• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics

Letter to friends: this is why I will vote Remain in the referendum
The LSE’s Nicholas Barr explains why he will be voting to Remain in the EU referendum – citing a wide range of arguments about sovereignty, migration, international influence, regulation, democracy, trade and the single market to make his case. He concludes the economic and foreign policy costs of leaving are large, and the gains in sovereignty in today’s connected world are limited.

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexitvote/2...-is-why-i-will-vote-remain-in-the-referendum/
 
milo said:
Letter to friends: this is why I will vote Remain in the referendum
The LSE’s Nicholas Barr explains why he will be voting to Remain in the EU referendum – citing a wide range of arguments about sovereignty, migration, international influence, regulation, democracy, trade and the single market to make his case. He concludes the economic and foreign policy costs of leaving are large, and the gains in sovereignty in today’s connected world are limited.

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexitvote/2...-is-why-i-will-vote-remain-in-the-referendum/
Click to expand...


World just can't get enough economists!!!!!!!!
 
K.D.D.D.D.Soc said:
World just can't get enough economists!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...

I think that it is a well argued blog post and he'd tried to back up his arguments with evidence. I'd be interested in seeing a Brexit supporter do the same and use evidence rather than emotion.

I think it is telling that the leave campaign have had to resort to running down experts (I am not talking about you here). If they could find any that agreed with them, I am sure that they would be singing a different tune.
 
milo said:
I think that it is a well argued blog post and he'd tried to back up his arguments with evidence. I'd be interested in seeing a Brexit supporter do the same and use evidence rather than emotion.

I think it is telling that the leave campaign have had to resort to running down experts (I am not talking about you here). If they could find any that agreed with them, I am sure that they would be singing a different tune.
Click to expand...

Because both campaigns have been guilty of hyperbole, I think people will naturally mistrust stats/figures/experts. This referendum will come down to turnout and gut instinct. At first I was undecided, but the more I thought about it, the more sure I became of a remain vote. I think most people who poll 'don't know' will opt for a remain vote.
 
the dza said:
Because both campaigns have been guilty of hyperbole, I think people will naturally mistrust stats/figures/experts. This referendum will come down to turnout and gut instinct. At first I was undecided, but the more I thought about it, the more sure I became of a remain vote. I think most people who poll 'don't know' will opt for a remain vote.
Click to expand...

This on both the points. Most folks do not have a idea of what the CM is all about and because of that will vote for what they know rather then the unknown.

Me I will be voting out as I think the most important thing ( imo) is getting control of our borders back.
 
I'm voting to stay, just for my pensions sake.

Controlling our borders is a pipe dream weather we are in or out, that horse has bolted.
 
parklane1 said:
Me I will be voting out as I think the most important thing ( imo) is getting control of our borders back.
Click to expand...

How do you think leaving the EU will change our control of our borders? What difference would you want to see afterwards?
 
milo said:
How do you think leaving the EU will change our control of our borders? What difference would you want to see afterwards?
Click to expand...

We are a small country with far to many people in it. I do not know what part of England you live in but where I live and a lot of other places the Hospitals are struggling, you can not get into a lot of schools, try getting a Doctors appointment and you will be lucky to get one within a week. I could go on but the situation is cronic and one of the main reasons is the number of people we are letting in, Australia have the right idea there is nothing wrong with letting people in if they meet the criteria needed and not anyone that wants to.

Now you may not agree with that but many do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AVB
parklane1 said:
We are a small country with far to many people in it. I do not know what part of England you live in but where I live and a lot of other places the Hospitals are struggling, you can not get into a lot of schools, try getting a Doctors appointment and you will be lucky to get one within a week. I could go on but the situation is cronic and one of the main reasons is the number of people we are letting in, Australia have the right idea there is nothing wrong with letting people in if they meet the criteria needed and not anyone that wants to.

Now you may not agree with that but many do.
Click to expand...

The problems with hospitals and schools is an ageing population and under investment. Reducing the number of immigrants (and particularly European immigrants) will make that worse because the vast majority are net tax contributors and low users of public services.

We have a points based immigration system already for people outside of the EU and it has not reduced numbers, in fact, immigrants from outside the EU outnumber those from inside.

Australia has a far higher level of immigration per head than the UK and their points based system is designed to attract immigrants rather than deter them.
This is what Migration Watch, hardly a friend of the in campaign, have to say about a points based immigration system like they have in Australia

http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/346

It seems funny to me that a Brexit campaign run by the most fervent free marketeers in the country seem to think that the state is better placed to decide who should come here to work than companies. I suspect that most of them do not believe this for a second but are saying because they realise that stirring up concerns about immigration is their only chance of winning.
 
milo said:
The problems with hospitals and schools is an ageing population and under investment. Reducing the number of immigrants (and particularly European immigrants) will make that worse because the vast majority are net tax contributors and low users of public services.

We have a points based immigration system already for people outside of the EU and it has not reduced numbers, in fact, immigrants from outside the EU outnumber those from inside.

Australia has a far higher level of immigration per head than the UK and their points based system is designed to attract immigrants rather than deter them.
This is what Migration Watch, hardly a friend of the in campaign, have to say about a points based immigration system like they have in Australia

http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/346

It seems funny to me that a Brexit campaign run by the most fervent free marketeers in the country seem to think that the state is better placed to decide who should come here to work than companies. I suspect that most of them do not believe this for a second but are saying because they realise that stirring up concerns about immigration is their only chance of winning.
Click to expand...

As I say you may disagree which is fine, I guess the part of England you live in has no problems at the hospital, doctors, schools etc.
 
@milo isn't the point of the Australian points-based system not that (currently) it is seeking to attract Immigrants rather then deter them,but that Australia as a sovereign nation itself is in control of it?
Currently, it is seeking to attract immigrants (or based on points, those with certain attributes, qualifications etc). When the Australian government deems that a certain level has been reached they may decide to change priority and change the points to reflect different priorities, like keep net immigration to a certain level or even reduce it for a while.

I guess the point when people mention the Australian government itself judges what levels of immigration are needed and changes accordingly (and without having to agree what that is with 20-odd neighboring Nations).
 
parklane1 said:
As I say you may disagree which is fine, I guess the part of England you live in has no problems at the hospital, doctors, schools etc.
Click to expand...

The point is that the problems with public services are not caused by immigrants. We have an ageing population and funding for public services has been slashed over the last six years.
 
glorygloryeze said:
@milo isn't the point of the Australian points-based system not that (currently) it is seeking to attract Immigrants rather then deter them,but that Australia as a sovereign nation itself is in control of it?
Currently, it is seeking to attract immigrants (or based on points, those with certain attributes, qualifications etc). When the Australian government deems that a certain level has been reached they may decide to change priority and change the points to reflect different priorities, like keep net immigration to a certain level or even reduce it for a while.

I guess the point when people mention the Australian government itself judges what levels of immigration are needed and changes accordingly (and without having to agree what that is with 20-odd neighboring Nations).
Click to expand...

We have a points based system for immigration outside the EU now and non-EU immigration is higher than from within. We could cut immigration now by tightening up these controls. It would be detrimental to our economy but it would be easy enough to do.

I think that the real issue here is that successive governments have failed to talk about the benefits to the UK economy of immigration. Instead they have played up to peoples' fears, courted the right wing press by talking tough but then have carried out a polar opposite policy in practice.
 
milo said:
The point is that the problems with public services are not caused by immigrants. We have an ageing population and funding for public services has been slashed over the last six years.
Click to expand...

On the whole i agree that we have an issue with an ageing population, but isn't the cuts to public services a bit of a red herring?
Certainly complaints about the problems with public services were being made long before the last 6 years of Coalition/Tory cuts..
 
milo said:
The point is that the problems with public services are not caused by immigrants. We have an ageing population and funding for public services has been slashed over the last six years.
Click to expand...

Rubbish mate, I agree we have a ageing population but if you REALLY believe that the main cause of the problem is not down to too many people then there is no point in carrying this on. As I say if you have no problem where you live maybe those that do should move there.
 
parklane1 said:
We are a small country with far to many people in it. I do not know what part of England you live in but where I live and a lot of other places the Hospitals are struggling, you can not get into a lot of schools, try getting a Doctors appointment and you will be lucky to get one within a week. I could go on but the situation is cronic and one of the main reasons is the number of people we are letting in, Australia have the right idea there is nothing wrong with letting people in if they meet the criteria needed and not anyone that wants to.

Now you may not agree with that but many do.
Click to expand...

Yeah and we're all called xenophobes, racist, little englanders, yet most people who know me think I'm a bleeding heart liberal with a leaning to the left
 
glorygloryeze said:
@milo isn't the point of the Australian points-based system not that (currently) it is seeking to attract Immigrants rather then deter them,but that Australia as a sovereign nation itself is in control of it?
Currently, it is seeking to attract immigrants (or based on points, those with certain attributes, qualifications etc). When the Australian government deems that a certain level has been reached they may decide to change priority and change the points to reflect different priorities, like keep net immigration to a certain level or even reduce it for a while.

I guess the point when people mention the Australian government itself judges what levels of immigration are needed and changes accordingly (and without having to agree what that is with 20-odd neighboring Nations).
Click to expand...


Bingo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back