So the good times are about to roll....are they?

[herethereandeverywhere]

I wanted to ask on another thread, but they are all bunfight-y.

I am a remainer so I feel very depressed about today. I would like some reassurance from brexiters about what I have to look forwards to.

I'm afraid 'taking back control' isn't clear enough to me, so an explanation of what will be different if that's the theme you will go for.

So far, since the vote, my family has lost £10,000s and my husband's current job/role has been placed in jeopardy. I have probably lost the ability to automatically continue to work in an EU country in under 2 years time (I currently live in Germany, though this was intended to be temporary). I have dear friends relocating out of London since the banks are shifting jobs due to Brexit so I'm not sure who I would be moving back to. My house is worth less and I'm less likely to be able to sell it if I do want to move. I'll need to get the kids Irish passports if I want them to benefit from the EU.

So cheer me up - we're set for a brighter future aren't we? What can I look forwards to?

Times are changing fast, and we need a political system which is adaptable and flexible and responsive to people's opinions. We don't get this in the EU.

You don't get it with Westminster either. Try writing to your MP and see how much notice gets taken of your views.

As for 70% of people wanting control of immigration - we have only had E European immigration for just over 10 years now. So convince me that those who are so against immigration were not concerned 20 years ago. If so, the chances are it was black, brown, Jews, Irish - whatever community came over in a sudden influx and tended to live together. Live together in part because of a lack of acceptance by the wider community.

Release No if you look properly we have said that if the argument re immigration IS NOT AN ECONOMIC ONE and instead is political it is therefore a racist one

Contradict if you wish. Being afraid of losing jobs = economic. Concern over resources = economic. Because you politically don't like them = racist

So convince me that those who are so against immigration were not concerned 20 years ago

Well, firstly I don't think there are many people who are "against immigration". I think people are concerned about the amount of immigration and the lack of control which FOM entails. Secondly I'm sure some were, but not the majority.

Chapter 1 of

www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/uk-public-opinion-toward-immigration-overall-attitudes-and-level-of-concern/

Figure 1 of

www.ipsos-mori.com/DownloadPublication/1634_sri-perceptions-and-reality-immigration-report-2013.pdf

You don't get it with Westminster either. Try writing to your MP and see how much notice gets taken of your views.

I got a written reply from my white male conservative MP regarding a concern about benefits within a week.
He forwarded my concerns to Caroline Noakes.

Yep. I have tried it. I was happy with my response.

But carry on. Do. Call me a remainer and speak for all leavers etc. Tell me that I believe all leavers are racist. Some are.

And then ask me if I believe any remainers are racists. Actually some are.

Deflection from facts has been going on now for a year and no doubt it will continue

Anyho

Back to the benefits!

Oh I have one. As I am from immigrant stock I have got off ,my arse and applied for two more passports! Just in case. Just in case. If it's OK for Farage to fuck off if whenit all goes belly up I guess us immigrant types can shut the door behind us too

I disagree that it is not possible to have non-economic reasons to have concerns about the level of immigration. Interesting language you are using. "Don't like them"

Some interesting reading. Haven't read this in detail yet and I'm not sure if it makes sense or is barmy old cack.

policyexchange.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Racial-Self-Interest-is-not-Racism-FINAL.pdf

JC being a nasty racist:

www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/jeremy-corbyn-its-not-racist-for-people-to-feel-concerned-about-immigration-a3262021.html

But carry on. Do. Call me a remainer and speak for all leavers etc. Tell me that I believe all leavers are racist. Some are.

Do you object to being called a remainer? if so I apologise, I have never come across anyone who objects before. Most leavers and remainers refer to themselves that way, it is useful short hand. Is "people who voted leave" okay?

I'm not speaking for all leavers, I'm speaking for myself.

I didn't say you said all leavers were racist, I said you were equating concerns about immigration with racism.

Deflection from facts has been going on now for a year and no doubt it will continue

Indeed

'Don't like them'? Not sure what you mean

Explain a pure political reason, which doesn't have any economic impact which is not a racist one. Am all ears. Quoting JC won't help tho as he has protected more than one anti-semite.

I'll help. One could say that concerns about impact on culture etc could be political however they are more visceral. And you know where that leads and I really don't think most people cognitively weigh up whether they are thinking about immigration in a tribal visceral way. I suspect it is far far less nuanced than that. So then we get to is it because they are taking my jobs (economic) or I don't like them (racial).

After all this is EU immigration - mainly white immigration we are talking about here. Non EU immigration is not under discussion

'Don't like them'? Not sure what you mean

What I mean is that you seem to be implying that concern about immigration levels is about people "not liking" immigrants. I really don't think that is the case.

An example would be in my area which is quite rural, due to the increasing need for housing to house the increasing population, much of which is due to immigration, intersecting with government policy which makes it very difficult for the local authority to refuse planning permission, there are large numbers of planning applications for large housing developments which will substantially change the nature of the area, in a way which most people are not happy about. Small villages will become small villages with a housing estate attached, or will merge with the towns. People live here because they want to live in a rural area. Continued high levels of immigration will change this, very quickly.

If you are minded to say this is the fault of the government policy - well yes partly, but the gov policy is because if we have high immigration, we need to build more houses and they have got to be built somewhere.

If you, or anyone, are minded to say, oh, I see, you are just unhappy about the Portugese families moving into the new estate down the road (as I was told last time I used this example), then you have not understood what I am saying. It is about numbers.

Right as I have said already. Resources = economic reason

You have just agreed with me. Thank you

Don't expect replies from Nicola Blackwood MP - she always had a poor reputation for replying to letters, but now she appears to have given up altogether. She also refused to offer me an appointment for a surgery. I wouldn't have minded waiting for a while, but no, no dice.

My area has lots of small villages ringed with housing estates. This is Government policy and has been going on for 40 odd years. It's not driven by immigration, but by pressure on housing because jobs are in the south east.

How do you now the housing need is due to immigrants? What about our increasingly elderly population? The longer people live, the longer they stay in their houses for, driving up the need for new housing. i have lived in a few villages around the uk and they have all had a far larger population of elderly, retired people than young families (who often can't afford the houses that are lived in by a single elderly person). This is a really big problem and I'm not sure how you solve it, but I'm pretty sure that driving working age people that contribute to the economy out of the country is not the way to do it......

Not blaming the elderly, btw. It's not their fault that successive governments have failed to respond to increased life expectancy (see pensions policy for this!).

Right as I have said already. Resources = economic reason

How is building on greenfield land and the changing landscape of villages and rural areas an "economic reason"? Please clarify. I agree it is a resource issue - land - but it is not one which can be solved by a different economic policy.

If you are still saying it is economic - what is the relevance of that to your argument?

Also, I'm getting a bit confused here. Are you saying it is okay, and not necessarily racist, to talk about economic concerns regarding immigration, but not okay to talk about non-economic concerns because in your view there are no non-racist non-economic concerns?

On immigration there has been a lot of emphasis on small communities drowned out by influxes of immigrants as you outlined Release

Just how many people are actually affected though? I know lots of leavers in the north who were putting forwards the examples of doctor's surgeries and schools in Lincolnshire but it wasn't personal experience, it came from the Daily Mail. They live in either comfortable middle class villages in rural areas or in cities that have had high levels of immigration for hundreds of years, and fully functioning multi cultural communities that have been absorbing Eastern European immigrants for decades, but where the decline of manufacturing industries under successive governments have taken an economic toll.

On the other hand in my community we are becoming increasingly concerned about how our services will be supported now that EU immigrants are feeling deterred. My FIL is in a Care Home where 90% of the staff are from overseas and the hospital ward he has just been discharged from was staffed by a Spanish staff nurse and a Philippine health assistant. The hospitality industry, hotels, restaurants etc. all report that they rarely have a British candidate. We have neighbours who work in the services industries, the science research facility up the road, and international development who have left or are leaving......

It is a matter of perspective isn't it? For every community under strain as a result of immigration is there another that will be under strain without it, or as studies show, actually a lot more communities that will be under strain without it, together with the tax receipts

And al because the Daily Mail and government made EU immigration the scapegoat for widening inequality.....

How do you now the housing need is due to immigrants?

A friend has done a lot of work on the figures for the population of the area, population growth, housing need etc etc and it is clear that the majority of the growth in housing demand is due to immigration. Smaller household sizes, second homes, etc all have an effect too of course. But clearly, if there is a large net migration to the UK, the demand for houses will increase. I find it hard to see how this cannot be the case.

Of course it is not necessarily the case that the actual houses being built here will be occupied by immigrants (they might, they might not) - the situation is more complicated than that with people immigrating to the UK, and other people moving around the country, out of London etc etc. But in general, if the population increases, the demand for houses increases.

On immigration there has been a lot of emphasis on small communities drowned out by influxes of immigrants as you outlined Release

Need to go out, so will reply more later, but just to be clear ron, this is not the situation I am talking about. I am specifically talking about house building for an increased population, see above, not who will live in these new houses.

Name change fail ^ is me

Just popping in to wave to releasethebats. Lovely to hear a kindred spirit. Always welcome for tea and cake at the Brexit Arms [tea]

House building shortfall = 200k per year for last 10 years.

Immigration target overshoot = 200k per year for last 10 years.

I started adult life believing in absolutely no immigration controls (in a perfect World all countries help each other so people spread themselves out to match resources). Even I can see that it is not racist to suggest not accepting the right of 500 million Europeans to come and join the 65 million of us already on our small island. My kids are friends with the whole street, but everyone goes home to their own house at bedtime.

Ditto if the population doesn't die, though. I think the problems with housing are complex and to try and argue that it is all down to immigration is a massive oversimplification. Especially when you consider that the housing situation differs considerably depending on where you live in the country. It's as much to do with right to buy/sell off of council stock, propping up of the housing market by successive governments so that people view housing as investment, lack of house building, white flight from cities (you'd have no problem buying a house on a single income in Bradford, for example). Pinning all of your hopes on immigration whilst simultaneously taking a wrecking ball to the economy seems an awfully risky thing to do, to me. What if these problems aren't solved by a drop in immigration? What assurances do we have that they will be? And if we don't have firm assurances then isn't this a hell of a big leap in the dark?

I think you can recognise it isn't the only reason but there are two aspects to this: firstly, that just because it isn't the only reason that isn't to me a sufficient reason to ignore altogether, and secondly, short of euthaniasia and controlling the birth rate, immigration is the only thing we DO have control over.

It isn't good enough to say 'well, elderly people are living a longer and people are having 3/4/5 children, so we should be encouraging high immigration levels.' If anything, it's a reason why we shouldn't.

So if we succeed in reducing immigration and the ratio of retirees to working age population moves yet further in favour of the retirees, how are we planning to pay for their pensions and healthcare?

The thread has moved on a lot whilst I've been at work but having skimmed through, I see a lot of reasons for voting Leave and still no benefits to doing so.

I notice that Remainers are labelled as liberal elites who don't care about the poor, yet those who claim this also blithely acknowledge that the economy will suffer greatly due to Brexit, but apparently this is worth the cost (why?) I suspect that it's the better-off who are able to weather a short-term decline in the economy whereas the poor will not have the resources to withstand this. But apparently it's Remainers who don't care about the poor...

armpitz I think the point is that is reducing immigration worth the economic cost of doing so? It's not a simple case of "reduce immigration, everything gets better". So why are we doing it? Is immigration really such a problem that it's worth trashing our economy for? A grown up government would have put the time and thought into how we can address ALL the problems this country faces rather than blaming everything on one issue and offering a simplistic, likely very harmful solution. When immigration reduces we will still have the other problems you mention, but because of the cost of Brexit and the loss of workforce, we will have neither the skills nor the finances to address them.