Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Brexit

How will you vote in the EU referendum-Leave or Stay?

1001 replies

BritBrit · 25/04/2016 14:05

How will you be voting? Can admin add a poll?

OP posts:
OnlyLovers · 01/05/2016 16:34

I'ts brilliant the way you two nearly always post identical views at nearly the same time

Confused

What are you talking about? 'always'? 'Always' in what timeframe? I'm really not sure what your point is.

lurked101 · 01/05/2016 16:36

EU migrants are net tax contributors and less represented on the jsa head count than their size of the workforce.

Not sure you can make the capitalism arguments when most economic predictions are fairly bleak, and the vast majority of British firms want to stay in.

PortiaCastis · 01/05/2016 16:40

A lot of EU migrants don't earn enough to pay tax i.e car cleaners fruit pickers

STIDW · 01/05/2016 16:40

^Controlling EU migration alone is going to save billions.

I've no desire to enter into an argument over this - I can't convince you and you can't convince me.^

Is controlling EU migration really going to save billions though?

Many recent EU migrants are young and skilled. We don’t pay much for their education, they normally arrive after being educated. Since most of them are working age, we don’t pay much for their pensions or health care either. Many eventually return home.

We may actually need EU migrants to contribute to our taxes to financially support our increasingly ageing population & the services they need.

As Boris Johnson said in 2013 “We need to help our young – not beat up on Johnny Foreigner.”

www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/property/10392577/Its-mad-to-blame-our-housing-crisis-on-blooming-foreigners.html

According to independent analysis examining the claims leaving the EU wont necessarily reduce immigration by very much;

  1. "Leaving the EU would not automatically lead to a large reduction in immigration, for two reasons.

If we wanted to continue to participate in the EU single market after leaving the EU then one obvious way to do so would be for us to join Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein as members of the European Economic Area.

But free movement applies to EEA members, as it does to Switzerland, a non-EEA member with more limited single market access....

"So “controlling immigration” might require leaving the single market as well as the EU.

  1. "The end of free movement doesn’t necessarily mean a big drop in immigration

If free movement were to end, with or without single market access, this still wouldn’t automatically mean a large reduction in immigration.

Migration Watch estimates that applying broadly the same rules to EU migrants as non-EU ones at the moment might reduce net immigration by up to 100,000, from its current level of about 300,000.

However, it’s also been argued that leaving the EU could see higher levels of non-EU migration, which would partly offset any reduction.

It depends on what the government chooses to do with immigration policy if we were to leave the EU."

  1. "Immigrants and public services

There are about 3 million EU citizens currently living in the UK. The evidence suggests that impacts on jobs and wages have been small, and are most likely to affect lower-skilled workers.

Recently arrived EU immigrants pay more in tax than they consume in welfare or public services, so they benefit the public finances.

The impact on public services is difficult to measure with certainty. Immigrants may add to demand for and pressure on public services, but also contribute to financing and providing those services, particularly in the NHS.

Impacts are likely to vary by local area. However, research shows that higher levels of immigration are not associated, at a local level, with longer NHS waiting times.

And in schools, increased numbers of pupils with English as a second language doesn't have any negative impact on levels of achievement for native English speaking students. If anything, pupils in schools with lots of non-native speakers do slightly better."

fullfact.org/europe/immigration-eu-referendum/

I don''t have a fixed view. If new information comes to light I weigh up the pros & cons & re-evaluate decisions.

lurked101 · 01/05/2016 16:48

Thanhs for that!

Limer · 01/05/2016 16:50

EU migrants have displaced the native UK population from many jobs. So does their net contribution also factor in the cost of the benefits to support the workless locals?

I predict the next point - the EU migrants are doing the jobs that the UK locals won't do. Agreed. So make those jobs worth doing, pay more, improve conditions. But the bosses want to keep costs down and wages low. It's only since the flooding of the market with EU migrants that we've seen the likes of zero-hours contracts. Classic supply and demand. If the available pool of labour was smaller, wages would have to rise.

lurked101 · 01/05/2016 16:51

A study by ucl showed that even if you were to send EU migrants home and not allow more in, the effect on public services would be negative because the fall in demand would not be great enough to make up for the fall in tax revenue and therefore funding.

OnlyLovers · 01/05/2016 16:56

STIDW has posted a link to a report stating that there is 'little evidence of overall adverse effects of immigration on wages and employment for people born in the UK.'

I'd be interested in seeing evidence to the contrary: that EU migrants DO displace existing UK population from jobs, rather than taking the jobs that are otherwise unfilled.

lurked101 · 01/05/2016 17:03

Let's be honest if someone whose second language is English is displacing you from a low skilled job, you weren't trying lol

Limer · 01/05/2016 17:12

I don't find it funny that UK locals are being beaten to jobs by cleverer multi-lingual EU migrants. The poor sods don't stand a chance, do they.

lurked101 · 01/05/2016 17:15

Or aren't making the effort.

STIDW · 01/05/2016 17:17

But UK unemployment is relatively low & about the same it was 10/20 years ago.

SpringingIntoAction · 01/05/2016 17:40

Dear, dear there's some awful nonsense being posted on this thread.

Time and time again we get the same nonsense (usually accompanied by an EU-funded report).

A report is only as good or unbiased as the data it has to work with or the data it decides to include.

I say that for the reports produced by the LEAVE side as equally as those produced by the REMAIN side.

  • EU migrants make a net contribution to the EU (some do, some don't)
  • it's the old that are causing hospital care shortage (the 360,000 extra people arriving each year and needing medical care never go near hospitals don'tcha know)

-the NHS would collapse with EU migrants (doubt it as they are only around 10% and the REMAIN team obviously think there must be lots of spare capacity in the NHS anyway as they claim the 336,000 has no additional impact)

-migrants lower hospital waiting lists (of course they do)

Bin all that cack ^^^^

Use your eyes!

The EU migrant in a minimum wage job with a wife and 2 school age children IS NOT a net contributor to UK economy. Hundreds of his fellow migrants may be - but that family is not. Unfortunately the UK cannot be selective and has to admit the EU migrant families are are also a et drain on the economy when it admits the others that are not.

A town or city that is accepts more unplanned migration that its infrastructure can cope with is a miserable place to live, for the residents who have been living there for many years and for the new arrivals.

Immigration - when people from throughout the world bring the skills to the UK that the country needs is immigration that is beneficial to our country.

Uncontrolled EU migration into the UK that brings only those from a limited number of European countries to do many low-paid, low-skilled jobs may stimulate the economy by their sheer presence but may, in the long term, create more problems than we had ever envisaged, as they too age and become a drain on the country.

What then, import more people in an endless Ponzi scheme?

Anyway, the whole reason for leaving is to regain sovereignty. That's the big issue - this incessant immigration thing is just a side-show that arises when you have lost your sovereignty.

lurked101 · 01/05/2016 17:49

What a load of crap. Use your eyes not what independent studies tell you about the broader picture.

SpringingIntoAction · 01/05/2016 17:54

What a load of crap.

Back on form again today Lurked.

OnlyLovers · 01/05/2016 17:55

Springing, you offer anecdote and opinion.
Can you offer some evidence to support your views?

lurked101 · 01/05/2016 17:55

Still infinitely better than your shoddy arguments. Where is the project fear in bold type today?

SpringingIntoAction · 01/05/2016 17:56

The EU migrant in a minimum wage job with a wife and 2 school age children IS NOT a net contributor to UK economy.

Been waiting for about 3 weeks now for an explanation as to how this worker is a net contributor to the Uk economy.

MangoMoon · 01/05/2016 17:57

Lurked101 & OnlyLovers:

How will you vote in the EU referendum-Leave or Stay?
SpringingIntoAction · 01/05/2016 18:00

You REMAINers are very touchy today. It's not nice to call other posters views 'crap' or 'shoddy'.

The EU doesn't tend to fund a lot of reports into how bad it is for a country.

Anyway, the data that the reports are based on may be incomplete as Cameron is till withholding data - (doesnt want to frighten the horses this side of the referendum)

Anyway, this is a discussion forum, not a link-posting competition.

Try the puzzle I set some time ago - the one about the EU migrant on minimum wage with 2 school age children being a net contributor to the economy.

lurked101 · 01/05/2016 18:07

Yes cause all of the reports backing staying in the EU are paid for by the EU and therefore biased... only when it doesnt suit your argument.

SpringingIntoAction · 01/05/2016 18:17

Plenty also backing Brexit.

Celebrated playwright George Bernard Shaw once famously quipped: "If all economists were laid end to end, they would not reach a conclusion."

Some say in - some say out.

Some are produced by institutions that receive considerable amounts of EU funding - some are not.

Some are produced by the same economists who said we should join the Euro - some are not.

The only thing you can be sure of is that very few of them will eventually be proved to be right.

If economists were right all the time we would have avoided the banking collapse and global recession - not many predicted that.

If the economists who urged us to join the Euro had persuaded the Government to do so - we would be in a shit state by now.

When you speak to ordinary people, it's the not economy that bothers them. It's the sheer thought of chuntering along forever and ever, as we currently are, in a land of declining wages and rising house prices, where their graduate kids can't find a well-paid job and cannot afford an affordable home.

They want a change . They want a Government that actually governs in the interests of the British people They are sick of being told what we can / not do by an undemocratic EU. They want change. They don't even care if they do have to take some short-term pain. They want the whole system tossed up and set down down again.

A4Document · 01/05/2016 18:35

why else would there be so much backing for remain amongst the UK industries which have been stated above.

Quotes from an article by Daniel Hannan: Britain's obsolescent conglomerates are backing remain

"The divergence of interest between large and small businesses is critical to the Brexit debate. Here are two key figures to bear in mind. First, twice as many people work for SMEs" (small and medium-sized enterprises) "as for big companies. Second, only 6 per cent of all UK firms do any business with the EU – but 100 per cent of them must apply 100 per cent of EU regulations".

"Amount spent on lobbying in the first six months of 2015

1 Microsoft Corporation 4,500,000
2 Shell Companies 4,500,000
3 ExxonMobil Petroleum & Chemical 4,500,000
4 Deutsche Bank AG 3,962,000
5 Dow Europe GmbH 3,750,000
6 Google 3,500,000
7 General Electric Company (GE) 3,250,000
8 Siemens AG 3,230,169
9 Huawei Technologies 3,000,000
10 BP 2,500,000
Source: Transparency International

There’s a reason they’re prepared to shell out so much. The 36 FTSE-100 companies that signed a pro-EU letter in The Times last month spent €21.3 million lobbying the EU; they got back €120.9 million in grants from Brussels. Hard to argue with a 600 per cent return on investment."

SpringingIntoAction · 01/05/2016 18:50

A4Document is right - these big corporations are spending those vast amounts on lobbying Brussels because they can get the laws they want from the EU.

Here's one for the Guardianistas, pointing out the scale of the lobbying that is going on in Brussels. 30,000 lobbyists.

www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/08/lobbyists-european-parliament-brussels-corporate

Companies don't spend that sort of money lobbying without effect.

The same companies that want you to REMAIN in the EU and who are funding the REMAIN campaign.

They are not on the side of the working man.

Vote REMAIN - be 'owned' and farmed by Big Corpa.

SpringingIntoAction · 01/05/2016 18:52

Almost worth starting a new thread A4Document on whether the Big Corpa lobbysits are manipulating us as well as the EU.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.