To continue to wonder who is happy with where Brexit is heading

[Bearbehind]

Whilst I'm sure Leavers will undoubtedly think AIBU the last thread filled up so here's another 1000 opportunities to discuss what you think about where Brexit is heading.

“What was made clear to Nissan and to others in the automotive industry is that what we want is a competitive environment for the whole of the industry.”
I am afraid to me that sounds like more mindless waffle. I can't believe that the Nissan bosses haven't got a promise more substantial than a soundbite, but of course they aren't going to reveal their hand. These people weren't born yesterday. In terms of being PM, Theresa May was effectively born yesterday. She might grow into the job, she might not.

Bear,

I don't think you really understand the concept of hedging. And, with regards to contents insurance, you lose the cost of insurance every year that you are not robbed.

Hedging is never the wrong decision if you have a fx mismatch in income and expenditure.

If there was no 'problem' with the nissan agreement then the government would have given us some details

If only to show us what hard core negotiators they are

Winchester immigration has been controlled and always will be , FOM is not for everyone is it ?

If you hav

Have any element that is unontrolled then it is uncontrolled as a whole. It's maths. One (controlled) plus infinity(uncontrolled) = infinity.

In which case Brexit doesn't solve your problems winchester, there's still the CTA with ROI.

i don't think you really understand the concept of hedging.

I think we are going to have to agree to disagree on this larry

But Winchester even FOM comes with rules , it isn't the free for all that some would have you believe it to be .

See the link Magik put up earlier

surfer why are you and others moaning about how often people post
People post as often as the see fit, there's no law against that

yes of course but I do know of posters who are put off posting due to a couple of posters and each topic seems to have one chilbirth has one, relationships, education, and usually they are big Stats fans don't know why! They love and cling to statistics and their posting style puts people off.
Thats the way it is, but it can also create echo chambers as your not getting the full opposing side ( in all these topics). No stifling of discussion at all, leavers as much as remainers are in the dark here its just we dont mind as much! But - there is not much discussion from certain quarters.

banking on Nissan closing down their factory in Sunderland to teach the low life Leavers from there a lesson

Well, it leaves a nasty taste in the mouth doesn't it.

This thread moves fast.

Winchester Woman Why would you say 'anti immigrant'. It's not even 'anti immigration.' More like 'anti mass uncontrolled immigration'. Are you in favour of mass uncontrolled immigration because I'm not.

I was referencing recent comments from the Conservative party, in particular Amber Rudd's suggestion that there might be some listing and name and shame of companies that employ non-UK citizens. Thankfully that seems to be been shelved but I think that counts as anti-immigrant.

I also don't think you can neatly separate immigration from the individual immigrant, any more than you can entirely depersonalise being female, gay, black or anything else.

Mass uncontrolled immigration is not something that we have or were facing. It is a straw man. It appears to be pretty settled that areas with the highest levels of immigration in the country voted Remain, and areas with low immigration (but high fear of "mass uncontrolled immigration") voted Leave. My personal experience, living and working with mostly UK but also some non-UK citizens, is that both add similarly to the economy and UK society, and that one is not better than the other.

Are you also not in favour of the state intervening in the market with subsidy or whatever. Is that something you disapprove of.

I think if a subsidy, or anything else, is being given we should be told what it is. I wonder why there is such a lack of transparency.

Since we are still in the EU, I imagine that nothing is being given at the moment. I wonder how enforceable promises are?

banking on Nissan closing down their factory in Sunderland to teach the low life Leavers from there a lesson

Well, it leaves a nasty taste in the mouth doesn't it.

It does if you phrase it like that autumn however no one did.

My point and others on previous threads is that if Brexit is going to cost people personally whether that be financially or emotional or whatever, their views on whether its s good idea are very likely to change.

Given the lack of reasoned arguments for Brexit, ie very few people have a 'goal' in mind, adverse affects will have an impact on opinion.

I don't really understand what you're saying Bearbehind - are you saying you want people to suffer so they'll realise voting leave was a bad idea?

As ever you miss the point surfer, I'm saying if they do suffer they'll think it's a bad idea.

There is a big difference between wishing it on people and thinking it will happen.

But you don't mind a subsidy?

It's not a straw man. It is uncontrolled.

Your maths don't stack up Winchester. They're not plausible because there's not infinite people on the planet.

Something with a control on it is cannot be uncontrolled. It could be further controlled but it is not uncontrolled.

They do add up, unless you are saying immigration is controlled by the fact there are only 300 million odd people in the Eu

To be fair, there is a limited amount of immigration which can come from RoI - I think they only have a population of 5 or 6 million. Now, the Indian sub-continent would be a different matter, and I believe their government was talking about wanting visa free access in return for a trade deal.

I think it's fine to use public money to fund R&D or provide targeted grants for small businesses/certain sectors.

I think there are obvious problems in granting a subsidy to one large foreign corporate body and not to others.

peregrina

Thats the bit i dont get, so in the EU we had free movement in return for trade etc

So now if we want trade with india and Australia and france for example they could all say no trade without free movement

Is that right? In theory anyway as i know that it would be negotiated

Immigration is not only, or even mainly, a matter of rules and policy. The primary driving forces behind immigration (and emigration) lie elsewhere.

I think we are only truly likely to see the mass immigration you fear in this country in case of a war or a natural disaster which would see people fleeing for their lives. Rules in such a situation would have some, but still a limited, effect.

At the moment, I think that immigration is most effectively controlled economically and socially. We only allow open immigration from other EU countries which are not vastly poorer than us, and normal social and economic forces (e.g. desire to stay near family, preference for own culture etc) effectively prevent mass immigration.