Brexit

[thermionic]

Immigration is nothing more than a convenient scapegoat for much deeper issues. It often is.

Hence the area I live in voting 76% remain, yet having one of the highest percentages of immigrants in the UK.

The EU itself was a scapegoat. Murdoch and Dacre's dogs obviously sat around a table, defined what they thought would turn people off EU membership the most, and kept beating that drum at every opportunity, without any remote regard for accuracy.

Hardcore leave / remainers can't be persuaded. The media influences swinging voters. This was a tug of war for power between the old-school-tie, Eton types such as Cameron and Osborne (the likes of whom have been leading the UK for centuries) and the media barons. They are multi-millionaires, and it was simply a big game to them - like tennis. The thing is, having the 2nd largest EU economy opting out could destabilise the whole project, creating potential for fascist uprisings in many places (Austria and France spring to mind). But Murdoch and Dacre are without emphathy (read: sociopaths), so this collateral damage is of no concern to them; all that matters is that they won the power struggle, and they can call more shots. 

 

[Script]

I frankly think you will do yourselves a world of good by kicking out the bankers involved in the global financial crisis, not the immigrants.

As if it were a coincidence, today four ex-bankers (Barclays) have been sentenced to six (four and two) years of imprisionment for fraud in what got known as the Libor scandal (prior to the 08/09 crash; price adjustment of interbank rate by 0.01% led to a net of several millions being skimmed of per day). A guy called Tom Hayes (UBS & Citi Group) was even sentenced to 14 years a bit back. Moreover, several banks (i.e. HSBC, JP Morgan, Deutsche Bank, Citibank, Royal Bank of Scotland, ICAP) involved in the manipulation had to pay massive fines of several billions of dollars each.----If you asked me, prisions terms are way too short and fines way to low. It's all a joke, I know.

However, an organisation like the EU Commission can and did create pressure. I'm not saying it was the sole reason this scandal has led to clean-ups, cos the US also had a huge interest. However, I'd think that regulating banks and the financial system is easier when countries work together. Yes, in general, the EU is very slow in cleaning up the mess from 2008/2009, well, any mess for that matter. But the UK, in which neo-liberal market principles are rated very high, has been known to impede several suggestions by the EU to regulate banks and the financial market. In this respect, the United States of A have been much faster and more rigorous. Of course, the entire financial system is far from ideal, cos there are still way too many loopholes for fraud, but I see some progress being made.

My point is that all this does not make for 'sexy' topics -- not in the media, not in politics, and not in campaigns. Well, it's not as 'sexy' as 'immigrants' for instance and sure more complicated than a three digit number being thrown around. But I'm digressing.

The real irony here is that politicians of the calibre like Farage (I'm pretty sure we'll hear of him again!) and Mr. Gove easily qualify as neo-liberal. Look into any European right-leaning political party manifesto (including some conservatives) and you'll spot the words 'immigration issue' used just a few pages apart from 'neo-liberal' whatever. It's a known combination though: Liberal Nationalism or National Liberalism? What we see right now is a counter-reaction to globalization (immigration for that matter) but an upholding of market freedom.

I really hope for Britain that this kind of neo-liberalism doesn't turn inward now, not only accellerating the watering down of government but, more importantly, aggravating the employment situation even further. Big corporations and banks act globally anyway and are known to not care for borders much. They will dictate their deals. While big players that act only locally too will most probably win, as they can now shut the door for competitors and dictate prices as they please.

I'm sorry if I contribute to the doom and gloom aspect of this thread by posting this. I really hope that I'm wrong in what I see.

 

[sahib]

these people that I mentioned who were placed next door to us. They were placed in a flat at a taxpayer's expense of £1,000 a month rent. They stole from us and they stole from our downstairs neighbours. They run a havoc here.

Now before you take this and twist it round let me repeat again. I am not trying to tar everybody with that brush. I am giving it as an example of what can happen with unlimited and uncontrolled immigration.

But the problem with what you're saying is that the same thing can happen without immigration as well.
So it begs the question of why you have to point to crime in conjunction with immigration, if the two weren't connected somehow.

I am not saying that. You have just said it but it is true.  I am also not connecting  "with immigration" and "without immigration"  either.  What I am saying is that with unlimited movement the crime will also move from one country/region to another. That is all. Now, if you are saying this is not the case then we'll agree to disagree.

Since all humans are humans and humans commit crimes it stands to reason that regardless of where people are from you'll be increasing the amount of crime in a population if the population grows as a result of immigration.  But as far as you're concerned; if your area will always be populated the odds will be about the same in terms of you suffering from crime. It won't matter who lives next to you.

Well, I am glad you say that because that is exactly what I am trying to say.

The point of controlled immigration is to control the increase in population where you may have economic and social problems .  I do not think you are familiar with the demographics here but you pile 100,000 people in a city with a population of under 1,000,000  (here in Glasgow as an example) you are going to have social problems.

You are not putting these people up in the West End next to Waitrose. You are piling them in tower blocks in areas where even the police describes as "undesirable areas with undesirable people". I am not making this up. This is the terminology.  One of my son's problematic friends has just been posted back to France to his dad as his mother can not look after him as she can not get a job and lives in one of the very tower blocks.  The kid already has problems. Let him in that block for two years you will have added one more to the gang. This is the point.  But do not take this as if I am demonizing immigrants in general. I am not.

Immigration is of course a good thing and I am an example of it. But I am a product of controlled immigration.

But the distinction between controlled and uncontrolled seems entirely arbitrary.

The borders towards the EU are controlled as far as that's possible.

.......You can't just move from Nicaragua into the UK, can you?

So immigration is in fact NOT uncontrolled. It IS controlled. The issue is whom is allowed in.  And it is also not unlimited.

No. You obviously have not been paying attention to the discussion. We are not talking about immigration from outside the EU but within the EU and you have NO CONTROL over it. It is also unlimited. Anybody from any EU member state can come and settle in the UK (or in any other EU state) whether they have a job or not. That is the condition of having access to the free market. Free movement.

The concern that the leave camp put forward was also not for present but for future with proposed EU expansion. And I looked at it from Turkey's accession point of view. The leave camp's argument was that what sort of people do we want to attract to UK. I am sorry to say that but understanding what sort of people you will be attracting from Turkey requires a deep understanding of that culture, and that goes way beyond sitting in the steps of London and eating kofte.

Further more, you're saying this right after you're talking about immigrants having committed crimes, so the question that appears in my head is just what type of control, specifically, was applied in your immigration case that would have disqualified you from immigration had you been the type that committed crimes?

If you are in EU and if you have a criminal record, unless there is a specific warning to the authorities in the UK you can walk in.  My case is/was different as Turkey was not and is still not in the EU and in order to come to UK one requires a visa which is a through process. It is very unlikely that you will get a visa if you have a criminal record.

However, what alarms me most with this discussion is that the tone of the responses I receive gives me the impression that as if I somehow describe the immigration as the sole source of crime. I do not. In fact I have said that the crime is just one aspect. But it seem according to you the immigration is all nice and dandy and somehow we all live in great harmony. We do not. Life is not like that. As much as I would like to reach out and help everybody I also have to be pragmatic about my resources.

 

[beatnik]

I have just read the news that after 10 years president of the EU Barroso is going to be president (non-exec) and advisor for Goldman Sachs europe.

But yeah the EU is about being together, freedom, evolution, peace and love

of course

 

[abbey road d enfer]

I have just read the news that after 10 years president of the EU Barroso is going to be president (non-exec) and advisor for Goldman Sachs europe.

Which triggered a deluge of reproach from scandalized politicians, saying it gives them a bad rap, but now we know that, put in the same position, they would do the same.
Barroso is guilty of one thing: getting caught.

 

[mattiasNYC]

I have just read the news that after 10 years president of the EU Barroso is going to be president (non-exec) and advisor for Goldman Sachs europe.

But yeah the EU is about being together, freedom, evolution, peace and love

of course

Glad I was sitting down. Otherwise I would have fallen and bumped my head because of the shock.

We see this all the time in politics. And people just keep on electing the same type of politicians. Who they represent when in power is pretty clear I think.

 

[thermionic]

I have just read the news that after 10 years president of the EU Barroso is going to be president (non-exec) and advisor for Goldman Sachs europe.

But yeah the EU is about being together, freedom, evolution, peace and love

of course

That’s really bad. To prevent such things happening we should vote to break up the United Kingdom, empower racist thugs, take away regulations that protect workers’ rights - and self-engineer the mother of all recessions…

..oh wait, we already did that, didn’t we!

(btw – as an example of government corruption this is chicken feed compared to what goes on in the ‘UK’ every day. Does anyone think the likes of Philip Green give hundreds of thousands to political parties out of ideology? For £5,000 you can dine with an MP! Does anyone think a healthy democracy has the PM in secret meetings with Murdoch, whereby he slithers out of the back door to avoid press? Nothing sinister there…all in a healthy democracy… Far less morally repulsive than someone from Brussels who took a job at a bank…)

 

[beatnik]

We see this all the time in politics. And people just keep on electing the same type of politicians. Who they represent when in power is pretty clear I think.

eu citizens don't vote to elect the eu president, but yeah democracy, what a pretty word for making people being comfortably numb

personally i would be happier with a recession than being in the hands of goldman sachs, by the way barroso is now president, this doesn't mean he wasn't working for them before as well

a few years ago italy got mario monti ( another goldman sachs guy ) put in as prime minister. nobody voted for him. he made cuts all over the place and took all the money he could, saved a few banks, then disappeared

imho it should be the governments to admin the banks, not the contrary

 

[ruffrecords]

I have just read the news that after 10 years president of the EU Barroso is going to be president (non-exec) and advisor for Goldman Sachs europe.

But yeah the EU is about being together, freedom, evolution, peace and love

of course

That’s really bad. To prevent such things happening we should vote to break up the United Kingdom, empower racist thugs, take away regulations that protect workers’ rights - and self-engineer the mother of all recessions…

None of which would happen if honest people of conviction stood for Parliament instead of bleating about those in power.

Cheers

Ian

 

[mattiasNYC]

We see this all the time in politics. And people just keep on electing the same type of politicians. Who they represent when in power is pretty clear I think.

eu citizens don't vote to elect the eu president, but yeah democracy, what a pretty word for making people being comfortably numb

Yeah, I know, but people vote for people who put people in power. That's what I meant.

 

[thermionic]

I have just read the news that after 10 years president of the EU Barroso is going to be president (non-exec) and advisor for Goldman Sachs europe.

But yeah the EU is about being together, freedom, evolution, peace and love

of course

That’s really bad. To prevent such things happening we should vote to break up the United Kingdom, empower racist thugs, take away regulations that protect workers’ rights - and self-engineer the mother of all recessions…

None of which would happen if honest people of conviction stood for Parliament instead of bleating about those in power.

Cheers

Ian

Does any country have MPs that fill this criteria? Voting in the Referendum was always going to be a question of pragmatism over utopian ideology. When the most xenophobic, malevolent forces within UK society, i.e. Murdoch (a guy who makes money publishing photos taken with hidden cameras at the funerals of children) and The Daily Mail support a particular side in a vote, one is wise to consider the prospect that racial hatred might be incited. I certainly wouldn't let my offspring know I vote 'leave'...

 

[ruffrecords]

I have just read the news that after 10 years president of the EU Barroso is going to be president (non-exec) and advisor for Goldman Sachs europe.

But yeah the EU is about being together, freedom, evolution, peace and love

of course

That’s really bad. To prevent such things happening we should vote to break up the United Kingdom, empower racist thugs, take away regulations that protect workers’ rights - and self-engineer the mother of all recessions…

None of which would happen if honest people of conviction stood for Parliament instead of bleating about those in power.

Cheers

Ian

Does any country have MPs that fill this criteria? Voting in the Referendum was always going to be a question of pragmatism over utopian ideology. When the most xenophobic, malevolent forces within UK society, i.e. Murdoch (a guy who makes money publishing photos taken with hidden cameras at the funerals of children) and The Daily Mail support a particular side in a vote, one is wise to consider the prospect that racial hatred might be incited. I certainly wouldn't let my offspring know I vote 'leave'...

I'll rephrase. You clearly believe you speak for many people so why don't you stand?

Cheers

Ian

 

[thermionic]

I thought the music industry was cut-throat until I got involved in electronics. I suspect politics would make either industry feel like a gentle ride along a country lane.

As has been said in many discussions over the last few weeks: those who ignore the past are doomed to repeat the same mistakes. When the printing press was invented, it was soon realised that restrictions had to be put on how many presses any one person owned. This worked fine in the UK up until 1979, when Thatcher decided to let Murdoch bypass The Monopolies Commission: Thatcher + Murdoch's Secret Meeting Democracy in the UK has been impaired ever since. 

An interactive map of countries offended by Boris Johnson:

http://indy100.independent.co.uk/article/a-map-of-all-the-countries-boris-johnson-has-offended--W1zaTLC63rW

 

[Script]

Johnson nominated Foreign Minister.

My first thought... Johnson? What the heck...
Second thought... Mrs May, what a genius move.

Now it might get interesting.

 

[thermionic]

Johnson nominated Foreign Minister.

My first thought... Johnson? What the heck...
Second thought... Mrs May, what a genius move.

Now it might get interesting.

"You created this mess, you sort it out!"

 

[ruffrecords]

I thought the music industry was cut-throat until I got involved in electronics. I suspect politics would make either industry feel like a gentle ride along a country lane.

Those who can, do , those who can't, teach, and the rest whinge.

Cheers

Ian

 

[Script]

Just read that an extrapolated 600,000 skilled workers (survey by stepstone among 40,000 employees in Britain, Ireland, Germany) have expressed willingness to leave the UK to find a job within the EU. Main reason given is the prospect/fear that UK companies will be effected negatively by the UK leaving the EU (i.e., less pay, prospect pf promotion, workers' rights). Not sure people would leave that easily, but most favoured countries of destination are Spain, France, the Netherlands, Germany. Also read that those four countries are looking forward to any skilled worker willing to resettle.

Emigration of that scale might contribute to solving more than the current immigration issue of there not being enough jobs for skilled immigrants. It might also lead to a decrease in both youth and long-term unemployment if people are willing and able to (re-)educate. And, last but not least, there will be more free houses on the market... all grand.

 

[ruffrecords]

Several of the papers have accused Remainers of  Sore Loser Syndrome. This video made me laugh:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Se8rx-MxCxk

Cheers

IAn

 

[Script]

Several of the papers have accused Remainers of  Sore Loser Syndrome.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure there is that too.

The worst thing, however, is if fears, both imaginary and real, of people are not taken seriously. I think that politicians all across the world have been way too unconsiderate of this for way too long, contributing to some of the problems we see today.

Moreover, when//as soon as//should people start to feel negative effects in their wallets (we all know that Brexit is not a reality yet, but it seems that everybody is getting prepared), then any discussion quickly reaches an end -- believe me. It's in the pocket where people (of all societal strata) feel it and where they are most sensitive (e.g., mortgage, kids' education, health care, elderly care etc). Not everybody can wait for years for things in politics to change (both before and after the referendum). As I said, I don't think that to emigrate is an easy decision. But then again, once someone makes up their mind, it's not that difficult after all.

Let's assume all those 600,000 people really gonna leave the UK. What then? I'd say, so what. It's nothing in comparison to the exodus happening in Greece right now. It's a minor loss, but a loss nonetheless. Let's hope for Britain that the new government knows how to approach those people and convince them change their minds.

 

[ruffrecords]

This is exactly the same as when we joined the Common Market. There was already the 'brain drain' to the US and people thought joining the Common Market would only make that worse. Also there was a great fear that prices would rise as would taxes in order to pay out membership fees.

Cheers

Ian