Brexit Penny Dropping?

[Zarley]

18 minutes ago, manxman1980 said:

Just for fun...

 

Love it! 🤣😂🤣

[P.K.]

On 5/21/2023 at 9:39 AM, The Voice of Reason said:

I know you can I’m just not practiced in how. 
I’ll try it next time. Thanks

I don't believe it.

You obviously know that if you post up a link with "telegraph" in it folks will see it and think "A load of brexit wank not worth reading" and move on...

[The Voice of Reason]

2 hours ago, P.K. said:

I don't believe it.

You obviously know that if you post up a link with "telegraph" in it folks will see it and think "A load of brexit wank not worth reading" and move on...

Well no

Thats like saying if you post up a link with “ Guardian “ in it folks will see it and think “ A load of anti Brexit wank not worth reading” and move on….

I however, am willing to consider all sides of any argument and judge it on its own merit regardless of whatever paper or journal it appears in.

Its called being open to reasoned argument, not dismissing it purely because of its source.

[woolley]

3 hours ago, The Voice of Reason said:

Well no

Thats like saying if you post up a link with “ Guardian “ in it folks will see it and think “ A load of anti Brexit wank not worth reading” and move on….

I however, am willing to consider all sides of any argument and judge it on its own merit regardless of whatever paper or journal it appears in.

Its called being open to reasoned argument, not dismissing it purely because of its source.

Yep, but if it's in the Guardian the chances are it will indeed be as you said in the first place.

[P.K.]

Comparing the absolutely awful very right wing Telegraph which is completely in thrall to the agenda of the owner to the Guardian which happens to be the UK's most trusted newspaper - now that's funny!

@woolley

It seems that every day or so we get yet another report on the damaging fallout of the totally stupid and completely unnecessary brexit. Like this one:

Brexit food trade barriers have cost UK households £7bn, report finds

LSE researchers estimate that extra barriers on EU food imports have pushed up bills by £250 on average

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/24/brexit-food-trade-barriers-have-cost-uk-households-7bn-report-finds

I get it that some folks think that the EU is run by evil goblins intent on world domination. Even though there is zero evidence for it and it could never actually come about. A simple example. Say the EU voted through a regulation that was extremely damaging to the UK like booting us out of the Customs Union and Single Market (it occurs to me here that I would bet the farm on at least 95% of those who voted to leave don't know the difference between an EU Directive and an EU Regulation).

As only our Sovereign Parliament can make UK law it would eventually find it's way to the House of Commons. Despite the tory party ethos of self first, party second and country third as long as it suits my best interests they would vote it down. Now that would give the EU a big problem. It the problem can't be solved then THAT would be the time to trigger Article 50.

Instead as a country we stupidly committed an act of self harm.

Edited May 26, 2023 by P.K.
typo

[Non-Believer]

UK net inward migration reached almost 600,000 last year, almost double what it was in 2016. More EU citizens left than arrived so those migrants arrived from elsewhere.

Farage now claiming that he didn't mislead the public during his Brexit campaign and blaming Johnson. 

Edited May 26, 2023 by Non-Believer
Typo

[The Voice of Reason]

32 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

UK net inward migration reached almost 600,000 last year, almost double what it was in 2016. More EU citizens left than arrived so those migrants arrived from elsewhere.

And what, pray tell, is wrong with that?

[Non-Believer]

49 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

And what, pray tell, is wrong with that?

I believe that "we were taking back control of our borders?"

If there's nothing wrong with it, why are Sunak and Braverman stating that they are so keen to address "national" concerns over it?

[manxman1980]

1 hour ago, Non-Believer said:

Farage now claiming that he didn't mislead the public during his Brexit campaign and blaming Johnson. 

Is he after a career in stand-up comedy now?  After his admission that Brexit has failed he knows he has to shift the blame somewhere.  Farage was quick to claim that his years of campaigning had led to Brexit but now seems in a hurry to disown any form of responsibility.

1 hour ago, The Voice of Reason said:

And what, pray tell, is wrong with that?

There is nothing wrong with migration, however, the Tory party (particularly the right of that party) scream and shout about "taking back control of our borders".  Sections of the Brexit supporters were also motivated to vote leave in order to reduce migration because they kept being told about all these foreigners coming to the UK to steal there jobs (whilst simultaneously living entirely off the UK benefit system).

Whilst you may see nothing wrong with migration there is absolutely a large group of people who are going to be far from happy about that increase and will feel that they have been betrayed/misled.  I am sure that they will find a way to blame the "liberal elite" though whilst ignoring the fact that they now have an Australian style points based immigration system that they desperately wanted...

Meanwhile Braverman suggests that we should be training British workers to pick fruit.  I am sure that parents really want to know that is something that the UK Government has in mind for their children. 

[Non-Believer]

The hilarious bit is that having failed to halt this influx of Johnny Foreigners to the point that it's doubled in seven years, they've now proposed to put restrictions on legal immigration paths for study, work and family reasons.

Not populist at all of course...

[The Voice of Reason]

2 hours ago, Non-Believer said:

I believe that "we were taking back control of our borders?"

If there's nothing wrong with it, why are Sunak and Braverman stating that they are so keen to address "national" concerns over it?

We need inward migration from those with the skills to fill, say the vacancies in the NHS.

But you seem to have missed my main point which is what is wrong with allowing migrants from non EU countries with these skills. Whereas before Brexit we  ( the UK I mean) were obliged to give preference to those from EU countries, purely because they were from those countries. ( by way of them not needing a visa) It’s now a lot fairer now these artificial restrictions have been removed.

We now have a greater pool of available talent from which to choose. Another Brexit bonus!🤗

Edited May 26, 2023 by The Voice of Reason
Adding the visa thing in second para for explanation. “ obliged” is probably the wrong word too but I can’t be bothered changing it.

[Markus Boyd]

8 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

We need inward migration from those with the skills to fill, say the vacancies in the NHS.

But you seem to have missed my main point which is what is wrong with allowing migrants from non EU countries with these skills. Whereas before Brexit we  ( the UK I mean) were obliged to give preference to those from EU countries, purely because they were from those countries. It’s now a lot fairer now these artificial restrictions have been removed.

We now have a greater pool of available talent from which to choose. Another Brexit bonus!🤗

Seems reasonable

[Non-Believer]

13 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

We need inward migration from those with the skills to fill, say the vacancies in the NHS.

But you seem to have missed my main point which is what is wrong with allowing migrants from non EU countries with these skills. Whereas before Brexit we  ( the UK I mean) were obliged to give preference to those from EU countries, purely because they were from those countries. ( by way of them not needing a visa) It’s now a lot fairer now these artificial restrictions have been removed.

We now have a greater pool of available talent from which to choose. Another Brexit bonus!🤗

So why then are we now suddenly imposing new restrictions on legal immigration pathways, as announced in the last two days, to include those work and study visas?

Surely we need to be drawing from this "new pool of talent" in order to fill the vacancies left by those hideous EU immigrants that we've now sent scuttling back (a little like rodents leaving a sinking ship perhaps?), rather than making it more difficult to come to the UK?

[The Voice of Reason]

8 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

So why then are we now suddenly imposing new restrictions on legal immigration pathways, as announced in the last two days, to include those work and study visas?

Surely we need to be drawing from this "new pool of talent" in order to fill the vacancies left by those hideous EU immigrants that we've now sent scuttling back (a little like rodents leaving a sinking ship perhaps?), rather than making it more difficult to come to the UK?

Why are you referring to EU immigrants as “ hideous”?

The whole point is that EU immigrants are no more or less “hideous” than those of any other nationality.

Would I be right in thinking this is part of the Remain agenda to paint those who voted for Brexit as haters of our European brethren?

Nothing could be further from the truth. It’s the institution of the EU Brexiteers rail against, not the citizens of the constituent countries.

 

[manxman1980]

30 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

We now have a greater pool of available talent from which to choose. Another Brexit bonus!🤗

That is not entirely true though it it?

Employers can only access this "greater pool of available talent" if they pay for a Sponsorship licence.  Unless you have that Sponsorship Licence the pool of talent just became a whole lot smaller and more expensive and time consuming to access.

Pre-Brexit employers could freely recruit from EU countries without incurring additional direct or indirect costs.

Note:  Employers could recruit outside of the EU even before Brexit as long as they complied with the UK Visa schemes that were in place at the time.  I think that involved demonstrating that you had tried to find candidates eligible within the UK before going outside the UK/EU to recruit.