Brexit bites as EU workers start to say screw you UK we are outa here…

[Mayhem]

You still do not understand the purpose of the links. They were to demonstrate the use of the term in regards to the UK, which they did.

The purpose was to back up your claim that 8.5 mio immigrants is mass immigration. Not that the term is used in the UK.

That is not how the English language works, that is not how any language works as far as I am aware. It is the meaning of terms in the language you are using that is relevant, not the meaning in the original language.

You seem to be mixing up etymology with contemporary usage.

Where do you think the english got the meaning from if not from the french who coined both terms? Again, the french coined both definitions of left and right, you just happened to ignore or forget the first definition and went with the second one incidentally ignoring that terms you use are used because of the first definitions and not the ones you use which of course confuses the hell out of you.properly

I can write in English. I just did it. And again!

More or less properly.

[Tijuana]

you are looking at it from a bit wrong perspective - you are no longer a lonely island - yes you will be more isolated economicaly but EU with its huge market and whats more important with its donations to buisnesses will beat your production by long mile especially if you will be forced to rise wages - rising wages is easy - but with risen wages your product is not competitive on other markets. and if its not competitive it doesnt sell - if owners dont make money their only logical solution is closing this buisness and cuting losses.

you are assuming that only thing that will rise will be wages - but its far from truth - the moment minimum wages rise inflation rushes - and in end resoult people with shitty jobs and shitty wages still earn shitty money they just have "illusion" of numbers rising - problem is their cost of living will rise dramaticaly - if you think its lie - look at what is happening for example in shanghai where 30 m^2 apartment costs more then 60 m^2 + in london. why do you think chinesse buisneses buy out london and other EU cities ? because its bloody cheap for them. and if you will rush inflation it will be even cheaper.

Meh, not reading anything by someone who can't be bothered to press shift. It's pretty rude. Just sayin...

[Mayhem]

The typical worker rarely has much knowledge about whats good for them, it seems.

Worker: They took my job!
Politician: I will bring back your job!
Worker: He will bring back my job!

[Thalassian Bob]

The typical worker rarely has much knowledge about whats good for them, it seems.

Exactly the kind of condescending attitude that has gotten so much of the working-class pissed off at the establishment and will continue to make them vote in opposition to the things that you want (presumably). If you want to win people over to your argument, engage with them on the issues they raise, don't just presume to know what is best for somebody else.

I often wondered how many people voted for Brexit in truth largely out of a desire to spite the City

I'm sure it was an element of their voting decision for a lot of people. While my own vote depended on a lot of issues and I was unsure pretty much up until the day of voting, I have to admit the idea of voting against the wishes of the powers that be was quite exciting.

[Tijuana]

Or how about we look at it yet another way:
If there is not enough supply only the richest few will be able to afford it.
People do not really need warm water from the tap if they have a stove, so why let more plumbers in than needed to get rid of the shit?
(Well, on a second thought... not getting rid of the shit only ever kills a few, right? Wouldn't ever happen to you, I'm sure, because deseases never spread to others, right? And you can afford to pay higher wages for your home.)

Yes, there are two sides of extremes: too much labor driving the cost too low for the workers, and too little labor driving the cost too high for the employers, and thereby the consumers. This is not complicated stuff here yet, here we are world.

[Mayhem]

Exactly the kind of condescending attitude that has gotten so much of the working-class pissed off at the establishment and will continue to make them vote in opposition to the things that you want (presumably). If you want to win people over to your argument, engage with them on the issues they raise, don't just presume to know what is best for somebody else.

The working class has not changed anything as the politicians that presumably are fucking them over are still in power.

[Aggrophobic]

Exactly the kind of condescending attitude that has gotten so much of the working-class pissed off at the establishment and will continue to make them vote in opposition to the things that you want (presumably). If you want to win people over to your argument, engage with them on the issues they raise, don't just presume to know what is best for somebody else.

Facts make the working class angry?
Ok, then.

I'm not going to fall for the bullshit just becuase you think it sounds better.

[Kalis]

The purpose was to back up your claim that 8.5 mio immigrants is mass immigration. Not that the term is used in the UK.

No, the purpose was to show that the term is used in respect of immigration in the UK, which it did. You are trying to tell me the intent behind my actions, that is your delusion at work again.

Where do you think the english got the meaning from if not from the french who coined both terms? Again, the french coined both definitions of left and right, you just happened to ignore or forget the first definition and went with the second one incidentally ignoring that terms you use are used because of the first definitions and not the ones you use which of course confuses the hell out of you.properly

It makes no difference where the term came from, it is how it is used in contemporary English which is important. A huge amount of English words have changed meaning over time, including loan words and terms, it is not uncommon.

You are displaying an incredible level of ignorance of how languages develop.

More or less properly.

Far better than you.

[Mayhem]

No, the purpose was to show that the term is used in respect of immigration in the UK, which it did. You are trying to tell me the intent behind my actions, that is your delusion at work again.

Except those links don't show that at all which you would know if you read them. It shows that the term is used, yeah ok.

It makes no difference where the term came from, it is how it is used in contemporary English which is important. A huge amount of English words have changed meaning over time, including loan words and terms, it is not uncommon.

You are displaying an incredible level of ignorance of how languages develop.

You're telling me it's coinsidence that the english definition of left/right is the same as the one coined by the french?

Far better than you.

/golfclap ^^

[Thalassian Bob]

Facts make the working class angry?
Ok, then.

I'm not going to fall for the bullshit just becuase you think it sounds better.

Okay, enjoy the ever growing popularity of the protectionist Right-wing then.

The working class has not changed anything as the politicians that presumably are fucking them over are still in power.

MPs can be changed each election cycle, the EU referendum was a much more important, more permanent decision and one that the typical worker (outside London) seemed to get their way on.

[Mehrunes]

You can call it ignorance but when another entity is prescribing legislation then are you really sovereign? We did an awful job (willfully at that) explaining the EU to our populace but the EU is guilty of being difficult and opaque to the layman. Layer that with decades of anti-EU propaganda and you can't really blame most of the population for having no clue about what the real issues were.

You can be. It's not a defining trait of sovereignty. Again, international law surpassing national law isn't unique to EU and isn't even anything new. Also again, EU isn't the only international body that's a source of international law. And the very fact that UK could unilaterally decide to leave is all the proof one needs to realize that they indeed were sovereign.

And succumbing to propaganda doesn't overwrite or prevent ignorance. If anything, it is a symptom of ignorance. So yes, I can blame people for coddling themselves with eurosceptic screeching disjointed from reality because it makes them feel better about themselves instead of bothering to even fact check said screeching, let alone go out of their way and learn something more.

EU isn't guilty of squat either. The institutions of EU are forced to be transparent by EU law and the information is out there. So are the underlying mechanisms. Treaties governing EU aren't really written in some hardcore legalese when it comes to the parts of how the institutions function.

That the Brexit mooks never saw TEU or TFEU in their lives because they were too busy whining about how EU forces straight bananas on them, how it's because of EU that Pakistanis UK invited are going to turn UK into a caliphate and bowing down to Farage and his claims of 350 millions to NHS is ultimately no one else's fault but their own.

[Kalis]

Except those links don't show that at all which you would know if you read them. It shows that the term is used, yeah ok.

They were to show that the term "mass immigration" is often used to describe immigration into the UK, they did that.

You're telling me it's coinsidence that the english definition of left/right is the same as the one coined by the french?

For the love of God! It does not matter how the terms came to be in English, it matters how they are used in English.

Neither of us were alive in the 18th Century, neither of us are French, neither of us are speaking to each other in French, so why on Earth are you using 18th Century French definitions for a conversation in English during the 21st Century and not contemporary English ones?

[Mehrunes]

The Bank of England itself has stated that immigration on the current scale is depressing wages, schools are over-crowded in part because net immigration is at 300k a year and many of the people coming to the UK from places like the Indian sub-continent are having way more kids than native Brits and studies suggest migrants have a negative net impact on the exchequer between £4 billion and £17 billion pounds per year. When broken down by areas of origin, people from places like the original EU14 offer a net contribution to the treasury, but those from Eastern Europe and Asia are often a net drain. An uncomfortable case of affairs, to be sure, but one that has the data to support it.

Polish migrants are net contributors. I have read the same about other countries that joined in 2004. So at best it leaves the 3 countries that joined after 2004. Which pale (and so do the other 9 countries that joined in 2004 anyway) in migrant numbers to UK. So UK could have always limited or even stopped migration from India and Pakistan, removing the 2nd and 3rd spots from countries of origin of most migrants entering UK, leaving the net benefit Poles at first spot and raising the Irish, who should also be net contributors due to being a part of the old EU from the top positions. Hell, I am not even sure if UK would still have net positive migration without people from India and Pakistan. Alas, solving their own issues is too hard, blaming the EU was easier.

[Mayhem]

They were to show that the term "mass immigration" is often used to describe immigration into the UK, they did that.

Nope.

For the love of God! It does not matter how the terms came to be in English, it matters how they are used in English.

Neither of us were alive in the 18th Century, neither of us are French, neither of us are speaking to each other in French, so why on Earth are you using 18th Century French definitions for a conversation in English during the 21st Century and not contemporary English ones?

The contemporary english one is the same used back in days by the french, the english didn't change a thing, they just ignored one usage but kept terms that rely on that usage far right (describing fascists) for example. That's why you're so confused about it.

[Kalis]

Nope.

So I could not provide quotes from those links to show that the term "mass immigration" is used to describe immigration into the UK? Do you want a bet on that?

The contemporary english one is the same used back in days by the french, the english didn't change a thing, they just ignored one usage but kept terms that rely on that usage far right (describing fascists) for example. That's why you're so confused about it.

WE DO NOT LIVE IN 18TH CENTURY FRANCE. WE ARE NOT SPEAKING FRENCH. HOW THEY DEFINED WORDS IS IRRELEVANT TO A CONVERSATION IN CONTEMPORARY ENGLISH. WILL WRITING IN BOLD AND CAPS HELP YOU UNDERSTAND THIS? PROBABLY NOT.

[Mayhem]

So I could not provide quotes from those links to show that the term "mass immigration" is used to describe immigration into the UK? Do you want a bet on that?

Not to back up your claim of 8.5 mio immigrants = mass immigration.

WE DO NOT LIVE IN 18TH CENTURY FRANCE. WE ARE NOT SPEAKING FRENCH. HOW THEY DEFINED WORDS IS IRRELEVANT TO A CONVERSATION IN CONTEMPORARY ENGLISH. WILL WRITING IN BOLD AND CAPS HELP YOU UNDERSTAND THIS? PROBABLY NOT.

IT IS THE VERY SAME DEFINITION IN CONTEMPORARY ENGLISH

[Kalis]

Not to back up your claim of 8.5 mio immigrants = mass immigration.

If I can provide three quotes from my links that refer to immigration levels in the UK today as mass immigration, then you permanently delete your account. Deal?

I think you quoted one yourself, so is it a bet you are willing to make? Some of those links are before we even reached 8.5 million, so they will be referring to lower levels than that as mass immigration, e.g. the Theresa May one is from when we had about 8 million.

IT IS THE VERY SAME DEFINITION IN CONTEMPORARY ENGLISH

No it is not, in France it meant people who sat on the far right of the chamber, I believe they still use that today, whereas in English it does not. For a start it would not make any sense in the UK, considering the layout of the House of Commons.

You are still confusing etymology with current usage.

[Mehrunes]

Exactly the kind of condescending attitude that has gotten so much of the working-class pissed off at the establishment and will continue to make them vote in opposition to the things that you want (presumably). If you want to win people over to your argument, engage with them on the issues they raise, don't just presume to know what is best for somebody else.

So accurate descriptions of reality make the working class vote based on their feels because said description triggered their feeble sensibilities? Not exactly the best picture of the working class you're painting here. And the working class has been engaged during the Brexit campaign on the issues they raised, even in cases these "issues" were total horseshit like "muh sovereignty", "UK has no say in EU", "EU is undemocratic" or Muslims. They remained with their pre-established biases and convictions, deaf to any arguments. Because populist crap Farage spewed appeased their feels better.

Facts make the working class angry?
Ok, then.

I'm not going to fall for the bullshit just becuase you think it sounds better.

Well, it's not really that inaccurate of a statement.

MPs can be changed each election cycle, the EU referendum was a much more important, more permanent decision and one that the typical worker (outside London) seemed to get their way on.

More permanent indeed. Because once UK is not bound by EU's worker's protections, UK government will be free to introduce any and all pro-corporate policies they have wet dreams about. And that will result in working class Utopia, somehow.

[Aggrophobic]

Okay, enjoy the ever growing popularity of the protectionist Right-wing then.

Education is the solution for that, not giving into propaganda and bullshit.

[Mayhem]

If I can provide three quotes from my links that refer to immigration levels in the UK today as mass immigration, then you permanently delete your account. Deal?

I think you quoted one yourself, so is it a bet you are willing to make? Some of those links are before we even reached 8.5 million, so they will be referring to lower levels than that as mass immigration, e.g. the Theresa May one is from when we had about 8 million.

... selective quoting if all else fails

No it is not, in France it meant people who sat on the far right of the chamber, I believe they still use that today, whereas in English it does not. For a start it would not make any sense in the UK, considering the layout of the House of Commons.

Yes that is how the terms came to be, that doesn't mean people have to sit on the far right to be called far right as it describes idiologies and policies and not seating arrangement in a room at all times.

So what is the difference then to the english term? What does far right describe in english that is different from what it described back when it came up?