The Brexit Arms. Please drink ( & post ) responsibly.

[surferjet]

Mango is right. All stereotying is wrong and unhelpful and it has happened on both sides. But the vitriol to leavers (on MN but also in the Guardian, btl on the Guardian, on Facebook etc) has been hideous and I do honestly think on a different scale of offensiveness to calling someone "elite" or "liberal" or even "smug".

All of that went on in the opposite direction though too, both in the btl comments in the mail and guardian, and in the other place I post. There was also lots of traitors and other nasty derogatory language used other than liberal.

I have seen, and stood up to some nasty racism on here, but not on any of the EU threads i've posted on.

btw, i've read a lot today. Having teens at xmas is rather dull, they get up late and then are room dwellers. both daughters are at a party tonight, which i suspect is actually the pub but an attempt for the 19 yo to take the 16 yo old out with her.

Wrong to turn a blind eye?

I'm confused. Your daughters have said they are going to a party but you think they've both gone to the pub together?

Yup.. I'm sure the 16 year old is being taken out with the older ones friends, cause I'm also sure that I have heard about a party that the youngest had planned to go to for weeks in advance.

Pretty much confirmed by them being a very giggly and singing as they came up the street.

No uber suggests no party and that they've actually been to the High Road pubs instead.

Think I might hoover the landing at 7 am

again that assumption that people voted the way they did because of empty promises (and them being so stupid and desperate as to vote for their own demise). that is part of the contempt.

it is so hard to see that they voted leave because they do not want to be in europe? that they voted for political and ideological reasons that they place value in and stand by (despite the onslaught of abuse) and that they might have consistent political beliefs and ideals?

sheesh.

here's a simple one for example - some people do not believe in centralisation of power even at the national level let alone at the superstate level.

or some people do not believe in free movement in a superstate where massive inequities between wages and benefits exist. that some people, scoff and sneer as you might, genuinely believe in a nation putting it's own interests and that of it's citizens first.

that some people believe that cheaply importing already skilled labour leads directly to ceasing to train our own youth re: the nhs bursaries are taken away meaning any british youngster who would like to be a nurse, occupational therapist etc finds that now they will need to stump up 27k of fees and 3 years of rent and living expenses whilst being too busy on placements to work directly in order to gain access to in some cases a wage of less than 20k.

that some people note and believe untenable that young people who live in a society that charges them a fortune to qualify even for relatively low paid jobs cannot compete with youngsters living in countries where education is free and the cost of living is low.

that some people have seen wages really drop - forget minimum wage as a decoy look at the fact that people at the lower paid end of the spectrum could once (as i did as a youngster when trying to fund uni or deal with an in between year) increase their earnings by working evening shifts, nights or weekends for which they used to have pay a decent extra incentive. Now they don't have to because there is a labour force willing to work unsocial hours for minimum wage in skilled jobs.

A friend of mine for example sources security guards for various contracts and basically only employs non nationals because they pay minimum wage for a job that people have to pay to gain their own license for (literally they have to do the training and pay the fee themselves - around £300) and they work 12 hour overnight shifts on site. They need their own transport as these sites are all over the place, they are on zero hour contracts and have no fixed hours. That job a decade or two ago would have been a good source of income with premium rates for night shifts - a way of someone willing to work hard to be able to earn a decent wage. Not now. The only people who can afford to do it are those coming from a very different economy and willing to live 5 working adults to a house.

what people seem to fail to realise is how shit things already are at the bottom and how far pay and expectations have already been eroded. this crap of 'minimum wage means it's fine', 'local people are just too lazy/don't want to do these jobs' is nonsense.

FOM is a capitalists wet dream - people voting against it are doing quite the opposite of the 'turkeys voting for christmas' analogy. that in fact is what they were being asked to do.

gosh even if you people haven't done a proper on the ground job in decades you surely did as students and teens?

I fail to see how leaving the EU will help regarding wages and NHS burseries?

Surely having tariffs added to our exports will make them more expensive meaning that in order to compete wages will be driven down further? Tax revenue will be much lower if the banks and other businesses leave to be replaced by ones attracted to the UK (if there still is a united kingsom) by a low corporation tax regime?

I just see no end to austerity now with the dismantling of the NHS and lack of funds for schools, social care and other state provided investment.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/dec/27/taxpayers-cash-should-go-to-needy-ends-up-atos-capita?utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=GU+Today+main+NEW+H+categories&utm_term=206038&subid=18573163&CMP=EMCNEWEML6619I2

How austerity works in practice and why it isn't caused by and doesn't solve economic imbalances.

There are pluses and minuses to tariffs but worth bearing in mind that the UK is a net importer of goods and food and clothes would be a lot cheaper without EU external trade tariffs. Manufacturing is about 10% of UK GDP and agriculture is less than 1%.

I see it having the opposite effect. Changing tariffs and subsidies can and does have massive impacts, making companies more efficient, changing production focuses and stimulating industries. New Zealand farmers had a hideous shock when state subsidies ended abruptly (not something I am advocating) but now their businesses are booming and generating fantastic tax revenues and exports. The EU is a force for bad in our economy however painful cutting free is I believe we will be celebrating for years to come. The immediate aftermath has been good despite Remain projections and the medium and long term both look set to be better. I'm certainly not £4,700 worse off this year neither are any of my friends, family or extended family. Nor any colleagues.

you miss the point - they have seen the effect the eu project has had on them and the utter disregard there has been for their needs, wages, workers rights and conditions etc - they got a chance to say whether they want to be a part of it and the answer is no.

the turkeys have seen decades of christmas - when asked if they wanted to continue with the christmas project they said no.

they may not be sure how we undo the damage done by christmas but they are sure as hell not voting to continue it.

You weren't supposed to be 4,700 worse of this year, it was that if you used a CETA model for trade then each household would be 4,700 worse off by 2030.

"they have seen the effect the eu project has had on them and the utter disregard there has been for their needs, wages, workers rights and conditions etc - they got a chance to say whether they want to be a part of it and the answer is no."

But this isn't the case, the immigration has an extremely minimal effect on wages of the lowest paid ( and then only in areas where there is extremely large amounts of immigration), and actually causes wages in the middle and top to rise. It has no effect on unemployment of domestic nationals. ) 0 hours contracts etc are domestic policy not EU policy.

The really big impact on wages and job security in the last decade has been the financial crisis, many people took cuts in pay and hours, and were willing to put up with worsening conditions in order to stay in a job.

The skills shortages that we have now were prevalent before FOM occured and the training of domestic nationals.

I fail to see how leaving the EU will help regarding wages and NHS burseries?

If we stopped staffing the NHS by poaching trained staff from other (often less well off) countries, by the laws of supply and demand, we would need to make it attractive for people to train eg as nurses and so the conditions (fees, bursaries) would need to become more favourable. If the government failed to do this and the NHS started to collapse under staff shortages, we could vote in a government who would. Paying to train our own medical staff should not be beyond one of the wealthiest countries in the world.

that's it - just don't take on anything voiced and explained to you and repeat that everything is fine, there is no problem. that worked great didn't it? well unless you were actually hoping for a remain outcome.

ignore reality and keep chanting the grass is green, the grass is green. the idiots will eventually believe you?

weird.

But Darth and Infinite, what Honey is trying to say is that jobs that previously commanded a premium like working night shift no longer do as the employer can get people to work from the EU for minimum wage for these shifts. This affects security jobs, warehouse jobs and manufacturing. My father would work all hours god sends on nights and other unsociable hours to get overtime. This is now a thing of the past in many industries.

yep fairly obvious isn't it? if you weren't constantly poaching ready trained staff from other countries you would not be able to do something as vile as cancel all funding for the training of key nhs staff because you'd need people to be able to afford to qualify for the roles.

thank you corcory - i was fairly sure i was speaking english but beginning to doubt my sanity.

minimum wage should mean the absolute minimum ever paid re: social hours, no qualifications or licenses required, not requiring your own transport or the purchasing of equipment etc etc.

minimum wage jobs now expect people to work unsocial hours, have qualifications, have minimum of three years experience, have their own car etc - that is madness.

it's easy to say wages aren't effected if you're just saying look they pay minimum wage what's the problem? the point is that jobs that were not minimum wage now are and the requirements for getting a minimum wage job are out of reach of the youngest or poorest people.

But this isn't the case, the immigration has an extremely minimal effect on wages of the lowest paid ( and then only in areas where there is extremely large amounts of immigration), and actually causes wages in the middle and top to rise

This is stated over and over again. Where is the evidence - is it just that one Bank of England study? And if people's experience is that this is not the case (I have heard countless examples on here of jobs which were relatively well paid and secure now being poorly paid with crap conditions and being done by EU nationals) are all these people imagining what they see before their eyes? Or is it possible that the research was flawed and perhaps, only looked at certain industries or types of jobs or locations? It's not rocket science is it, that if a business can get someone to work for less than a person would need for a basic standard of living in this country, that some will and that this will drive down wages and conditions. Why have working conditions improved in this country since Victorian times? Because people have collectively fought for better conditions, often using the threat of withdrawing their labour. Now there is always someone who will take a lower wage (because that wage is high compared to what they could earn in their own country) so un and low-skilled wages and conditions are going backwards.

You weren't supposed to be 4,700 worse of this year, it was that if you used a CETA model for trade then each household would be 4,700 worse off by 2030

I think this is interesting. All economics is based on models. The economist chooses what to put in the model and what not. I'm reading "Signals" by Pippa Malgrem and it has some interesting quotes in about how you set up your economic model using things you are able to measure, and leaving out things that you can't measure. But the problems then start to arise when you either say - well, it's not in my model so it's not important, or even - well, it's not in my model so it doesn't exist.

I think that is what's been going on. People can see before their eyes where the country and EU are headed. But the "models" and "facts" have all been selected to ignore anything which doesn't fit the answer required. But people know what they see is happening.

The £4,300 is based on such a trite economic model it's laughable. It is a mean figure, and would only be relevant if we shared the country's wealth out equally, which, great though I think that would be, we don't.

that will be based on some ridiculous model including buying all sorts of goods and services that many people haven't been able to afford for years. maybe people with incomes of 50k who buy and use tons of luxury items/services may possibly by the reckonings of some model be worse off by that amount. people at the bottom will not be. they couldn't be. they'd be on the streets if they shaved 4,700 off.

fois gras will go up by 10% - the horror! a bmw will cost £500 more - shock! how will we survive?

In the context of forecasts has everyone seen Gove and Flanders on experts.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38408686

Flanders blithely ignoring that OBR forecasts by definition do not take account of political likelihoods (and are therefore still based on Osborne statements in the absence of a Brexit plan) and Gove completely agreeing with respect for expertise while asserting the supremacy of Parliamentarians and their right to radically challenge.