Brexit Thread

[Greyblades]

That sentence was in the fourth line, I even went back and checked because I had previously not read your post at all.

The sentence he quoted is in the Second line, and only in the edited version because I moved the last line to the first because it was more rhetorically appealing.

Evidently you still havent read it, might I suggest a third attempt:

I do not want a Norway deal, because I dont want Freedom of immigration, I'd love to be in the single market but I dont think it worth that caveat.

My reason for leaving was rooted in me wanting to stop seeing homeless people sleeping on the streets, I dont see that ever happening if we keep allowing in more people than we can employ and house.

We let in so many people, half the time with the intent of putting a higher cost local out of work. I know it is our politicians fault that 200,000-300,000 are let in each year, but I cannot ignore that even if we were to vote in politicians that would lower immigration they would stopped from dropping it low enough because of the EU's freedom of movmement rule. That was a problem that led me to a bigger problem; that even if we were to get our act together our attempts to make things better could be overruled by european beauracrats who clearly do not cater to my concerns and over who I have no influence.

The referendum was a ill planned mess but that was the nature of the thing, we werent asked how we'd do it, just if we wanted to. I knew we'd likely never be asked again; the EU wasnt listening and it was clear this was an attempt to sweep the issue under the rug by a politician who wanted to get a no vote while we were uncertain and use it as an excuse to never talk about it again. We didnt have the luxury of waiting for a Churchill or a Pitt to arise who could lead us through the trouble it would cause; indeed this was our only chance to get it done that didnt require putting in a less palatable political party in charge for 5 years.

So I and 17 million other people took it, through hell and high water. I'm fine with an economic depression when the alternative is having to witness hopeless stagnation every time I leave my home, the comfort and luxury of a first world country doesnt seem worth it if so many of my fellow britons are stuck outside.

Right now we get a yearly net increase of 184,000 EU citizens and 188,000 non EU members settling into the UK, our government in the EU can only refuse the second number so even if we dropped it to zero we are stuck with 184,000 more people employ and house each year

Solving the homeless problem requires having homes and jobs to maintain them available for these homeless to take, proper jobs not 0 hour contracts and unpaid training courses that the government is using to pad out the numbers. Every one of those 184,000 people coming in is one less job for the 1,680,000 unemployed already here and one less house that could have gone to the 50,000 homeless let alone the million or so young people stuck living with their parents. I've already acknowledged that a lot of our issues with the homeless are semi-self inflicted but it doesnt change the fact that such a large rate of immigration is extremely countrproductive and will stifle any move to fix those problems.

[Husar]

The sentence he quoted is in the Second line, and only in the edited version because I moved the last line to the first because it was more rhetorically appealing.

My selected skin is obviously the only one that can ever be used as a reference.

Evidently you still havent read it, might I suggest a third attempt:

Of course I didn't, don't you read Sarmatian's posts?

Right now we get a yearly net increase of 184,000 EU citizens and 188,000 non EU members settling into the UK, our government in the EU can only refuse the second number so even if we dropped it to zero we are stuck with 184,000 more people employ and house each year

Solving the homeless problem requires having homes and jobs to maintain them available for these homeless to take, proper jobs not 0 hour contracts and unpaid training courses that the government is using to pad out the numbers. Every one of those 184,000 people coming in is one less job for the 1,680,000 unemployed already here and one less house that could have gone to the 50,000 homeless let alone the million or so young people stuck living with their parents. I've already acknowledged that a lot of our issues with the homeless are semi-self inflicted but it doesnt change the fact that such a large rate of immigration is extremely countrproductive and will stifle any move to fix those problems.

If 333,000 people come every year that you don't have houses for, why do you have only 50,000 homeless people?
Why can immigrants be given 0 hour contracts if those are part of the issue? There's zero proof in your statement for any of what you say, you merely assume that a) it would be impossible to lower intra-EU migration in any way and b) that nothing can be done about the 50k homeless because too many immigrants are coming. What I want from you is that you explain why that is. Does the UK lack construction companies or does the EU enforce a limit on the number of new houses? Can the UK not use cheap immigrant labor on 0 hour contracts to build a lot of new houses? Why do 333,000 people come to the UK every year anyway and what happens if the population growth stops? Why does the UK let so many non-EU citizens immigrate if it is already overburdeened with EU immigrants and why would cutting the number of immigrants in half not help if you do not currently get >184,000 new homeless people every year?

[Greyblades]

My selected skin is obviously the only one that can ever be used as a reference.

And your screen size, I dont count empty spaces when counting line sand teh first paragraph was short enough to only cover one line. Ach whatever.

Of course I didn't, don't you read Sarmatian's posts?

And people wonder why this forum is going down hill...

If 333,000 people come every year that you don't have houses for, why do you have only 50,000 homeless people?

I dont know, Honestly every source I find are contradictorary, guardan says 184,000 in 2013, while wikipedia says there were 54,430 homeless households in 2014, but only 498 people sleeping rough each night, while the guardian says 3,500 each night and that's not counting the increasing number of young adults working from thier parents homes instead of thier own because they cannot afford houses.

Why can immigrants be given 0 hour contracts if those are part of the issue?

...What makes you think they cant? 0 hour contracts and the like add to the problem because they do not provide a stable source of income required to maintain a household, it takes you off the unemployment list but can mean you can be only paid for anywhere as little as one hour of work each 6 months on a minimum wage. It pads the numbers of new jobs the government can tell the public it created without actually providing a proper source of income for the new "employee".

There's zero proof in your statement for any of what you say, you merely assume that a) it would be impossible to lower intra-EU migration in any way and b) that nothing can be done about the 50k homeless because too many immigrants are coming. What I want from you is that you explain why that is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedo...European_Union
When we joined the EU we agreed to the policy of freedom of movment for workers in the European Union, and that freedom means we cannot turn away EU migrants who can secure work, so no quota, no limitation, we must let them all in and mr camron could not or would not secure an exemption for the UK, the only option given to legally limit or halt immigration from the EU was to leave it.

Homelessness and unemployment cannot be solved if the need for jobs and houses out paces the supply, every new person in the country means one more person without a job, usually the local he is replacing because the employer is either too lazy to train or too stingy to pay. It is highly unlikely a good government could grow our economy fast enough to support the demands of such a fast growing population, let alone the lack-wit governments we were stuck choosing between a year ago.

Does the UK lack construction companies or does the EU enforce a limit on the number of new houses? Can the UK not use cheap immigrant labor on 0 hour contracts to build a lot of new houses? Why do 333,000 people come to the UK every year anyway and what happens if the population growth stops? Why does the UK let so many non-EU citizens immigrate if it is already overburdeened with EU immigrants and why would cutting the number of immigrants in half not help if you do not currently get >184,000 new homeless people every year?

The simple answer is our government is dominated by uncaring assholes who dont care about the issues of people poorer than themselves, be they champagne socialists or ivory tower conservatives.

[Pannonian]

And your screen size, I dont count empty spaces when counting line sand teh first paragraph was short enough to only cover one line. Ach whatever.

And people wonder why this forum is going down hill...

I dont know, Honestly every source I find are contradictorary, guardan says 184,000 in 2013, while wikipedia says there were 54,430 homeless households in 2014, but only 498 people sleeping rough each night, while the guardian says 3,500 each night and that's not counting the increasing number of young adults working from thier parents homes instead of thier own because they cannot afford houses.

...What makes you think they cant? 0 hour contracts and the like add to the problem because they do not provide a stable source of income required to maintain a household, it takes you off the unemployment list but can mean you can be only paid for anywhere as little as one hour of work each 6 months on a minimum wage. It pads the numbers of new jobs the government can tell the public it created without actually providing a proper source of income for the new "employee".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedo...European_Union
When we joined the EU we agreed to the policy of freedom of movment for workers in the European Union, and that freedom means we cannot turn away EU migrants who can secure work, so no quota, no limitation, we must let them all in and mr camron could not or would not secure an exemption for the UK, the only option given to legally limit or halt immigration from the EU was to leave it.

Homelessness and unemployment cannot be solved if the need for jobs and houses out paces the supply, every new person in the country means one more person without a job, usually the local he is replacing because the employer is either too lazy to train or too stingy to pay. It is highly unlikely a good government could grow our economy fast enough to support the demands of such a fast growing population, let alone the lack-wit governments we were stuck choosing between a year ago.

The simple answer is our government is dominated by uncaring assholes who dont care about the issues of people poorer than themselves, be they champagne socialists or ivory tower conservatives.

Are you aware that one of the gripes the right has with the EU is that it imposes regulations on employers? The EU, in common with most of the constituent countries, is socialist in nature (at least in comparison with the UK), working towards a tendency to regulate and enforce rights of the individual. The right wants rid of the EU to remove all these regulations and rights. Andrea Leadsom, one of the leading Brexiters, suggested removing all regulations for employers of small businesses, leaving their employees with no rights whatsoever. No minimum wage, unlimited hours, no environmental or H&S regulations, no nothing. That's the Brexit dream.

If your gripe is that the government doesn't care about people poorer than themselves, it's a bit ironic that you live in the UK and voted for Brexit.

[Greyblades]

What makes you think the EU care about people poorer than themselves? When they aid and abett a mass migration of foriegn young men with lower wage expectations and a tendency to molest rape and murder those who do not share thier belief system, without consulting the people they pretend to serve, they seem less caring as the worst of the Tories

One flavour of bastard over another, but the one I chose at least has a potential of change and a degree of control.

[Pannonian]

What makes you think the EU care about people poorer than themselves? When they aid and abett a mass migration of foriegn young men with lower wage expectations and a tendency to molest rape and murder those who do not share thier belief system, without consulting the people they pretend to serve, they seem less caring as the worst of the Tories

One flavour of bastard over another, but the one I chose at least has a potential of change and a degree of control.

When Andrea Leadsom says one way for small companies to cope with Brexit is to remove all regulations and employees' rights, it would suggest that the EU has a part in making sure these regulations and rights are there.

[Gilrandir]

Be honest, you and husar didn't read further than the first line, did you?

My selected skin is obviously the only one that can ever be used as a reference.

Yo, line-counters, would you like to hear me out?

Greyblades brought up the homeless problem as one of the reasons the UK should get out of the EU.
BUT: homeless were there before the UK joined the EU and even before there was any UK (I don't mean those were the same people, though) and will be there anyway. Blaming societal ulcers onto someONE is ridiculous. They were always there rising and ebbing depending on many factors. Even if you subtract one of those it doesn't mean the situation will improve. What if by exiting the EU Great Britain (or Lesser Britain) will provoke a downhill tendency in economy thus increasing the number of local (not imported) hobos?

Conclusion: don't expect that Brexit will heal all sores of your country since they were not begotten by EU membership.

[Husar]

And people wonder why this forum is going down hill...

When they aid and abett a mass migration of foriegn young men with lower wage expectations and a tendency to molest rape and murder those who do not share thier belief system[...]

Hmm, yes...

I dont know, Honestly every source I find are contradictorary, guardan says 184,000 in 2013, while wikipedia says there were 54,430 homeless households in 2014, but only 498 people sleeping rough each night, while the guardian says 3,500 each night and that's not counting the increasing number of young adults working from thier parents homes instead of thier own because they cannot afford houses.

So because you can't find data you can trust, you know it is the fault of the EU?
Even with the data we used earlier, you couldn't really explain the math that would imply it is the fault of the EU.
Yet you know it is the fault of the EU?

...What makes you think they cant? 0 hour contracts and the like add to the problem because they do not provide a stable source of income required to maintain a household, it takes you off the unemployment list but can mean you can be only paid for anywhere as little as one hour of work each 6 months on a minimum wage. It pads the numbers of new jobs the government can tell the public it created without actually providing a proper source of income for the new "employee".

Obviously the fault of the EU?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedo...European_Union
When we joined the EU we agreed to the policy of freedom of movment for workers in the European Union, and that freedom means we cannot turn away EU migrants who can secure work, so no quota, no limitation, we must let them all in and mr camron could not or would not secure an exemption for the UK, the only option given to legally limit or halt immigration from the EU was to leave it.

And why can so many of them secure work in your country?
Because of the EU? Again, does the EU enforce cheap contracts for cheap foreign workers? Why do the non-EU immigrants come? Are their cheap jobs also mandated by the EU?

Homelessness and unemployment cannot be solved if the need for jobs and houses out paces the supply, every new person in the country means one more person without a job, usually the local he is replacing because the employer is either too lazy to train or too stingy to pay. It is highly unlikely a good government could grow our economy fast enough to support the demands of such a fast growing population, let alone the lack-wit governments we were stuck choosing between a year ago.

Probably overlooked this part:

However, research by the National Institute of Economic and Social Research has shown that a cut in the number of migrants would have a negative impact on the economy.

Well, first of all, your article does not prove what you say right before it, it does not say every immigrant puts a UK citizen out of a job, it merely says a lot of the new jhobs go to immigrants, but that could just as well be due to a stagnating or slowly growing native population.
That the economic growth cannot keep pace with the population growth is something you did not show. And what about all the non-EU immigrants? Are they all allowed in and slip straight into unemployment?

The simple answer is our government is dominated by uncaring assholes who dont care about the issues of people poorer than themselves, be they champagne socialists or ivory tower conservatives.

Makes you wonder who let them rise through the party ranks and continuously elected them into higher and higher offices or how does one become a politician in the UK?

Yo, line-counters, would you like to hear me out?

Greyblades brought up the homeless problem as one of the reasons the UK should get out of the EU.
BUT: homeless were there before the UK joined the EU and even before there was any UK (I don't mean those were the same people, though) and will be there anyway. Blaming societal ulcers onto someONE is ridiculous. They were always there rising and ebbing depending on many factors. Even if you subtract one of those it doesn't mean the situation will improve. What if by exiting the EU Great Britain (or Lesser Britain) will provoke a downhill tendency in economy thus increasing the number of local (not imported) hobos?

Conclusion: don't expect that Brexit will heal all sores of your country since they were not begotten by EU membership.

There will always be those who want to live in the streets, yes. For everyone else it should be possible to provide them with a home at least.

[Greyblades]

When Andrea Leadsom says one way for small companies to cope with Brexit is to remove all regulations and employees' rights, it would suggest that the EU has a part in making sure these regulations and rights are there.

Actually it suggests that andrea leadsome is an idiot and that's why she lost to may.

Greyblades brought up the homeless problem as one of the reasons the UK should get out of the EU.
BUT: homeless were there before the UK joined the EU and even before there was any UK (I don't mean those were the same people, though) and will be there anyway. Blaming societal ulcers onto someONE is ridiculous. They were always there rising and ebbing depending on many factors. Even if you subtract one of those it doesn't mean the situation will improve. What if by exiting the EU Great Britain (or Lesser Britain) will provoke a downhill tendency in economy thus increasing the number of local (not imported) hobos?

Conclusion: don't expect that Brexit will heal all sores of your country since they were not begotten by EU membership.

Econimic downturns can reverse, EU immigration could not be stopped or controlled without leaving and meant that the economic prosperity we were capable of creating in the EU would never be enough to eliminate unemployment, AKA the leading cause of sleeping rough.

Hmm, yes...

Better a truth you dont like than no real response at all.

So because you can't find data you can trust, you know it is the fault of the EU?
Even with the data we used earlier, you couldn't really explain the math that would imply it is the fault of the EU.
Yet you know it is the fault of the EU?

I know that the 184,000 immigrants a year is uncontrollable because of EU. I know that the homeless problem is increasing because I can see it on my streets and both sides of the political spectrum confirm it. I know that rough sleeping is largely a result of unemployment from both common sense (you cant afford to rent a house if you are broke) and said political consensus. I can find data I can trust, I just cant find data that can answer your question. Where are immigrants getting houses? Who knows, I suspect a lowered definition of housing on the part of the immigrant and a reliance on voluntary application on the part of the surveys.

Obviously the fault of the EU?

You brought it up. I only exploited it to pre-empt an appeal to dropping unemployment rates.

And why can so many of them secure work in your country?
Because of the EU? Again, does the EU enforce cheap contracts for cheap foreign workers? Why do the non-EU immigrants come? Are their cheap jobs also mandated by the EU?

The government doesnt control the private sector and cant put controls on who we take in thanks to the EU, meaning that if I voted in a government that wanted to it couldnt, hence my problem with the EU.

Probably overlooked this part:

I didnt: you overlooked this part: "I'm fine with an economic depression when the alternative is having to witness hopeless stagnation every time I leave my home, the comfort and luxury of a first world country doesnt seem worth it if so many of my fellow britons are stuck outside."

Well, first of all, your article does not prove what you say right before it, it does not say every immigrant puts a UK citizen out of a job, it merely says a lot of the new jhobs go to immigrants, but that could just as well be due to a stagnating or slowly growing native population.

Nitpicking, every job going to an immigrant is one not going to a local and there is only so much that could be explained by lack of qualification on the part of the local in such an educated population. If it was down to a stagnating or slowly growing native population: unemployment would be near zero.

That the economic growth cannot keep pace with the population growth is something you did not show. And what about all the non-EU immigrants? Are they all allowed in and slip straight into unemployment?

Immigration of 330000 a year, mostly employed before arrival job creation of about 400,000 a year of which, lets be generous and say 350,000 are worth anything, gives a net growth of jobs of around 20,000 a year. Unemployment is at 1.67 million so we can say that at this rate UK in the EU would beat unemployment in 83 &1/2 years.

Assuming of course the numbers stays static and that the European economy could stay stable for 83 years, I somewhat doubt it considering Deuschbank just asked for a bailout, the mediteranian is going down the drain and Germany is putting 90 billion into a project of self harm, I give odds that it doesnt last 2 years before another crisis.

As you mentioned lowering immigration would damage the economy, diminishing returns, we need to lower it gradually but we cannot do that well if half a continent of poor people is utterly at liberty to undercut every job seeker in the country for a taste of a good life. Immigration shot up 100,000 in 2013 there's nothing stopping the EU immigrants from making up for any reduction in non EU immigration

Makes you wonder who let them rise through the party ranks and continuously elected them into higher and higher offices or how does one become a politician in the UK?

Makes you wonder if they can keep it up forever.

[Husar]

Econimic downturns can reverse, EU immigration could not be stopped or controlled without leaving and meant that the economic prosperity we were capable of creating in the EU would never be enough to eliminate unemployment, AKA the leading cause of sleeping rough.

I know that the 184,000 immigrants a year is uncontrollable because of EU. I know that the homeless problem is increasing because I can see it on my streets and both sides of the political spectrum confirm it. I know that rough sleeping is largely a result of unemployment from both common sense (you cant afford to rent a house if you are broke) and said political consensus. I can find data I can trust, I just cant find data that can answer your question. Where are immigrants getting houses? Who knows, I suspect a lowered definition of housing on the part of the immigrant and a reliance on voluntary application on the part of the surveys.

The government doesnt control the private sector and cant put controls on who we take in thanks to the EU, meaning that if I voted in a government that wanted to it couldnt, hence my problem with the EU.

I didnt: you overlooked this part: "I'm fine with an economic depression when the alternative is having to witness hopeless stagnation every time I leave my home, the comfort and luxury of a first world country doesnt seem worth it if so many of my fellow britons are stuck outside."

Nitpicking, every job going to an immigrant is one not going to a local and there is only so much that could be explained by lack of qualification on the part of the local in such an educated population. If it was down to a stagnating or slowly growing native population: unemployment would be near zero.

Immigration of 330000 a year, mostly employed before arrival job creation of about 400,000 a year of which, lets be generous and say 350,000 are worth anything, gives a net growth of jobs of around 20,000 a year. Unemployment is at 1.67 million so we can say that at this rate UK in the EU would beat unemployment in 83 &1/2 years.

Assuming of course the numbers stays static and that the European economy could stay stable for 83 years, I somewhat doubt it considering Deuschbank just asked for a bailout, the mediteranian is going down the drain and Germany is putting 90 billion into a project of self harm, I give odds that it doesnt last 2 years before another crisis.

As you mentioned lowering immigration would damage the economy, diminishing returns, we need to lower it gradually but we cannot do that well if half a continent of poor people is utterly at liberty to undercut every job seeker in the country for a taste of a good life. Immigration shot up 100,000 in 2013 there's nothing stopping the EU immigrants from making up for any reduction in non EU immigration

Makes you wonder if they can keep it up forever.

Cut out a few parts to keep only the relevant ones, but there seem to be a series of assumptions that I would heavily doubt.

1) Your calculations are way too simple, so first of all, you won't realistically reach a point of having 0 unemployed people, simply because some people always switch jobs. An unemployment rate of around 4% is usually considered full employment for that reason.

2) You seem to think population and number of jobs are completely decoupled, but the population also affects consumption and consumption influences the number of available jobs... If your population stops growing, the number of jobs may stagnate or even go down. Or growth can become very slow. A counterbalance could come through export/trade, but given that you left the EU, you also gave up the common market, making that harder to achieve.

3) You complain about the inability of your government to control immigration within the EU and say it can't control the private sector. There are two issues here:
3A) The government could control non-EU migration, if it agreed with you that migration is such a problem, why does it not lower that type of migration to at least mitigate the problem? After all you say all parties admit the problem exists and apparently want to do something about it.
3B) That the government can't control the private sector is just laughable. Even the USA have a minimum wage and here you talk about zero-hour contracts as though nothing can be done about them. The EU does not forbid minimum wages, Germany only recently introduced some.

4) "Every job going to an immigrant is not going to a local": Again, a lot of these jobs wouldn't even exist if it weren't for population growth. Can you show me where on the following graph the unemployment rate is affected by EU immigration?
https://www.google.de/publicdata/exp...de&hl=en&dl=en
Your country must have had a lot of EU immigration in the late 80s and early 90s and then threw all the immigrants out until 2008? Why is the rate dropping since July 2013? And didn't you just say homelessness has gone up between 2013 and now? Why?

5) The US had "full employment" for a while and still had homeless people. How does that fit your idea that employment and homelessness are directly linked?

6) Why is the number of houses not growing fast enough? Apparently this was never a big issue in the past, but now after the housing bubble burst it is? Couldn't have something to do with capitalism and the bubble having destroyed the confidence of investors in real estate and a shortage giving owners higher profits?

[Greyblades]

1. Of course it is simplistic, it's illustrating that job growth is being rendered largely useless for tackling unemployment by population growth. And as previously illustrated here the UK's employment figures are padded with zero hour contracts and various unpaid "training" jobs.

2. I adressed this by acknowledging diminishing returns and expressing the desire for control not complete halt. Control the EU prevents being effective.

3.
a) Because they dont give a shit about the people detrimentally affected by it.

Less flippantly because the Conservative government is trying to make the national numbers to go the way they want; unemployment, gdp, FTSE etc and they are not very interested in how it is done or how it actually affects the population because thus far the numbers are all they have needed to prove that they are better than the alternatives which they technicaly are because Labour tried to do the same thing for 15 years but even less effectively. For example in a practical terms Zero hour contracts wouldnt count as full employment and thus the number of unemployed would go up by 800,000. The job growth is at 400,000 a year, who cares if any of those jobs actually goes to anyone who didnt move in from europe.

b) As stipulated in the freedom of movment policy we agreed to who's second line clearly states "Such freedom of movement shall entail the abolition of any discrimination based on nationality between workers of the Member States as regards employment, remuneration and other conditions of work and employment" we cannot get them to stop hiring from the EU as forcing the private sector to only hire britons is in direct violation of that.

4) You're doing the same thing as Gilrandir, taking it to the most simplistic conclusion, ignoring pre established context and giving no benefit of doubt. It is strawmanning to the highest degree and is highly aggrivating, even insulting.

The majority of immigrants coming from the EU is coming to take a job that existed before the immigrant arrived and could have gone to a local but didn't, and it is extremely safe to say that a lack of skill does not account for the majority.

5) America has never had full employment.

6) Does it matter? It isnt growing fast enough, it will never grow fast enough to accomodate such a population growth, it never did even in the days of massive council housing development. The government might be willing to ignore that uncontrolled immigration is countering the benefits it brings but I am not.