[Politics] Brexit

[pastafarian]

We only have one open border and that is with Ireland. We still have the right to check every passport and refuse entry should we feel it necessary to do so.


Sent from my iPhone using blancmange

im looking forward to the introduction of the tier based immigration system that we have with non EU nationals being introduced to EU nationals next week..........cant see how anyone could object, just refuse entry to EU nationals if they dont have enough points,after all its our borders and we control them...... .......any objection to this ?

 

[Hamilton]

im looking forward to the introduction of the tier based immigration system that we have with non EU nationals being introduced to EU nationals next week..........cant see how anyone could object, just refuse entry to EU nationals if they dont have enough points,after all its our borders and we control them...... .......any objection to this ?

We already control our borders. How would you set the tiers?


Sent from my iPhone using pineapple upside-down cake

 

[pastafarian]

We already control our borders. How would you set the tiers?


Sent from my iPhone using pineapple upside-down cake

jesus christ
you dpnt even know the immigration system for the UK and yet want to offer your version

 

[Lincoln Imp]

On this occasion Boris was writing about just the EU ?....really?
The quote doesn’t negate or minimise the role of NATO?.....double really?

Well you two certainly seem sold, Boris was writing about Europe not NATO apparently.
Well yes. that’s what the poster says,that’s what it implies,that’s what it is designed to do and that’s what you have taken away from the message(along with no doubt many others), that Boris was talking about the EU and not NATO when giving out thanks for peace and prosperity. It’s a message the remain camp like to push, thank the EU no need to mention NATO.

Im sure you don’t need reminding that the quote on the poster is a line from his book.

"the European Community, now Union, has helped to deliver a period of peace and prosperity for its people as long as any since the days of the Antonine emperors."

Here is the FULL line from the book.(page 308 if you are interested)

"Together with NATO the European Community, now Union, has helped to deliver a period of peace and prosperity for its people as long as any since the days of the Antonine emperors."

Notice anything different?Now someone somewhere in the remain camp has read this line and said ok chaps lets knock up this snappy image to show Boris thanks The EU for peace and prosperity, we don’t want any reference to NATO so leave the first three words out.

Now you know what he actually wrote
Does the quote negate or minimise the role of NATO?.....obviously Yes,
Was he writing only about the EU…..obviously NO

so Ill ask the original question again
why no mention of NATO in this quote?

Your 0747 post on the Respect from the North thread suggests you had a bad night, as does the one above.

Consider this passage (which I have just made up): "The success of UK technology companies in lifting the country to the top level of digital games exporters deserves the greatest praise. Along with the US and Japan, the United Kingdom is now one of the world's leading games manufacturers."

Now I think it would be quite reasonable for the UK games industry to quote the extract "the UK is now one of the world's leading games manufacturers" in its publicity. That is not misleading. It doesn't say that the UK 'IS the world's leading manufacturer'. It says that it is one of them. In the same way that the EU peace and prosperity poster says that the 'EU helped'. Not that it preserved peace by itself, but that it helped. The two examples are the same. To accuse anyone of being intentionally misleading by not mentioning other organisations that helped is as absurd as accusing Boris of being devious by not mentioning the armed forces of the US, UK and France in his original piece.

I am sorry, but on this one I think you are being a bit obsessive.

 

[Hamilton]

jesus christ
you dpnt even know the immigration system for the UK and yet want to offer your version

No, I'm perfectly clear on the immigration system for this country.

I am asking you about your views on a tiering system for EU nationals.

 

[Lincoln Imp]

It was actually the truth bro.There's the difference.Come back and hit me with something original.

That's interesting. Goodness. You are telling me that your post - "Another **** who can't articulate a decent counter argument" - was not insulting because it was true. Just to clarify, are you saying that the poster was a ******* **** or just a ****? If the asterisks stand for what we think they stand for then your post is indeed a low-rent insult. But maybe they don't. Maybe you are calling HT a chap or a dude of something. Do tell.

 

[pastafarian]

We already control our borders. How would you set the tiers?


Sent from my iPhone using pineapple upside-down cake

lets make this very simple

a tier based points system already exists for non EU nationals,its already in place,its an actual thing and not imaginary at all.

if we really have control of our borders then we can expand and implement this system to EU nationals also tomorrow then


!/do you think there could be any objection to implementing this? we do after all control our borders dont we

 

[Hamilton]

lets make this very simple

a tier based points system already exists for non EU nationals,its already in place,its an actual thing and not imaginary at all.

if we really have control of our borders then we can expand and implement this system to EU nationals also tomorrow then


!/do you think there could be any objection to implementing this? we do after all control our borders dont we

I'm perfectly aware of the tiering system.

You original post suggested some form legislation change was imminent. And I quote, "im looking forward to the introduction of the tier based immigration system that we have with non EU nationals being introduced to EU nationals next week"

How, in your view, would this tiering system aid the UK economy if implemented with EU nationals? I am totally against the introduction of a tiering system for EU nationals unless it can be proved to be in the interests of our national economy.

 

[pastafarian]

I am sorry, but on this one I think you are being a bit obsessive.

shock hooror

you have no problem with the remain camp doctoring quotes to push an agenda

 

[pastafarian]

I'm perfectly aware of the tiering system.

You original post suggested some form legislation change was imminent. And I quote, "im looking forward to the introduction of the tier based immigration system that we have with non EU nationals being introduced to EU nationals next week"

How, in your view, would this tiering system aid the UK economy if implemented with EU nationals? I am totally against the introduction of a tiering system for EU nationals unless it can be proved to be in the interests of our national economy.

WTF
lets start again

you said we control our borders

CAN we the introduce the tier based immigration system that applies to non eu nationals to eu nationals tomorrow?
since you believe we control our borders i already presume your answer is yes we can

 

[Stoo82]

Your 0747 post on the Respect from the North thread suggests you had a bad night, as does the one above.

Consider this passage (which I have just made up): "The success of UK technology companies in lifting the country to the top level of digital games exporters deserves the greatest praise. Along with the US and Japan, the United Kingdom is now one of the world's leading games manufacturers."

Now I think it would be quite reasonable for the UK games industry to quote the extract "the UK is now one of the world's leading games manufacturers" in its publicity. That is not misleading. It doesn't say that the UK 'IS the world's leading manufacturer'. It says that it is one of them. In the same way that the EU peace and prosperity poster says that the 'EU helped'. Not that it preserved peace by itself, but that it helped. The two examples are the same. To accuse anyone of being intentionally misleading by not mentioning other organisations that helped is as absurd as accusing Boris of being devious by not mentioning the armed forces of the US, UK and France in his original piece.

I am sorry, but on this one I think you are being a bit obsessive.

You could be correct to say that the EU has helped keep peace in Europe. I would argue that the EU is a result of the peace and not a keeper of it.

The threat from the Soviet Union, American military bases, Democracy, nuclear weapons, nothing to fight for, war not being a tool of diplomacy anymore, and that it would highly unlikely that the population would be prepared to fight like that again without bringing down the governments, were reasons why Europe stopped fighting.

I'm probably going to vote out. But I like the idea of the EU. Just not as it is. In a few hundred years, yes, The United States of Europe is not a bad idea in my eyes. Sussex> England>UK>Europe>World.

Europe has no history of Democracy. And that is why the EU is governed how it is. Unaccountable. Mysterious. Aloof. Legislating on things that are not important to the people. The EU is fundamentally undemocratic. It is neither for the people or by the people.

 

[pastafarian]

Your 0747 post on the Respect from the North thread suggests you had a bad night, as does the one above.

Consider this passage (which I have just made up): "The success of UK technology companies in lifting the country to the top level of digital games exporters deserves the greatest praise. Along with the US and Japan, the United Kingdom is now one of the world's leading games manufacturers."

Now I think it would be quite reasonable for the UK games industry to quote the extract "the UK is now one of the world's leading games manufacturers" in its publicity. That is not misleading. It doesn't say that the UK 'IS the world's leading manufacturer'. It says that it is one of them. In the same way that the EU peace and prosperity poster says that the 'EU helped'. Not that it preserved peace by itself, but that it helped. The two examples are the same. To accuse anyone of being intentionally misleading by not mentioning other organisations that helped is as absurd as accusing Boris of being devious by not mentioning the armed forces of the US, UK and France in his original piece.

I am sorry, but on this one I think you are being a bit obsessive.

you forgot to answer
in this particular quote why was NATO not included.?its there in the first three words,why omit them?

 

[Hamilton]

WTF
lets start again

you said we control our borders

CAN we the introduce the tier based immigration system that applies to non eu nationals to eu nationals tomorrow?
since you believe we control our borders i already presume your answer is yes we can

Control of borders and a tiering system are two disconnected matters.

Now, I appreciate that you are getting very worked up about this, but there is no need to be rude.

So, back to my question. How, if introduced, would such a tiering system help the UK economy if implemented for EU nationals?

 

[5ways]

On this occasion Boris was writing about just the EU ?....really?
The quote doesn’t negate or minimise the role of NATO?.....double really?

Well you two certainly seem sold, Boris was writing about Europe not NATO apparently.
Well yes. that’s what the poster says,that’s what it implies,that’s what it is designed to do and that’s what you have taken away from the message(along with no doubt many others), that Boris was talking about the EU and not NATO when giving out thanks for peace and prosperity. It’s a message the remain camp like to push, thank the EU no need to mention NATO.

Im sure you don’t need reminding that the quote on the poster is a line from his book.

"the European Community, now Union, has helped to deliver a period of peace and prosperity for its people as long as any since the days of the Antonine emperors."

Here is the FULL line from the book.(page 308 if you are interested)

"Together with NATO the European Community, now Union, has helped to deliver a period of peace and prosperity for its people as long as any since the days of the Antonine emperors."

Notice anything different?Now someone somewhere in the remain camp has read this line and said ok chaps lets knock up this snappy image to show Boris thanks The EU for peace and prosperity, we don’t want any reference to NATO so leave the first three words out.

Now you know what he actually wrote
Does the quote negate or minimise the role of NATO?.....obviously Yes,
Was he writing only about the EU…..obviously NO

so Ill ask the original question again
why no mention of NATO in this quote?

Fair enough to go to the effort to look up the line. I don't disagree with any of it, nor would 99% of remainers. Boris' U-turn on Europe would make Littlefinger proud. They didn't mention NATO cos they're not talking about NATOxit, and, again, it's a quote for a poster..

 

[pastafarian]

So, back to my question. How, if introduced, would such a tiering system help the UK economy if implemented for EU nationals?

can you confirm , that along with herrT and 5ways you believe its possible to implement the tier system to eu nationals in the first place

 

[5ways]

looks like this myth has been blown out of the water
mass immigration costs millions every day

"This report shows that EU migration, taken as a whole, is not making the positive fiscal contribution that has so often been claimed. Furthermore, it is adding to the rapidly increasing pressures on housing and public services."

8. Haven't HMRC just published figures showing recent EEA nationals pay five times more than they get?
No. They only compare receipts of income tax and National Insurance with payments of child benefit and tax credits. The same comparison shows the UK general population paying six times more than they get. While on the one hand the comparison does not include taxes like VAT and excise duties, on the other hand it doesn't include housing benefit or any other DWP payments, and most importantly does not include the cost of any public services whatsoever.

9. HMRC say recent EEA migrants make a net fiscal contribution of £2.5 billion
This is nonsense. No one would describe this sum as a net fiscal contribution for the reasons given in paragraph 8. If the calculation were carried out for the UK population as a whole it would give a 'net fiscal contribution' of over £220 billion. If that were so, the UK would not be in deficit!

http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/press-release/448




http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...rope-cost-the-british-taxpayer-3m-a-day-last/

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepag...osts-Britain-3m-a-day-shock-report-warns.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3593872/17bn-true-cost-immigration-UK-year.html

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/05/17/revealed-eu-migrants-cost-uk-1-billion-year/

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/670875/migrants-cost-britain-brexit-eu-referendum-migration-report

couldn’t find any links to the report from the guardian or BBC soz….im sure they are just short of staff or something

So they twist the figures in every conceivable way to make it look negative, and find that the impact of migrants is at worse neutral

"In another important finding, the new research said immigrants who have arrived since 2001 – including hundreds of thousands of arrivals from the eastern European countries which joined the EU from 2004 – had been “cost neutral” to Britain."

Staggering.

 

[pastafarian]

Fair enough to go to the effort to look up the line. I don't disagree with any of it, nor would 99% of remainers. Boris' U-turn on Europe would make Littlefinger proud. They didn't mention NATO cos they're not talking about NATOxit, and, again, it's a quote for a poster..

It wasnt an effort
i own the book
?
are you saying its wrong the reference to NATO was omitted

 

[5ways]

It wasnt an effort
i own the book
?
are you saying its wrong the reference to NATO was omitted

OK I can see your point but I really, really, really don't think it's a big deal. No-one is denying NATO's importance, but we're talking about the EU. It did not say "The EU is the sole contributor to European security"- it said it helped. That's fine. It's a line for a poster that makes a correct point. The EU has helped to usher in a period of peace in Europe that is unprecedented in its modern history. Which has gone something like this 'war war war war war, peace, war, peace, peace peace, WW1, peace, minor war, WW2 EU NATO, minor war, peace peace peace peace.

 

[pastafarian]

So they twist the figures in every conceivable way to make it look negative, and find that the impact of migrants is at worse neutral

"In another important finding, the new research said immigrants who have arrived since 2001 – including hundreds of thousands of arrivals from the eastern European countries which joined the EU from 2004 – had been “cost neutral” to Britain."

Staggering.

That was a quick assssment .
is the Methodology wrong then on the migration watch report

which bits stuck out as bad Methodology?

 

[Hamilton]

can you confirm , that along with herrT and 5ways you believe its possible to implement the tier system to eu nationals in the first place

It's possible to introduce any tiering system you like to any nationals you want - should you wish, and should you have pockets deep enough to fund the tiering system you want.

So, how, if introduced, would such a tiering system help the UK economy if implemented for EU nationals? (and I'm assuming your proposal is to apply the same 5 point system to EU nationals with no amendments.)