[Politics] Brexit

[The Rivet]

Interesting quote, did she not form alliances with and aid both the Dutch and French in the defeat of the Spanish?

Yes because it was in OUR interest. well that's what history says anyway.
Right now the same should be applied. Our European partners use us not 'Love' us.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

My loving people, we have been persuaded by some, that are careful of our safety, to take heed how we commit ourselves to armed multitudes, for fear of treachery; but I assure you, I do not desire to live to distrust my faithful and loving people. Let tyrants fear; I have always so behaved myself that, under God, I have placed my chiefest strength and safeguard in the loyal hearts and good will of my subjects. And therefore I am come amongst you at this time, not as for my recreation or sport, but being resolved, in the midst and heat of the battle, to live or die amongst you all; to lay down, for my God, and for my kingdom, and for my people, my honor and my blood, even the dust. I know I have but the body of a weak and feeble woman; but I have the heart of a king, and of a king of England, too; and think foul scorn that Parma or Spain, or any prince of Europe, should dare to invade the borders of my realms: to which, rather than any dishonor should grow by me, I myself will take up arms; I myself will be your general, judge, and rewarder of every one of your virtues in the field. I know already, by your forwardness, that you have deserved rewards and crowns; and we do assure you, on the word of a prince, they shall be duly paid you. In the mean my lieutenant general shall be in my stead, than whom never prince commanded a more noble and worthy subject; not doubting by your obedience to my general, by your concord in the camp, and by your valor in the field, we shall shortly have a famous victory over the enemies of my God, of my kingdom, and of my people.

Queen Elizabeth I - 1588

I personally don't think that Elizabeth's situation in 1588 was particularly comparable to ours today. Try something from Churchill post-war.

Edit: and as if by magic, something appropriate appears in the next post.......

 

[jaghebby]

In August 1949, at the first meeting of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg, Churchill said:

‘We are reunited here, in this new Assembly, not as representatives of our several countries or various political parties, but as Europeans forging ahead, hand in hand, and if necessary elbow to elbow, to restore the former glories of Europe..

‘There is no reason for us not to succeed in achieving our goal and laying the foundation of a United Europe. A Europe whose moral design will win the respect and acknowledgement of all humanity, and whose physical strength will be such that no person will dare to disturb it as it marches peacefully towards the future.’

 

[The Rivet]

In August 1949, at the first meeting of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg, Churchill said:

‘We are reunited here, in this new Assembly, not as representatives of our several countries or various political parties, but as Europeans forging ahead, hand in hand, and if necessary elbow to elbow, to restore the former glories of Europe..

‘There is no reason for us not to succeed in achieving our goal and laying the foundation of a United Europe. A Europe whose moral design will win the respect and acknowledgement of all humanity, and whose physical strength will be such that no person will dare to disturb it as it marches peacefully towards the future.’

Churchill wasn't endorsing a single European state. He was encouraging cooperation and peace.

 

[The Rivet]

I personally don't think that Elizabeth's situation in 1588 was particularly comparable to ours today. Try something from Churchill post-war.

Edit: and as if by magic, something appropriate appears in the next post.......

No I wont because that is still how millions of Brits think, They shouldn't be ashamed about that. The WI was attacked recently for signing patriotic songs! What next?

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

Surely Dyson moved to Malaysia because he was sick of the restrictions of working from a country within the EU, now the shackles and rules are off. So he left Europe and hopes we leave as well.....that is why he supports Brexit...that simple.

He moved to Malaysia to make more money - greed - because it is cheaper to manufacture there, which does not really have anything to do with the EU. To manufacture so cheaply over here, he would have to use slave labour..... Literally.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

No I wont because that is still how millions of Brits think, They shouldn't be ashamed about that. The WI was attacked recently for signing patriotic songs! What next?

...... Does the WI have a deafness problem......?

 

[The Rivet]

...... Does the WI have a deafness problem......?

Oh dear. I shall say goodnight then.

 

[jaghebby]

Churchill wasn't endorsing a single European state. He was encouraging cooperation and peace.

You are wrong as he said in 1949:

‘The British Government have rightly stated that they cannot commit this country to entering any European Union without the agreement of the other members of the British Commonwealth. We all agree with that statement. But no time must be lost in discussing the question with the Dominions and seeking to convince them that their interests as well as ours lie in a United Europe.’

And in 1950 Churchill called for the creation of a European Army ’..under a unified command, and in which we should all bear a worthy and honourable part.’ (France objected to this plan).

Churchill always said ‘we’ must build a United States of Europe; not ‘they’. He said ‘we’ aim at the eventual participation of the peoples of Europe; not ‘they’. He said ‘we’ must assemble and combine countries to join the Union of Europe; not ‘they’. He said ‘we’ should create a European army; not ‘they’ It’s surely beyond doubt that Churchill wanted the UK to take part in the unification of Europe!

So Rivet you are wrong - again!!!!!

 

[The Rivet]

Churchill wasn't endorsing a single European state. He was encouraging cooperation and peace.

You are wrong as he said in 1949:

‘The British Government have rightly stated that they cannot commit this country to entering any European Union without the agreement of the other members of the British Commonwealth. We all agree with that statement. But no time must be lost in discussing the question with the Dominions and seeking to convince them that their interests as well as ours lie in a United Europe.’

And in 1950 Churchill called for the creation of a European Army ’..under a unified command, and in which we should all bear a worthy and honourable part.’ (France objected to this plan).

Churchill always said ‘we’ must build a United States of Europe; not ‘they’. He said ‘we’ aim at the eventual participation of the peoples of Europe; not ‘they’. He said ‘we’ must assemble and combine countries to join the Union of Europe; not ‘they’. He said ‘we’ should create a European army; not ‘they’ It’s surely beyond doubt that Churchill wanted the UK to take part in the unification of Europe!

So Rivet you are wrong - again!!!!!

Wont be wrong 24th June. Goodnight

 

[Maldini]

So you are saying that the standard of degrees in Germany, France, Spain, Netherlands is lower than ours? Well that seems to me a typical leavers response! However, doesn't alter the fact that job creation in this country has far out stripped the rest of the EU and that employment of UK nationals is at record levels and this is alongside the employment of migrants, rather than has been strongly suggested by Brexiteers and the guy in the video, that they put British workers out of jobs. This patently untrue and completely false.

Did I actually say the standard is lower or did I ask if it is? Yes it's great that we are creating jobs however not so much when it's migrants taking them.All we are doing is increasing our population for no good reason.

So migrants don't take jobs from UK workers?So who do they take them from? Mickey Mouse and his crew?

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

you think solving the immigration problem is about kicking people out?
Its not.its not about deporting people already here at all
Its about trying to manage the amount coming in year after year after year,something we cant fully manage if we are in the EU.people already here are not going to be sent home,managing the numbers gives us a fighting chance of bringing our infrastructure up to scratch and not forever playing catch up.

i still cant believe so many people are still uneducated about this

The immigration issue is about issues of integration, cultural dilution and pressure on public services. I get why people think that, and its a very real and pressing problem in parts. Many people want to vote Leave because of that, and you are, correctly, pointing out that there will be no reduction in the number of immigrants here. So people like [MENTION=240]larus[/MENTION], who already think there are too many, are going to be very disappointed in your answer that the numbers won't go down.

 

[pastafarian]

The immigration issue is about issues of integration, cultural dilution and pressure on public services. I get why people think that, and its a very real and pressing problem in parts. Many people want to vote Leave because of that, and you are, correctly, pointing out that there will be no reduction in the number of immigrants here. So people like [MENTION=240]larus[/MENTION], who already think there are too many, are going to be very disappointed in your answer that the numbers won't go down.

They wont go down in the short term, but even glancing at immigration figures tells you that plenty go home (for whatever reason) to be replaced by others,i doesnt work out everyone.
Stands to reason if an immigration policy is well managed and you are only letting in 10`s of thousands as promised by the tories then overall immigration numbers will decline over a longer period,
im sure @laurus wont be disappointed at all as im sure he realises the large numbers here wont be fixed overnight but will be managed better if we leave

 

[jimhigham]

Should the vote be a close victory for the "leave" campaign (say, 52%-48%) I would be very surprised if the subsequent negotiations didn't result in a revised offer to the UK and a further in/out vote a year or two down the line.

I appreciate that many politicians have stated that this is a one time vote but I simply do not believe them. The European Union can ill afford to lose one of its primary net contributors and the loss of the UK could run the risk of the entire project unravelling. I would expect a final scramble from the remaining nations to try and keep us on board.

I'll caveat this. It's pure speculation on my part and I have no inside sources to back any of this up. However, does it sound that unlikely?

 

[pastafarian]

The simple facts are that European migrants who have arrived since 2000 are, on average, better educated than the UK-born labour force. In 2011, 25% of migrants from the A8 eastern European countries had a university degree compared with 62% for those from the A15 countries in western and southern Europe and 42% for migrants from outside Europe. The detailed figures show that even in the case of Poland and other east European countries, the educational qualifications of those coming to the UK have increased in the past decade from 6% university graduates in 2004 to 25% in 2011.

You might also note that the education gap between migrants and the British labour force is growing: the proportion defined as with “low education” is 53% of the British workforce, 8-13% of recent EU migrants and 15% of those from outside Europe. perhaps this says more about our education system than the EU. Guy in the video says that migrants are taking jobs to the detrement of UK workers but the facts don't bear this out!

Since January-March 2010, the post-recession low-point for employment, the number of UK-born workers in employment has risen by 1.1m to a new record level of 26.25m. Not only was the number a record, but so, in 2015, was the proportion of UK-born people aged 16-64 in employment, 74.3%. In the six years to the first quarter of this year. there was a rise from 70.7% to 74.6% in the UK-born employment rate.

There was, it should be said, also a net rise of 633,000 in the number of EU migrants from the new eastern European member countries in work - more than 80% of those of working age do so - and one of 309,000 in those from long-standing EU counries in western Europe. But this rise occurred alongside, not instead of, a sustained increase in UK-born employment.

Employment among UK nationals rose even more, by over 1.5m, in the six years to the first quarter accounting for two-thirds of the overall rise in employment It has also never been higher as a percentage of the 16-64 workforce. Could there have been a bigger increase in UK-born or UK nationals' employment? Maybe a little, but probably not by much. Given that a significant proportion of the 16-64 workforce is in full-time education and not working, or looking after children and other family members, or unable to work for other reasons, the current UK-born employment rate is probably quite close to the maximum.

The majority of EU migrants to Britain would still qualify under skilled-labour criteria under a points-based system. But this additional layer of bureaucracy, whether the onus would be on workers or those seeking to recruit them, would make it harder for firms to fill gaps in their workforces. Those who say they would reduce red tape would merely tangle business up in more of it. And Britain’s labour market would become more inflexible.

Therefore, we need migration for the economy to grow and prosperity to increase. For me the migration debate has been orchestrated by the leave campaign to pander to peoples fears and prejudices when the truth is very much more different. Therefore, I strongly believe we are better of in!

yes
numbers that are arriving are unsustainable

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

The simple facts are that European migrants who have arrived since 2000 are, on average, better educated than the UK-born labour force. In 2011, 25% of migrants from the A8 eastern European countries had a university degree compared with 62% for those from the A15 countries in western and southern Europe and 42% for migrants from outside Europe. The detailed figures show that even in the case of Poland and other east European countries, the educational qualifications of those coming to the UK have increased in the past decade from 6% university graduates in 2004 to 25% in 2011.

You might also note that the education gap between migrants and the British labour force is growing: the proportion defined as with “low education” is 53% of the British workforce, 8-13% of recent EU migrants and 15% of those from outside Europe. perhaps this says more about our education system than the EU. Guy in the video says that migrants are taking jobs to the detrement of UK workers but the facts don't bear this out!

Since January-March 2010, the post-recession low-point for employment, the number of UK-born workers in employment has risen by 1.1m to a new record level of 26.25m. Not only was the number a record, but so, in 2015, was the proportion of UK-born people aged 16-64 in employment, 74.3%. In the six years to the first quarter of this year. there was a rise from 70.7% to 74.6% in the UK-born employment rate.

There was, it should be said, also a net rise of 633,000 in the number of EU migrants from the new eastern European member countries in work - more than 80% of those of working age do so - and one of 309,000 in those from long-standing EU counries in western Europe. But this rise occurred alongside, not instead of, a sustained increase in UK-born employment.

Employment among UK nationals rose even more, by over 1.5m, in the six years to the first quarter accounting for two-thirds of the overall rise in employment It has also never been higher as a percentage of the 16-64 workforce. Could there have been a bigger increase in UK-born or UK nationals' employment? Maybe a little, but probably not by much. Given that a significant proportion of the 16-64 workforce is in full-time education and not working, or looking after children and other family members, or unable to work for other reasons, the current UK-born employment rate is probably quite close to the maximum.

The majority of EU migrants to Britain would still qualify under skilled-labour criteria under a points-based system. But this additional layer of bureaucracy, whether the onus would be on workers or those seeking to recruit them, would make it harder for firms to fill gaps in their workforces. Those who say they would reduce red tape would merely tangle business up in more of it. And Britain’s labour market would become more inflexible.

Therefore, we need migration for the economy to grow and prosperity to increase. For me the migration debate has been orchestrated by the leave campaign to pander to peoples fears and prejudices when the truth is very much more different. Therefore, I strongly believe we are better of in!

Bizarre post. Completely ignores whether the national identity and culture of Britain is worth protecting. All about money and economics. A country is much more than about how much money it can make. Its history and unique identity. So many people hate cultural imperialism, but our culture is under threat through the steady erosion of these things. We also only have a small country with a very high population density. Will you only be happy when all the green is covered up?

Sent from the boot of Lingard

 

[cunning fergus]

The simple facts are that European migrants who have arrived since 2000 are, on average, better educated than the UK-born labour force. In 2011, 25% of migrants from the A8 eastern European countries had a university degree compared with 62% for those from the A15 countries in western and southern Europe and 42% for migrants from outside Europe. The detailed figures show that even in the case of Poland and other east European countries, the educational qualifications of those coming to the UK have increased in the past decade from 6% university graduates in 2004 to 25% in 2011.

You might also note that the education gap between migrants and the British labour force is growing: the proportion defined as with “low education” is 53% of the British workforce, 8-13% of recent EU migrants and 15% of those from outside Europe. perhaps this says more about our education system than the EU. Guy in the video says that migrants are taking jobs to the detrement of UK workers but the facts don't bear this out!

Since January-March 2010, the post-recession low-point for employment, the number of UK-born workers in employment has risen by 1.1m to a new record level of 26.25m. Not only was the number a record, but so, in 2015, was the proportion of UK-born people aged 16-64 in employment, 74.3%. In the six years to the first quarter of this year. there was a rise from 70.7% to 74.6% in the UK-born employment rate.

There was, it should be said, also a net rise of 633,000 in the number of EU migrants from the new eastern European member countries in work - more than 80% of those of working age do so - and one of 309,000 in those from long-standing EU counries in western Europe. But this rise occurred alongside, not instead of, a sustained increase in UK-born employment.

Employment among UK nationals rose even more, by over 1.5m, in the six years to the first quarter accounting for two-thirds of the overall rise in employment It has also never been higher as a percentage of the 16-64 workforce. Could there have been a bigger increase in UK-born or UK nationals' employment? Maybe a little, but probably not by much. Given that a significant proportion of the 16-64 workforce is in full-time education and not working, or looking after children and other family members, or unable to work for other reasons, the current UK-born employment rate is probably quite close to the maximum.

The majority of EU migrants to Britain would still qualify under skilled-labour criteria under a points-based system. But this additional layer of bureaucracy, whether the onus would be on workers or those seeking to recruit them, would make it harder for firms to fill gaps in their workforces. Those who say they would reduce red tape would merely tangle business up in more of it. And Britain’s labour market would become more inflexible.

Therefore, we need migration for the economy to grow and prosperity to increase. For me the migration debate has been orchestrated by the leave campaign to pander to peoples fears and prejudices when the truth is very much more different. Therefore, I strongly believe we are better of in!

The simple facts are that 90% of EU workers currently here working would not qualify to come and work if they were non EU citizens.

http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/na...orkers_would_lose_UK_jobs_in_event_of_Brexit/

When Channel 4 reported on this study, the key point was that this cohort of 90% earned less than £22,000.

Better educated they may be but that is not translating to the work they undertake.

This study demonstrates clearly that it is the British low paid that are struggling with the consequences of a major influx of labour. It also puts in doubt just how much benefit the wider British taxpayers derive from this cohort given that they earn so little, and would pay relatively minimal amounts of tax.

I know this will push against your established orthodoxy.

 

[TomandJerry]

The Sun backs Leave

Huge, massive boost for camp Leave, biggest newspaper in the country

"the Sun comes out fighting for Britain to shake off the EU as four new polls all have leave pulling ahead of remain"

Time to panic, Remain?

 

[Bladders]

Huge, massive boost for camp Leave, biggest newspaper in the country

"the Sun comes out fighting for Britain to shake off the EU as four new polls all have leave pulling ahead of remain"

Time to panic, Remain?

Yes it is. Unless there's a huge amount of voters keeping their vote close to their chest as in the GE then it currently looks live Leave is going to walk it.

 

[TomandJerry]

Brexit now 13/8 with Bet365