The UK will be worse off in EVERY Brexit scenario

[Najnaj]

‘Economic growth’. They don’t give a damn, it’s about laws and immigration not being shoved down their throat, and they’re the best performing Western European country in terms of growth.

This is a bit like telling a doctor that you didn't go see him to hear about cancer, you came for a cold.

You can't ignore very real and practical facts by saying that you don't care about them. Also, unless you cherry pick the dates, the UK is not the best performing economy.

https://www.theguardian.com/business...-business-live

[Deleted]

I am still curious as to what new freedoms and liberties you are referring to, what will the average citizen be able to do that they weren't allowed to before leaving the EU?

Those citizens had to do as they were told by the EU before Brexit. If Brexit happens, they won't have to.

The EU will have no power to do that any more post-Brexit.

[Draco-Onis]

Those citizens had to do as they were told by the EU before Brexit. If Brexit happens, they won't have to.

The EU will have no power to do that any more post-Brexit.

That is not the EU that is your government and you will still have to abide by a lot of EU rules because Brexit doesn't mean you teleport out of Europe. Also the UK had the biggest autonomy out of all the EU countries, you guys basically called the shots in writing the rules now you do not. Again you are not telling what you will be able to do after Brexit that you weren't able to do before.

[Deleted]

That is not the EU that is your government and you will still have to abide by a lot of EU rules because Brexit doesn't mean you teleport out of Europe. Also the UK had the biggest autonomy out of all the EU countries, you guys basically called the shots in writing the rules now you do not. Again you are not telling what you will be able to do after Brexit that you weren't able to do before.

Time will tell. But I am expecting the EU not to let us go anyway. The times of Moses parting the seas to escape the Pharaoh are long past.

And I have explained but I won't repeat it, I refer to you my previous replies and that is all I will do regardless of your views on liberty and freedoms which I suspect are different from mine.

[Demolitia]

I have a realistic chance of influencing my government. That is possible with the EU but realistically I have no chance of doing that with such distance between us. I will take my chances with something local instead and be free of the EU "just to be sure".

I'm not sure physical distance is a valid concern in 2018 but as you wish. Good luck.

[Kalis]

Feel free to watch the lecture or not, but I’m more inclined to accept Christian Hilber’s (professor of economic geography at LSE) analysis of the housing crisis than I am yours.

Supply and demand economics is on my side, so I’m not interested in what a single professor hypothesises on the subject, as the whole of standard economic theory and practice backs my view.

EU immigration has been a net negative when you factor out the incredibly wealthy EU citizens (primarily French) that moved to Britain, yet I can find economists who argue it is a net positive - because they include the extremely wealthy that distort the figures.

Individual economists are useful for reinforcing a pre-existing idea, to get an actual picture you need a lot more data points.

[Draco-Onis]

Time will tell. But I am expecting the EU not to let us go anyway. The times of Moses parting the seas to escape the Pharaoh are long past.

And I have explained but I won't repeat it, I refer to you my previous replies and that is all I will do regardless of your views on liberty and freedoms which I suspect are different from mine.

You are being vague and have a penchant for hyperbole, you words are empty and meaningless since you seem to have no idea what freedoms and liberties you want or are getting. Also if you have not noticed the EU cannot wait the kick the UK out it is your government who are dragging their feet since they seem to have not the slightest clue what they want or what they are doing. This entire Brexit shitshow is because the UK has no plan, if it was up to the EU the UK would have been kicked out already.

Also Moses and the Pharohs? You think UK citizens were slaves? you should be ashamed of yourself.

[Demolitia]

Time will tell. But I am expecting the EU not to let us go anyway. Thw times of Moses parting the seas to escape the Pharaoh are long past.

The UK is free to leave tomorrow. There just won't be any deal.

[Kalis]

Sure. You (and basically all western developed countries) need to find a way to get a higher and sustainable birth rate. But nobody has figured out how to do that. So unless you're willing to kill your elderly because they take space, clog your NHS, and are not a net positive. Until you figure out the solution, immigrants are the way to go.
Immigration policies can and should be improved, but one very real and immediate problem is that people live longer, and your active population is not renewed so you need people from somewhere.

Targeted immigration is the way forward, we don’t have targeted immigration, especially not internal EU immigration.

Importing Eastern European car washers for supermarket car parks isn’t solving any problem that Britain had, importing nurses and doctors is, but we’re not just doing the latter.

[Draco-Onis]

Targeted immigration is the way forward, we don’t have targeted immigration, especially not internal EU immigration.

Importing Eastern European car washers for supermarket car parks isn’t solving any problem that Britain had, importing nurses and doctors is, but we’re not just doing the latter.

Yeah you should be more worried about keeping the doctors and nurse you have, good luck attracting more of them after this fiasco.

[Demolitia]

EU immigration has been a net negative when you factor out the incredibly wealthy EU citizens (primarily French) that moved to Britain, yet I can find economists who argue it is a net positive - because they include the extremely wealthy that distort the figures.

Yet the wealthy French are part of EU immigration so it is a net positive.

- - - Updated - - -

Targeted immigration is the way forward, we don’t have targeted immigration, especially not internal EU immigration.

Importing Eastern European car washers for supermarket car parks isn’t solving any problem that Britain had, importing nurses and doctors is, but we’re not just doing the latter.

It doesn't solve the problem on the long run. But as nobody seem to be eager to address that problem, the carwasher is in the meantime paying pension and nhs contribution that benefit your elderly.

- - - Updated - - -

Also Moses and the Pharohs? You think UK citizens were slaves? you should be ashamed of yourself.

We will make him listen to "Rule Britannia" again. He probably forgot.

[Deleted]

Targeted immigration is the way forward, we don’t have targeted immigration, especially not internal EU immigration.

Importing Eastern European car washers for supermarket car parks isn’t solving any problem that Britain had, importing nurses and doctors is, but we’re not just doing the latter.

pretending that the only people that come here from Eastern Europe are carwashers.

17% of the total workforce is Foreign-born.
EU migrants are more likely to be in work than natives, with the participation rate for the group at just below 80 per cent. So the myth they don't contribute is the usual talking points ideologues screech.
The high and rising labour force participation rate for the UK native population undermines the argument they are 'taking jawbs'.

They are important for certain sectors of the economy, such as food processing, clothes manufacturing, cleaning and IT., but also construction needs thier skilled labour.
The NHS would "collapse" without its European Union workers.

There is no correlation between local average wage growth and the local share of migrants in a local workforce. And any downward impact on low skilled wages is dwarfed overall by the general pay squeeze since the financial crisis.

low annual net migration to the UK economy would result in GDP growing less fast, tax revenues being weaker and the public debt as a share of GDP being higher than otherwise. Add that immigrants to the UK, particularly from Europe, are more likely to be younger than the native population and more likely to work and pay taxes than to claim benefits. And the tax benefit of the presence of immigrants is seen as outweighing the financial cost they impose through greater pressure on local infrastructure and public services.

And all your talking points are complete ideologue bullshit. But how can we expect a part time tax dodging health tourist to know what they are talking about.

[Kalis]

Yet the wealthy French are part of EU immigration so it is a net positive.

A small number of wealthy French aren’t impacting the wages, infrastructure and housing costs at the lower end. They might increase costs of housing in a wealthy borough like Richmond, but overall their impact is negligible.

The same cannot be said of all EU immigrants, if EU immigration into the UK was limited to the French, nobody would give a toss, but it isn’t.

Immigration is beneficial if it is targeted, current immigration policy is detrimental.

[Deleted]

There is even a Wikihow picture that gives advice about how to visualise the Brexit

[Kalis]

pretending that the only people that come here from Eastern Europe are carwashers.

It’s an example.

17% of the total workforce is Foreign-born.
EU migrants are more likely to be in work than natives, with the participation rate for the group at just below 80 per cent. So the myth they don't contribute is the usual talking points ideologues screech.
The high and rising labour force participation rate for the UK native population undermines the argument they are 'taking jawbs'.

An irrelevant statistic without average wage figures.

They are important for certain sectors of the economy, such as food processing, clothes manufacturing, cleaning and IT., but also construction needs thier skilled labour.
The NHS would "collapse" without its European Union workers.

Perhaps we should only accept immigration from those sectors we have a skills shortage in then.

There is no correlation between local average wage growth and the local share of migrants in a local workforce. And any downward impact on low skilled wages is dwarfed overall by the general pay squeeze since the financial crisis.

The BoE reports disagree, economic theory disagrees, common sense disagrees.

low annual net migration to the UK economy would result in GDP growing less fast, tax revenues being weaker and the public debt as a share of GDP being higher than otherwise. Add that immigrants to the UK, particularly from Europe, are more likely to be younger than the native population and more likely to work and pay taxes than to claim benefits. And the tax benefit of the presence of immigrants is seen as outweighing the financial cost they impose through greater pressure on local infrastructure and public services.

GDP is a shit indicator of how people within a country are doing. India had a relatively high GDP, poverty levels that we don’t have in Britain are rife there.

And all your talking points are complete ideologue bullshit. But how can we expect a part time tax dodging health tourist to know what they are talking about.

I almost certainly pay more in tax to the UK each year than you do and I certainly cost the UK less than you do. You’re a leech.

[Demolitia]

A small number of wealthy French aren’t impacting the wages, infrastructure and housing costs at the lower end. They might increase costs of housing in a wealthy borough like Richmond, but overall their impact is negligible.

The same cannot be said of all EU immigrants, if EU immigration into the UK was limited to the French, nobody would give a toss, but it isn’t.

Immigration is beneficial if it is targeted, current immigration policy is detrimental.

You are not building more housing, so I doubt the infrastructure costs are increased dramatically due to migration.

This is only one study and the data they used is rather limited.
http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.a...s-and-impacts/
It does not seem to show much of an impact from migration on the housing market.
few migrants live in social housing. migrants are twice as likely to rent than to buy. The only negative impact is that arrival of migrants might lead to an outflow of natives, leading to lower demand and prices.

It looks like your problem is on the supply side. All that really needs to happen is to build more housing. Your main problem there is that you'll need more immigrants to work on construction sites

[Iphie]

I didn't question the news you reported.

What matters is that you used that source in your OP, which means you get -50 DKP for linking to it.

I'm not the OP, learn to read.

edit: nice edit in that quote btw.

[Kallisto]

It looks like your problem is on the supply side. All that really needs to happen is to build more housing. Your main problem there is that you'll need more immigrants to work on construction sites

Not really we just need NIMBYs who scream "WE MUST BUILD MORE HOUSES AND THINGS FOR YOUTH TO DO!" to stop screaming when sites are found "HOW DARE YOU BUILD IT THERE. YOU OPPRESSIVE COUNCIL!" because it's things like that which hold up building on the supply side.

[Kalis]

Stick with your ham-fisted approach if you will, there is far more at play than simple supply and demand.

It’s not ham fisted, it’s based on all the available data.

You are not building more housing, so I doubt the infrastructure costs are increased dramatically due to migration.

Yes we are, but not enough to keep up with demand from immigration. Housing isn’t the only infrastructure costs either, an additional quarter of a million people each year will also require hospitals, roads, policing, etc, all of which the existing inhabitants will have to subsidise, which isn’t so much of a problem when there is a medium-to-long term return on that investment, but becomes a problem when the immigrants aren’t paying their way.

This is only one study and the data they used is rather limited.
http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.a...s-and-impacts/
It does not seem to show much of an impact from migration on the housing market.
few migrants live in social housing. migrants are twice as likely to rent than to buy. The only negative impact is that arrival of migrants might lead to an outflow of natives, leading to lower demand and prices.

The natives require somewhere to live, increasing demand on housing requires an increase of supply and when that can’t be met, then prices increase. Look at accommodation costs in London, where most immigrants go, it is extortionate.

Not one immigrant should live in social housing, it is intended for people that can’t afford their own housing and if they come to England, then they should have the ability to look after themselves, not rely on the existing inhabitants to subsidise them. We’re not a charity.

It looks like your problem is on the supply side. All that really needs to happen is to build more housing.

No, the problem is the demand side. We’re adding more people in a single year now than we added in decades prior to the late 90s.

Your main problem there is that you'll need more immigrants to work on construction sites

Needing more immigrants to build the housing for the increased number of immigrants is a Ponzi scheme. It’s insane.

And environmentally disastrous.

- - - Updated - - -

Not really we just need NIMBYs who scream "WE MUST BUILD MORE HOUSES AND THINGS FOR YOUTH TO DO!" to stop screaming when sites are found "HOW DARE YOU BUILD IT THERE. YOU OPPRESSIVE COUNCIL!" because it's things like that which hold up building on the supply side.

How dare people want to preserve their local communities and environment...the utter bastards!

[Demolitia]

Not really we just need NIMBYs who scream "WE MUST BUILD MORE HOUSES AND THINGS FOR YOUTH TO DO!" to stop screaming when sites are found "HOW DARE YOU BUILD IT THERE. YOU OPPRESSIVE COUNCIL!" because it's things like that which hold up building on the supply side.

I keep hearing about NIMBYs. Is that the actual issue? Are local councils so spineless they cannot face them?