman and Morgan's. They will have to liquidate their stocks, bonds and real estate assets. It will create a viscious deflationary spiral that will directly fife the those who have drawn the greatest advantage.

 

 

[Karl]

These are the kind of slugs that represent the more gregarious of the 0.1% for whom Brexit is a risk to their sordid lifestyle. They despise the little people whom they believe are too stupid to know when they are being played.

 

 

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-05-29/bill-clinton-was-here-elite-one-percent%E2%80%99s-orgy-island-exposed

 

 

Sent from my iPad

Edited May 29, 2016 by Karl

[dust]

Thanks, Karl. I don't know if it is the precise stunningly cogent argument I was looking for, but it's pretty good.

 

I'm sleepy so am not going to make a very good effort here. Will just cover a couple of things for now.

 

 

You realise 'voting to stay' isn't a vote for the status quo ? The EU is embarking on 'ever closer' union regardless of the British vote. Indeed, if we vote to remain, because of Camerons useless negotiations he has given away the British veto on any further interference in the EU march towards a fully federal state. That means on the 23rd we could well find ourselves in the EU but severely marginalised, unless we accept full Schengen and the adopt the Euro.

 

I don't know about the status quo. Change is fine with me.

 

What's wrong with a federation? The UK is no longer a major world power. Not better to be a part of something 'greater' rather than standing alone in the Atlantic? Even if it gave way to mass immigration (unlikely -- we could still enact border controls) and loss of law-making power (not entirely, though) wouldn't it be the better option in a very long-term view of things?

 

 

This is before going through the sovereignty issues: we can't control European immigration, make our laws, decide on who we want to negotiate trade agreements with.

 

You mean we can't control European immigration now, or wouldn't be able to in the future? Do we not have control over immigration right now?

[Apech]

Thanks, Karl. I don't know if it is the precise stunningly cogent argument I was looking for, but it's pretty good.

 

I'm sleepy so am not going to make a very good effort here. Will just cover a couple of things for now.

 

 

 

I don't know about the status quo. Change is fine with me.

 

What's wrong with a federation? The UK is no longer a major world power. Not better to be a part of something 'greater' rather than standing alone in the Atlantic? Even if it gave way to mass immigration (unlikely -- we could still enact border controls) and loss of law-making power (not entirely, though) wouldn't it be the better option in a very long-term view of things?

 

 

 

You mean we can't control European immigration now, or wouldn't be able to in the future? Do we not have control over immigration right now?

 

We can't control EU migration because there is free movement of labour.  Which is a good thing - without it London and our major cities would have collapsed by now.  Even if we Brexit we still won't 'control' immigration because business needs it.  So that whole issue is a lie.

 

You won't find any argument from the Leave side which shows exactly how the UK would function outside the EU.  I've asked and all you get is emotional arguments which make no sense.  Brexit is a romantic illusion based on the UK's historical political distancing from mainland Europe.  It's out of date and makes no real sense.  But it does appeal to many people's instincts - when they feel threatened by a changing world they want to retreat into their island shell.  That's all it is really.

[dust]

Hi Apech. To be honest, though I don't particularly enjoy the man, I'm with Richard Dawkins on this one:

 

“It is an outrage that people as ignorant as me are being asked to vote. This is a complicated matter of economics, politics, history, and we live in a representative democracy not a plebiscite democracy. You could make a case for having plebiscites on certain issues – I could imagine somebody arguing for one on fox hunting, for example – but not on something as involved as the European Union. This should be a matter for parliament.”

 

However, as it's already happening and there's not much we can do about that, I suppose I will have to vote, and I would like to try and understand at least more than the average -- which is difficult, because nobody seems to have any actual effing idea what the future of the EU is or what would happen if we left.

 

So... a couple of points Karl brought up interest me.

 

 

That means on the 23rd we could well find ourselves in the EU but severely marginalised, unless we accept full Schengen and the adopt the Euro.
 

Do we want to adopt the euro? It would seem to be an eventual inevitability of being part of an ever-closer EU. And what of trade deals? The argument is that EU has made the City of London less competitive through overregulation, and negotiates more protectionist and less effective trade deals on behalf of the UK. The WTO has basic rules for international trade by which both the EU and UK are obliged to abide; this would seem to limit the supposed likelihood of 1 in 10 British jobs being threatened by leaving..?

 

... despite 40 years of successive UK government promising to 'influence' Brussels, we have lost 78 out of 78 votes on things that we disagreed with. Even with the threat of leaving Cameron could change nothing significantly and managed to give away the Veto which might have a leat slowed things down.

 

Despite what I said before, isn't it true that the UK is a major power and economy, and that the EU does little to enhance this?

 

We have membership of the G20 and G8 Nations, a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, and seats on the International Monetary Fund Board of Governors and World Trade Organisation..

[Karl]

Thanks, Karl. I don't know if it is the precise stunningly cogent argument I was looking for, but it's pretty good.

 

I'm sleepy so am not going to make a very good effort here. Will just cover a couple of things for now.

 

 

 

 

I don't know about the status quo. Change is fine with me.

 

What's wrong with a federation? The UK is no longer a major world power. Not better to be a part of something 'greater' rather than standing alone in the Atlantic? Even if it gave way to mass immigration (unlikely -- we could still enact border controls) and loss of law-making power (not entirely, though) wouldn't it be the better option in a very long-term view of things?

 

 

 

 

You mean we can't control European immigration now, or wouldn't be able to in the future? Do we not have control over immigration right now?

 

If change is fine, then it's fine in or out. Most people are voting to remain in the EU because they fear change, but will get it anyway. However, within the EU we have no control of that change, outside we drive our own car.

 

I don't know what you mean by 'greater' or that 'Britain isn't a world power'. We have a global world, staying in the EU is being part of something smaller, not greater. As to a federation, well that's why the USSR broke up. I don't see the significance of Britain 'not being a world power' it just doesn't mean anything, we are a trading nation and the fifth largest economy in the world. In terms of being a large economy, we are very significant-and beginning to show additional growth which is outstripping the EU and many other nations. If Britain wants to grow it must get rid of EU little Englander thinking and embrace the globe.

 

Clearly I don't see being shackled to a rotting corpse the best option. It might have been in 1950, but the world has moved forward and the EU has not. It is stuck in a time warp which will eventually destroy it. If we leave it will likely collapse and then join the rest of the world and grow again. Unless we leave it will remain in depression and stagnation and us along with it-great for the corporates and cronies, not so good for the talented entrepreneur.

 

Sometimes you have to do the kindest thing, even if it's the hardest thing. If we don't vote to leave we will have to go down with the sinking ship and then Europe will split anyway, but perhaps in a hell fire of revolution or worse.

[dust]

Ignore my comment about 'world power' -- see my later post.

[Karl]

We can't control EU migration because there is free movement of labour.  Which is a good thing - without it London and our major cities would have collapsed by now.  Even if we Brexit we still won't 'control' immigration because business needs it.  So that whole issue is a lie.

 

You won't find any argument from the Leave side which shows exactly how the UK would function outside the EU.  I've asked and all you get is emotional arguments which make no sense.  Brexit is a romantic illusion based on the UK's historical political distancing from mainland Europe.  It's out of date and makes no real sense.  But it does appeal to many people's instincts - when they feel threatened by a changing world they want to retreat into their island shell.  That's all it is really.

 

It's not a lie. You don't live over here so you probably aren't aware of the strain on public services, housing and culture. We woukd control our borders and could enact an Australian points system instead of the ludicrous situation we are having to endure.

 

You won't find anything from the remain side to tell us how a creaking monstrosity with a failing economy and an undemocratic leadership demanding more money from Brotain every year will make Britain function at all. There are always risks to staying and leaving. It's a false dichotomy.

 

They do not feel threatened by change, they feel suffocated by stagnation and autocracy. Every remainer is terrified by change and that's why the Government is using its fear tactics. There is a whole world to embrace and remainers are the little Englanders too frightened of leaving nurse for fear of something worse. Remainers shoukd grow a pair and look outward and not introvert into a dying, defunct customs union designed for the world of the 50s and propping up the wealthy and lazy.

[Apech]

Hi Apech. To be honest, though I don't particularly enjoy the man, I'm with Richard Dawkins on this one:

 

“It is an outrage that people as ignorant as me are being asked to vote. This is a complicated matter of economics, politics, history, and we live in a representative democracy not a plebiscite democracy. You could make a case for having plebiscites on certain issues – I could imagine somebody arguing for one on fox hunting, for example – but not on something as involved as the European Union. This should be a matter for parliament.”

 

However, as it's already happening and there's not much we can do about that, I suppose I will have to vote, and I would like to try and understand at least more than the average -- which is difficult, because nobody seems to have any actual effing idea what the future of the EU is or what would happen if we left.

 

So... a couple of points Karl brought up interest me.

 

 

That means on the 23rd we could well find ourselves in the EU but severely marginalised, unless we accept full Schengen and the adopt the Euro.

 

Do we want to adopt the euro? It would seem to be an eventual inevitability of being part of an ever-closer EU. And what of trade deals? The argument is that EU has made the City of London less competitive through overregulation, and negotiates more protectionist and less effective trade deals on behalf of the UK. The WTO has basic rules for international trade by which both the EU and UK are obliged to abide; this would seem to limit the supposed likelihood of 1 in 10 British jobs being threatened by leaving..?

 

 

... despite 40 years of successive UK government promising to 'influence' Brussels, we have lost 78 out of 78 votes on things that we disagreed with. Even with the threat of leaving Cameron could change nothing significantly and managed to give away the Veto which might have a leat slowed things down.

 

Despite what I said before, isn't it true that the UK is a major power and economy, and that the EU does little to enhance this?

 

We have membership of the G20 and G8 Nations, a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, and seats on the International Monetary Fund Board of Governors and World Trade Organisation..

 

 

Good point by Mr. Dawkins there.  We shouldn't be having this referendum - it is only because Cameron promised it to try to offset the growing pressure from UKIP and his own right wing.  Instead of standing up for what he thinks is right he  blinked under pressure and so we have this referendum.

 

I don't agree about Schengen and the Euro.  Things have moved on.  The refugee crisis - a huge clusterfuck - has shown that you can't realistically have no internal borders if you have no outer borders.  If the EU had collectively preserved the outer border (in this case mostly Greece) then it would have been ok.  While I argue that free movement of labour within the EU is beneficial, and that we have to honour our commitments under international law to genuine asylum seekers correctly - this does not mean open the gates to all and everyone.  That's just madness.  The Eurozone is a similar cock up.  But Britain has prospered by being in the EU but outside the Eurozone.  My understanding is that Cameron has negotiated on the basis that we do not have to enter it.  So the idea that we will be marginalised because of these policies I find no longer convincing.  I think actually we will be well placed to lead a group to counter German/French dominance.

 

I'm not sure that 78/78 votes is actually factually correct.  But even supposing it is - the power and influence of the UK in the world is based mostly on our history and the special relationship with the US.  The USA has said it wants us in the EU.  Our historical ties and influence do not change.  Part of the reason for the strength of our economy is membership of the EU - in fact we have played quite a good game of taking advantage of the plusses and avoiding the negatives - the idea that it is just a weight around our neck is ridiculous.  Again - ask the Leave people what the plan is to maintain the UK as a successful country outside the EU and you just get vague aspirations.

[Chang]

We can't control EU migration because there is free movement of labour.  Which is a good thing - without it London and our major cities would have collapsed by now.  Even if we Brexit we still won't 'control' immigration because business needs it.  So that whole issue is a lie.

 

I am at a complete loss as to your argument here Apech.

 

That the E.U. allows free movement of labour is correct as is the fact that we have no control over it. Unfortunately it allows free movement of "people" rathert than labour and therein lies the problem. Why should we not have control over our own borders and allow in whomsoever we please? Only a Socialist would see such a suggestion as anything other than sound common sense.

You won't find any argument from the Leave side which shows exactly how the UK would function outside the EU.  I've asked and all you get is emotional arguments which make no sense.  Brexit is a romantic illusion based on the UK's historical political distancing from mainland Europe.  It's out of date and makes no real sense.  But it does appeal to many people's instincts - when they feel threatened by a changing world they want to retreat into their island shell.  That's all it is really.

 

Again I can throw your argument back in your face. The Brexit camp are in fact realists who see the world as it is. It is the Pro E.U. Superstate supporter who looks at Europe through rose tinted spectacles. The E.U. is fast coming apart at the seams and that is plain to see. Unfortunatley there are none so blind as those who will not see and they are doomed to mimic the Emperor in his new clothes.

 

In fact that tale sums up the whole "remain" argument and if we wish not to end up naked and shivering in the cold and rain then there is only way to vote on June 23rd.

[Apech]

I am at a complete loss as to your argument here Apech.

 

That the E.U. allows free movement of labour is correct as is the fact that we have no control over it. Unfortunately it allows free movement of "people" rathert than labour and therein lies the problem. Why should we not have control over our own borders and allow in whomsoever we please? Only a Socialist would see such a suggestion as anything other than sound common sense.

How many times have this and previous UK administration promised to reduce immigration - and how many times have they succeeded.  Zero.  Why? Because their partners in business want and need the immigrant workers.  In or out of the EU this will remain the same.  As far as the EU is concerned the current crisis was precipitated by failing to control the external borders of Europe.   

 

 

Again I can throw your argument back in your face. The Brexit camp are in fact realists who see the world as it is. It is the Pro E.U. Superstate supporter who looks at Europe through rose tinted spectacles. The E.U. is fast coming apart at the seams and that is plain to see. Unfortunatley there are none so blind as those who will not see and they are doomed to mimic the Emperor in his new clothes.

 

In fact that tale sums up the whole "remain" argument and if we wish not to end up naked and shivering in the cold and rain then there is only way to vote on June 23rd.

 

Give me a convincing plan for the development of the UK outside the EU and I will vote for it.  I've asked a fair number of times now and all I get is rhetoric.

[Karl]

Yes, the U.K. Government has been useless in controlling immigration, but, we can vote them out of office, we can't vote the EU out of office. We can't control our borders even if we had a Government tasked with doing so.

 

Life doesn't work like 'show me a perfectly planned future'. If you are waiting for someone to plan a perfect life for you, then try an astrologer. You have to make your own way. When a young adult leaves home they do not know what they will face, but they leave with the attitude that things will improve by the effort they apply. I'm sure you have learned that by now, or are you really living in cloud cuckoo land because you don't strike me as the type that believes in fairy tales.

 

Our future inside the EU is as Unknown as it is outside the EU, except, outside the EU we control our own economy, borders and laws. Inside the EU we have to abide by an anti-democratic group of failed bureaucrats that have been rejected by their own electorate and are turning Europe into 1970s Britain.

Edited May 30, 2016 by Karl

[dust]

Karl, you repeatedly bring up these failed bureaucrats, the EU being a "club for big crony corporates", etc...

 

What makes you think it would be any different on exit? Greed, corruption, and shitty politicians are a worldwide problem, not limited to Europe...

[Chang]

Karl, you repeatedly bring up these failed bureaucrats, the EU being a "club for big crony corporates", etc...

 

What makes you think it would be any different on exit? Greed, corruption, and shitty politicians are a worldwide problem, not limited to Europe...

 

What you say is quite correct. However, by distancing ourselves from the E.U. we would be relieving ourselves of one layer of greed, corruption and shitty politicians.

 

That at the very least would be a start.

[Karl]

Karl, you repeatedly bring up these failed bureaucrats, the EU being a "club for big crony corporates", etc...

 

What makes you think it would be any different on exit? Greed, corruption, and shitty politicians are a worldwide problem, not limited to Europe...

 

Because the EU was specifically designed that way. It wasn't ever supposed to be a democracy. If you want to create a rats nest, then you need plenty of food, bedding and a total lack of any rat catchers, or rat competition. That's what the EU is. That is why the US is desperate to get TTIP through the gates-one more big fat rat to join all the other slimey fuckers.

 

Of course shitty politicians are worldwide, and our country has its fair share. Despite all the hurrahs for uncontrolled immigration our debt burden is increasing. The only reason we aren't going down the plug hole like Europe is that we still had a democracy able to vote out the Euro and Schengen. Once we vote to stay, you can wave good buy to any semblance of democracy. At present we can reject such things as the Euro and Schengen. Come the 23rd of May, make no mistake, if we vote to remain then we vote away the last barriers we have to throwing out crap politicians and we welcome in the whole EU project.

 

Anyone who isn't in the EU club house should be voting to leave. Even those in receipt of the EU funding bribes should realise that those bribes can be switched off just as easily at any time. If you aren't in the DAVOS club and its world elite, then to vote to remain is effectively voting for serfdom.

[C T]

Speaking from across the water from Britain (meaning Ireland) all i can see is a country, from the perspective of the economy, despite being in the EU, going from terrible to horrible. Not that Ireland has much to contribute to Europe anyway except as a haven for unwanted refugees who are either shooed from other entry points or invited here by their buddies who are already here and living the good life due to shoddy human rights regulations (lack of it actually). I can see scroungers everywhere rubbing their hands in anticipation for the UK to pick 'remain' so when Ireland is sucked dry they wont have far to travel to continue their atrocious lifestyle. 

[Karl]

Speaking from across the water from Britain (meaning Ireland) all i can see is a country, from the perspective of the economy, despite being in the EU, going from terrible to horrible. Not that Ireland has much to contribute to Europe anyway except as a haven for unwanted refugees who are either shooed from other entry points or invited here by their buddies who are already here and living the good life due to shoddy human rights regulations (lack of it actually). I can see scroungers everywhere rubbing their hands in anticipation for the UK to pick 'remain' so when Ireland is sucked dry they wont have far to travel to continue their atrocious lifestyle. 

 

That's always the danger when you plant a big poster in your window advertising 'free stuff' to anyone who wants it, for as long as they want it. There are those who wish to reduce their countries to the kind of drudgery experienced under soviet Russia, particularly Britain. I think they harbour a kind of inverted snobbery grudge with a tendency towards Nihlism. They like to mention that Britain doesn't have an empire, isn't a world power, has been a bunch of white invaders who deserve the fate of being over run by those it supposedly invaded.

 

What's worse is that I used to be one of those people. I despised the whole notion of sovereignty and patriotism. I couldn't wait for the white middle classes and the wealthy to be brought down several rungs and end their isolated, priviliged little lives. Hands up, that was me ten years ago. It's a terrible, irrationally selfish attitude which values nothing, cares for nothing and has no ambition beyond jealousy.

[dust]

That's always the danger when you plant a big poster in your window advertising 'free stuff' to anyone who wants it, for as long as they want it. There are those who wish to reduce their countries to the kind of drudgery experienced under soviet Russia, particularly Britain. I think they harbour a kind of inverted snobbery grudge with a tendency towards Nihlism. They like to mention that Britain doesn't have an empire, isn't a world power, has been a bunch of white invaders who deserve the fate of being over run by those it supposedly invaded. What's worse is that I used to be one of those people. I despised the whole notion of sovereignty and patriotism. I couldn't wait for the white middle classes and the wealthy to be brought down several rungs and end their isolated, priviliged little lives. Hands up, that was me ten years ago. It's a terrible, irrationally selfish attitude which values nothing, cares for nothing and has no ambition beyond jealousy.

 

I don't know about the rest of you but I am from a wealthy, white upper-middle class family and went to two schools full of wealthy, white upper-middle- and upper class families, and I can tell you that nepotism and privilege are very much alive and well in this country, and that it would not hurt if a large portion of the upper-middle and upper classes were "brought down several rungs" -- as it would not hurt in almost every nation on Earth if the same were to happen to their upper classes.

 

But that's not where I'm coming from; the end of the upper classes is certainly not something I'm hoping or praying for. I don't give the class system much thought these days. And I don't actually think it's relevant here. You talk of "free stuff" as if the major problem in this country is scroungers and lazy immigrants, and then somehow turn the paragraph into an indictment of anti-middle class 'nihilists'...

 

To get back to the "free stuff" bit, then:

 

The majority expenditure of the DWP is state pensions, followed by housing benefits and then disability allowance, etc.

 

And some figures on benefits spending:

 

•  As of February 2015, of the 5.1 million working-age claimants of DWP benefits, 7.2% (371,220) were non-UK nationals when they first registered for a NINo (National Insurance No.)

•  Within this group, 113,960 claimants (2.2% of the total client group) were EU nationals when they first registered for a NINo, and 257,260 claimants (5% of the total) were non-EU nationals

•  6% of working age non-UK nationals at point of NINo registration were claiming a DWP working age benefit in February 2015, compared to 14% of UK nationals

 

So, more clearly:

7% of benefits claimants were non-UK nationals

6% of non-UK nationals (at point of NINo reg) were claiming a benefit of some description

 

6% is probably too much by anyone's standard, but it's not exactly strong evidence that all the immigrants are coming for "free stuff".

Edited May 30, 2016 by dustybeijing

[Karl]

I don't know about the rest of you but I am from a wealthy, white upper-middle class family and went to two schools full of wealthy, white upper-middle- and upper class families, and I can tell you that nepotism and privilege are very much alive and well in this country, and that it would not hurt if a large portion of the upper-middle and upper classes were "brought down several rungs" -- as it would not hurt in almost every nation on Earth if the same were to happen to their upper classes.

 

But that's not where I'm coming from; the end of the upper classes is certainly not something I'm hoping or praying for. I don't give the class system much thought these days. And I don't actually think it's relevant here. You talk of "free stuff" as if the major problem in this country is scroungers and lazy immigrants, and then somehow turn the paragraph into an indictment of anti-middle class 'nihilists'...

 

To get back to the "free stuff" bit, then:

 

The majority expenditure of the DWP is state pensions, followed by housing benefits and then disability allowance, etc.

 

And some figures on benefits spending:

 

•  As of February 2015, of the 5.1 million working-age claimants of DWP benefits, 7.2% (371,220) were non-UK nationals when they first registered for a NINo (National Insurance No.)

•  Within this group, 113,960 claimants (2.2% of the total client group) were EU nationals when they first registered for a NINo, and 257,260 claimants (5% of the total) were non-EU nationals

•  6% of working age non-UK nationals at point of NINo registration were claiming a DWP working age benefit in February 2015, compared to 14% of UK nationals

 

So, more clearly:

7% of benefits claimants were non-UK nationals

6% of non-UK nationals (at point of NINo reg) were claiming a benefit of some description

 

6% is probably too much by anyone's standard, but it's not exactly strong evidence that all the immigrants are coming for "free stuff".

 

It isn't the main thrust of the 'leave' argument anyway, I was replying to CT. Where it is a problem is public services such as housing, hospitals and schools.

 

I'm not anti-immigration. I believe it's a very good thing and we need it, however not uncontrolled immigration and not immigration in such great chunks that it is causing problems in areas with high influxes of migrant workers. I can't help thinking it feels exactly like it used to be in British companies in which the managers got the white table cloths and oak panelled toilets and the rest were expected to live in crap. If you can afford private health, to live in an upmarket area and send the kids to private schools, then I don't imagine immigration is an issue. However, when you are condemned to live with the NHS, Comprehnsive schools and renting, then things are a lot bleaker. Its OK for the multiculturalist liberal living in a nice, expensive area of Islington, but they need to consider the family struggling to get by on a housing estate in Bradford.

 

Controlled immigration is fine. It's means that public services/housing can expand as the wealth increases, but dropping huge immigrant numbers on struggling areas is a recipe for nationalism, racism and violence. The other problem is that despite Osbornes assertion that immigration is not affecting public services and housing, the fact is we are short of homes and the defecit and debt ARE increasing. If it was true that immigrants are a massive boom for the economy then why isn't the defecit falling ?

[Chang]

Give me a convincing plan for the development of the UK outside the EU and I will vote for it.  I've asked a fair number of times now and all I get is rhetoric.

 

This is a good point that you raise here well worthy of note.

 

Leaving the E.U. will result in considerable readjustment but there is no single answer to the form that readjustment will take. It will very much depend on the institution concerned. It will however make planning and action a necessity.

 

Remaining in the E.U. on the other hand will require far less in the way of both planning and action.

 

Should we remain within the so called "Union" then alll that will be required of us will be to bow our heads meekly and do as we are told.

[C T]

Should we remain within the so called "Union" then alll that will be required of us will be to bow our heads meekly and do as we are told.

Exemplified neatly by Ireland's current wobbly situation. 

 

Considering the punitive position Ireland occupies within the EU, it is shocking to see how mismanaged and mangled the whole mechanism of government has become. There are reasons for this, one of which i suspect is that the country has been zoned as a sort of dumping ground for benefit seekers. The situation is dire in this particular issue, and also in many other internal issues for eg, healthcare, education, transport, housing, crime... its a long list of broken. 

[Apech]

This is a good point that you raise here well worthy of note.

 

Leaving the E.U. will result in considerable readjustment but there is no single answer to the form that readjustment will take. It will very much depend on the institution concerned. It will however make planning and action a necessity.

 

Remaining in the E.U. on the other hand will require far less in the way of both planning and action.

 

Should we remain within the so called "Union" then alll that will be required of us will be to bow our heads meekly and do as we are told.

 

 

Well I was with you up to a point.  Don't you think that IDS, Gove and Boris should present some kind of prospectus for a way forward... ????

 

Why do we have to bow our heads meekly?  the Germans don't, the French don't so why should we?

[Apech]

Exemplified neatly by Ireland's current wobbly situation. 

 

Considering the punitive position Ireland occupies within the EU, it is shocking to see how mismanaged and mangled the whole mechanism of government has become. There are reasons for this, one of which i suspect is that the country has been zoned as a sort of dumping ground for benefit seekers. The situation is dire in this particular issue, and also in many other internal issues for eg, healthcare, education, transport, housing, crime... its a long list of broken. 

 

 

What happened to the Green Tiger?  Ireland was doing very well before the 2008/9 bump.  And seemed to revive quickly afterwards also.