[Politics] Brexit

[Deleted member 22389]

So we implemented the Equal Pay Act a whole five years before the EEC created their version and we did it because we knew we might join the EEC ? I'm afraid thatbis a very weak claim. If anything we led the way yet the post I was commenting on claimed the EU have led the way on it.

As for monopolies, Microsoft and Google are not monopolies - never have been. But for the sake of this argument let's say they were - they don't appear to be broken up ?

As I said some of the things on that list can be credited to the EU but some are down right distortions of the truth which then brings the whole post into question for its validity.

It's a weak argument from the remain side. They just love to peddle this idea that everyone in the EU follows suit, it's all a load bollox and absolutely no reason for us to stay in.

 

[Lincoln Imp]

Morning HT. Now you know I work in the construction industry. Now far from wanting to get rid of foreign workers which Watford zero is trying to imply,I merely want people that are actually qualified to do the job. What it doesn't need is people that claim to be qualified tradesmen whom clearly aren't. Now don't get me wrong there are some good workers that have come here to work and I am good friends with many of them. However as I have said there are far too many that really don't know what they are doing. Now I don't blame them for doing this Afterall they're trying to improve their lot. At the same time if they are not really qualified for the job then they shouldn't be doing it. I feel the are only they are allowed to is because they are paid at a cheaper rate. This then has had a knock on affect on the wages of the real tradesmen. Not so much these days but it definitely kept our wages down. Which let's face it which is what we work for.

And now my apologies for butting in. I don't criticise what you say or doubt it in any way but surely, if the low grade jerry builders you describe are active then all the criticism rests with the penny pinchers who choose to employ them in order to get work and/or increase profits at the expense of the end customer rather than FOM? Perhaps the regulations aren't tough enough but you will know more about this than I do.

 

[Dave the OAP]

Quite an interesting thing on the way down to Somerset yesterday. I couldn't believe how many people had covered up the EU flag on their number plates.

My mum who lives down there and who is a Labour Party member and attends local meetings etc, was saying that down that way the feedback that they have received was that people were very much the little englander mentality and were fed up with Europe "dictating" to the uk...which is fair enough, but where people were concerned regarding support for corbyn was this business about nationalising utilities, especially as Hinckley point is being built by EDF with some Chinese money. If they are faced with a continued shitehouse Tory government or a party that would lead to massive job losses in that area if the French pulled out, or were kicked out, it is the devil you know..

Interestingly according to her and the LP analysis, the north is exactly the opposite, in that the vote was more an anti establishment vote.
I never had my mum as a rabid red though...but all she watches is RT.

 

[melias shoes]

So the issue is with unqualified staff, which I can totally understand and which I have expressed concerns about with other sectors. That said, and please excuse my ignorance, but what has your employer choosing to take on such staff got to do with the EU?

Not necessarily my employer. It's other trades I was commenting about.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Not necessarily my employer. It's other trades I was commenting about.

Sure. But my point is still holds.

 

[melias shoes]

And now my apologies for butting in. I don't criticise what you say or doubt it in any way but surely, if the low grade jerry builders you describe are active then all the criticism rests with the penny pinchers who choose to employ them in order to get work and/or increase profits at the expense of the end customer rather than FOM? Perhaps the regulations aren't tough enough but you will know more about this than I do.

Exactly that. However it's these penny pitchers that fanfare the workers from the EU. Telling everyone that will listen that we can't do without them. When all the while the main reason they use them is because they can pay them lower wages.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Exactly that. However it's these penny pitchers that fanfare the workers from the EU. Telling everyone that will listen that we can't do without them. When all the while the main reason they use them is because they can pay them lower wages.

But you have said the issue is with their lack of qualifications. I do not see what the willingness of employers to employ people who are not up to the requirements for the job has to do with the EU.

 

[brighton bluenose]

But you have said the issue is with their lack of qualifications. I do not see what the willingness of employers to employ people who are not up to the requirements for the job has to do with the EU.

Perhaps his comment about qualifications was a little misplaced but the fact, as confirmed by the recent Migration Advisory Committe, is that in lower skilled jobs such as many of those in the construction industry EU migration has undercut wages and helped to drive them down.
In a wider context that report also states that in the economy generally EU migration, and inter alia, immigration generally hasn't led to reduced wage levels - what it doesn't say though, and as I suspect, is that UK wage levels have been HELD BACK due to both EU and non-EU immigration over the last decade.
After all it is not unreasonable to question whether just maybe 2.5million or more (nett) new arrivals have helped to keep wages at 2008 levels.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Perhaps his comment about qualifications was a little misplaced but the fact, as confirmed by the recent Migration Advisory Committe, is that in lower skilled jobs such as many of those in the construction industry EU migration has undercut wages and helped to drive them down.
In a wider context that report also states that in the economy generally EU migration, and inter alia, immigration generally hasn't led to reduced wage levels - what it doesn't say though, and as I suspect, is that UK wage levels have been HELD BACK due to both EU and non-EU immigration over the last decade.
After all it is not unreasonable to question whether just maybe 2.5million or more (nett) new arrivals have helped to keep wages at 2008 levels.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[MENTION=17469]melias shoes[/MENTION] very clearly stated his issue was not with foreigners but with unqualified employees. So I disagree his comments were misplaced.

I have always supported, respected and often admired (most) trades and professions and I am no supporter of wage races-to-the-bottom. And if wages are an issue there are other ways of controlling them without resorting to kicking out foreigners e.g. enforce a standard set of qualifications, enforce a minimum living and respectful wage, have a union etc. If there’s a minimum and respectful wage and a set of qualifications then undercutting salary and unqualified people are removed from job competition; good native Brits will surely then be favoured over others but it still leaves the door open for the very best of the EU.

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

Have you read the report critically and understood all it says - or have you merely cut and pasted the CER blurb?!
Be honest!

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

That's a fair question so Ill give you an honest answer: 'no'. I'm not sure this invalidates its findings though. My track record on such matters isn't the worst: I've actually read the ERG stuff and that of Patrick Minford (who I'm sure you know is the main thinker behind the ERG's stance). I've also posted stuff from the University of Sussex's Trade Observatory and quite a bit of other empirically based material. One question I keep coming back to is to ask Brexiteers to give any sort of rationale/defence of the whole project in terms of its economic impact and while I've hit this ball over the other side of the net it's never yet been returned with any backing grounded in any credible economic analysis. Not once.

And if you read my posting properly I was only saying that the findings of this report were more convincing than Boris's demented meanderings, so I set the bar very low indeed.

There's hardly a day that goes by when we don't get another addition to the mountain of data, forecasts, warnings that Brexit (particularly a no-deal one) will make us 'all' poorer^. The report that I cited actually argues that it's already done so. I think the burden is on our Brexiteer friends to pick apart the assumptions on which the model is based. Or simply find one shred of credible evidence that Brexit will work. Happy hunting chaps!


So I'm more than happy to enter into this side of the debate and would welcome it. I'd even welcome being proved wrong if it mean good news for the UK. Just give us some!

*to take just one recent example: last week the Institute of Purchasing and Supply's analysis from a member survey on the implication for a no-deal Brexit projected total chaos

 

[WATFORD zero]

Perhaps his comment about qualifications was a little misplaced but the fact, as confirmed by the recent Migration Advisory Committe, is that in lower skilled jobs such as many of those in the construction industry EU migration has undercut wages and helped to drive them down.
In a wider context that report also states that in the economy generally EU migration, and inter alia, immigration generally hasn't led to reduced wage levels - what it doesn't say though, and as I suspect, is that UK wage levels have been HELD BACK due to both EU and non-EU immigration over the last decade.
After all it is not unreasonable to question whether just maybe 2.5million or more (nett) new arrivals have helped to keep wages at 2008 levels.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Oh, you're back again.

It's just that when you were telling everyone about your preference for 'no deal' . you seem to have missed my question

As you obviously no(sic) the implications of 'no deal' what do you think we should do about the countries who have already raised issues with the WTO schedules we submitted a month ago ?

And where, how and who will collect and implement these tariffs and rules that we immediately revert to ?

Maybe now I've highlighted it, you could answer

A clue - (It's USA, Brazil and New Zealand who were the first to raise issues within the first week of submitting our schedules and quotas)

 

[WATFORD zero]

Exactly that. However it's these penny pitchers that fanfare the workers from the EU. Telling everyone that will listen that we can't do without them. When all the while the main reason they use them is because they can pay them lower wages.

Maybe you should have said that you have an issue with the quality of the people your employers employ rather than

I could tell you a few things about those foreign workers.
You see I'm what you call in the front line. I'm in construction and these SO CALLED skilled workers are far from that. As for hard working don't make me laugh. On a site where I am they start after us,are forever having fag breaks and rarely still at work after3pm. A whole hour and half before we leave. Baring in mind we start at 7.30am.
I'm sorry 52% is the will of the people. Do the maths.

It could easily be interpreted a different way to the way that you obviously meant Don't know what it's got to do with the EU though

 

[WATFORD zero]

I must admit I'm very encouraged by the noises coming from prominent members of the WTO. For ages we've been told by deluded leavers that no deal and WTO rules is the way forward. Lo and behold it appears that even that outcome is fraught with consequences. The fact that leavers on here and more unbelievably those actual idiots in power arrogantly thought that the WTO would just accept The UK instantly trading via the WTO under the same rules that were negotiated while it was an EU member defies belief. A UK that casts itself adrift from the biggest trading bloc in the world suddenly becomes a weak, desperate and vulnerable UK with it's back to the wall and other countries will seek to take advantage of that. Trump must be eyeing little Britain up with greedy dollar signs in his eyes. Planning on exactly how he's going to bend Britain over for a trade based arse reaming the likes of which it has never experienced before.

I think that this whole sorry idea will eventually get defeated by global economics. It will come to a point soon when Westminster realises that The UK has not only worked itself into a corner whereby it has no trade deal with the EU, but also will have to bow to demands from prominent WTO members seeking to "renegotiate" the arrangements that were made as EU members.

Let's see what parliament thinks about crashing out of the EU with no deal when they realise that the WTO safety net has been pulled out from under them as well.

I'm still surprised (although I really shouldn't be ) at the number of leavers who are demanding 'No deal' without the slightest idea what it means.

I can see a few tantrums when it finally dawns (if, indeed it ever does) what 'no deal' actually means. The idea that negotiating with USA, Russia, Brazil and India will be easier than that beastly EU is hilarious.

Who is going to break it to them that we also have negotiate with the EU as WTO members

 

[melias shoes]

But you have said the issue is with their lack of qualifications. I do not see what the willingness of employers to employ people who are not up to the requirements for the job has to do with the EU.

It has everything to do with the EU. With freedom of movement they're able to travel to any country within the EU. Regardless of ability.

 

[melias shoes]

Maybe you should have said that you have an issue with the quality of the people your employers employ rather than



It could easily be interpreted a different way to the way that you obviously meant Don't know what it's got to do with the EU though

Stop parroting Herr Tubthumper. It's not my employer if you read other post's you would realise this. It's other trades. No it couldn't be interpreted in a different way only if you choose too. Which you did.
It's got everything to do with the EU. Freedom of movement allows to travel within the EU.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

It has everything to do with the EU. With freedom of movement they're able to travel to any country within the EU. Regardless of ability.

I understand they can move. But your issue is with them being employed by construction companies without the necessary qualifications and/or skills. Their employment, and the choice of employing unqualified staff, lies purely and squarely with the company in question; it has nothing to do with the EU.

 

[WATFORD zero]

It has everything to do with the EU. With freedom of movement they're able to travel to any country within the EU. Regardless of ability.

I assume your employers are just sub contractors like everyone else. But then surely if we weren't in the EU your employers (and all the other sub-contractors) will just employ useless people from the UK if they are cheap enough ......

Oh...sorry



Anyway, back to getting out of the EU with the 'no deal' that you believe we should now go for.

What do you think we should do about the USA, New Zealand and Brazil turning down our WTO submission based on the EU quotas within the first week?

And where, how and who will collect and implement these tariffs and rules that we need to adopt (if we get agreement) ?

 

[Ernest]

Hunt has put his foot in it tonight with his comments about the EU being like the USSR, no better a diplomat than Johnson was

 

[melias shoes]

I assume your employers are just sub contractors like everyone else. But then surely your employers (and all the other sub-contractors) will just employ useless people from the UK if they are cheap enough ......

Oh...

Anyway, back to the 'no deal' that you think we should go for.

What do you think we should do about the USA, New Zealand and Brazil turning down our WTO submission based on the EU quotas within the first week?

Since the referendum what I can tell you there seems to be a small increase of British youngsters being given a chance. It's only what I've witnessed and isn't an official statistic. One of which is my son whom has qualified as an electrician. Hardly useless . Also a couple of young lads have been given a chance to learn bricklaying and carve out a career. So all good news .

 

[WATFORD zero]

Since the referendum what I can tell you there seems to be a small increase of British youngsters being given a chance. It's only what I've witnessed and isn't an official statistic. One of which is my son whom has qualified as an electrician. Hardly useless . Also a couple of young lads have been given a chance to learn bricklaying and carve out a career. So all good news .

I'm genuinely pleased. Always good to see youngsters given an opportunity and taking advantage of it

So, as you are advocating 'no deal' what do you think we should do about the USA, New Zealand and Brazil turning down our WTO submission based on the EU quotas within the first week?

And where, how and who will collect and implement these tariffs and rules that we need to adopt (if we get agreement) ?