Current Affairs EU In or Out

[Seathestars]

What did they say?

That you drink in the G bar

 

[davmaher]

Utter codswallop. It's been said over and over, the places where migrants are overwhelmingly living and working is the cities, and the cities voted overwhelmingly to remain in the EU. It's the rural areas and small towns where very few migrants live and work that wanted to leave. Places like Cowboy's town, which has roughly 99% British born residents, yet was one of the strongest voters to leave.

From the Daily Fail:

Migrant populations are not moving to cities per se, they are moving to places where there are jobs. In a lot of instances these are the cities but you also have examples such as Boston in Lincolnshire, which has had a significant influx of migrants (because there are jobs) but is not a city.
Towns such as Boston, until fairly recently, have had no real experience of changes such as this in their demographics, but have seen migrant numbers increase dramatically in a relatively short time. Cities have seen migrants arrive steadily over a long period of time and are probably more comfortable with that as it is no different from what they have seen before.

 

[Seathestars]

It seems as though people are beginning to see who played a major part in Brexit......

"ONE of Germany’s leading business figures has launched a scathing attack on “childish” Chancellor Angela Merkel and Brussels bureaucrats over their behaviour towards Brexit Britain.

Hans-Olaf Henkel, the former President of the Federation of German Industries (BDI), has called on them to grow up and strike a free trade deal with Britain.

Mr Henkel, who is one of the most respected business and political figures in his country and is now a Member of the European Parliament, has said a way needs to be found to allow the UK to stay as members of the common market and trade freely without free movement of people.

And in a furious attack on Mrs Merkel, he said she would go down in history as the politician who created Brexit for blocking a fair deal on border controls for David Cameron and opening the floodgates to immigrants from the Middle East and North Africa.

The hardline approach and threat of tariffs has, according to Mr Henkel, left many business people in Germany “very concerned” because they believe tariffs will hurt them even more than UK.

Mr Henkel described the behaviour of Mrs Merkel and European Commission President Jean Claude Juncker as “childish and counterproductive”.

He said: “It is childish because it is obviously a psychological reaction to the vote of the British people and they didn’t expect it, they didn’t like it and they want to punish Britain for a psychological reason rather than a logical reason.

“It’s counterproductive because it will strengthen those people who think that Juncker, Merkel and other people are for even closer European Union and by doing this they will foster rightwing populist movements.”

And raising concerns about the prospect of a trade war with Britain, he said: “It is certainly bad for Germany no question.

“Now that the British people have decided we have to make the best out of it. If we have a hard Brexit, I would remind Frau Merkel that Germany is an exporting country and thousands of jobs depends on exports and one of our largest customers is the UK.

“So if we slam duties on British exports then the UK will slam duties on German exports going to Britain. So neither side is going to benefit from that kind of approach.”

He went on: “They [businesses] are concerned and I think rightly so and I don’t think Frau Merkel is helping. One in four jobs in Germany depends on exports and the UK is one of our largest markets.”

He called on Mrs May to approach the BDI - the German version of the CBI - for support because “they are Britain’s natural allies in this.”

On what should happen, he said: “I think we should offer Britain a clear membership of the common market to trade freely without free movement.

“The idea that free movement is a prerequisite of free trade is ridiculous. Other countries and regions are allowed free trade without free movement.”

He pointed out that a free trade deal deal with Canada has just been struck by the EU “which does not include free movement.”

He also vented his fury over the way Mrs Merkel handled the so-called refugee crisis when she opened the floodgates and allowed in more than a million immigrants into Germany.

He said: “Frau Merkel’s refugee policy was the final nail in the coffin which pushed Britain to Brexit.

It went like this: First story is she let in one million refugees, second story she lets them settle in Germany, story three she will give them passports, story four they will be all be able to come to London.

“Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson told those stories and I think it made the difference as do a lot of the British MEPs I speak to.”

Mr Henkel claimed that Mr Juncker and Mrs Merkel 'pushed Britain out of the EU'
He also warned that with Marine Le Penn making gains in France and Alternative for Germany (AFD) on the rise in his country, that Mrs Merkel has unleashed a new wave of far right politicsa on the continent.

With the main German election next year he noted: “Support for Merkel’s party has shrunk

“AFD - which I resigned from after it was infiltrated by racists - had almost disappeared and now it is back as a force and will get over the five per cent threshold [needed for representation in the German Bundestag].”

He also said that federalists in Brussels in Berlin like Mr Juncker and Mrs Merkel “pushed Britain out of the EU.”

He lashed out over Mrs Merkel refusing to give way on freedom of movement of people when Mr Cameron had tried to renegotiate Britain’s membership and he contrasted it with the way she allowed the rules on movement of money to be ditched to save the euro in Greece.

He said: “If she had been as generous to Cameron on stopping free movement of people as she was to Greece on stopping free movement of capital then Britain would have probably voted to stay.

“When history is written people will say that Frau Merkel was responsible for Brexit.”

Wowzer, he didn't hold back.

The EU needs to be really careful I think, if they treat us badly the rest of Europe will take note, people are not stupid and they listen to what Juncker and the like say.

I believe we have the upper hand and the EU knows it, although I agree with this guy, they need to grow up and behave like adults, both sides.

 

[Old Blue 2]

Right, so you don't find it relevant that the people complaining about migrants barely know any, whilst those that are surrounded by them don't complain about them?

No Bruce, you are fixated on cities, cities, cities, and put it forward continually as the be-all-and-end-all to your arguments (yes arguments) concerning the reason to stay in the EU.

Pathetic Bruce. There is life in every country outside of cities!

And I stand by my comment that your constant mantra of 'cities' is now utterly boring...

Oh, and give me your statistics and sources of information to back up fully the contention you have made regarding migrants. You're just spouting your own propaganda once again, with no foundation in fact.

 

[Bluser]

That you drink in the G bar

And? I find it convivial and full of like minded individuals

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Migrant populations are not moving to cities per se, they are moving to places where there are jobs. In a lot of instances these are the cities but you also have examples such as Boston in Lincolnshire, which has had a significant influx of migrants (because there are jobs) but is not a city.
Towns such as Boston, until fairly recently, have had no real experience of changes such as this in their demographics, but have seen migrant numbers increase dramatically in a relatively short time. Cities have seen migrants arrive steadily over a long period of time and are probably more comfortable with that as it is no different from what they have seen before.

I don't doubt that Boston has had significant changes, but a few questions remain. Firstly, is this common everywhere, as the map I posted earlier still suggests that the vast majority of migrants live in large cities. Secondly, is the 'problem' in towns like Boston a rise in population or a rise in population from certain places? They require different solutions as they're different problems.

 

[Joey66]

No Bruce, you are fixated on cities, cities, cities, and put it forward continually as the be-all-and-end-all to your arguments (yes arguments) concerning the reason to stay in the EU.

Pathetic Bruce. There is life in every country outside of cities!

And I stand by my comment that your constant mantra of 'cities' is now utterly boring...

Oh, and give me your statistics and sources of information to back up fully the contention you have made regarding migrants. You're just spouting your own propaganda once again, with no foundation in fact.

How dare you say that to Mr Googlelol
I have asked him this question now 5 times - can the UK sustain net immigration of 330,000 plus each year never answers me?

 

[Bruce Wayne]

No Bruce, you are fixated on cities, cities, cities, and put it forward continually as the be-all-and-end-all to your arguments (yes arguments) concerning the reason to stay in the EU.

Pathetic Bruce. There is life in every country outside of cities!

And I stand by my comment that your constant mantra of 'cities' is now utterly boring...

Oh, and give me your statistics and sources of information to back up fully the contention you have made regarding migrants. You're just spouting your own propaganda once again, with no foundation in fact.

Pathetic, really? There are literally too many sources to quote highlighting the huge role cities play in both the economic and scientific output of a country. There may be life outside of cities, but the cities are the engines of growth for this country.

From the mouth of the government themselves (and through the Foresight team the mouth of leading academics in this field in the UK) - https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/future-of-cities

"Cities matter to the UK. They are the concentrations of the UK’s population, trade, commerce, cultural and social life. They are also the sites where most of the UK’s future growth, both population and economic, is forecast to occur. The UK’s future is now closely linked to that of its cities."

 

[Bruce Wayne]

How dare you say that to Mr Googlelol
I have asked him this question now 5 times - can the UK sustain net immigration of 330,000 plus each year never answers me?

Yes it can Joe, and if you did some research of your own that didn't involve tabloid radio or television I'm sure you'd be able to answer your own questions.

 

[roydo]

suggests that the vast majority of migrants live in large cities.

Dont the vast majority of people live in cities anyrate?

but the cities are the engines of growth for this country

Aint many fish caught, fields ploughed, or cows raised in them though.

 

[Old Blue 2]

Pathetic, really? There are literally too many sources to quote highlighting the huge role cities play in both the economic and scientific output of a country. There may be life outside of cities, but the cities are the engines of growth for this country.

From the mouth of the government themselves (and through the Foresight team the mouth of leading academics in this field in the UK) - https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/future-of-cities

"Cities matter to the UK. They are the concentrations of the UK’s population, trade, commerce, cultural and social life. They are also the sites where most of the UK’s future growth, both population and economic, is forecast to occur. The UK’s future is now closely linked to that of its cities."

You dangle a carrot, and the donkey bites every time...

 

[The Esk]

How dare you say that to Mr Googlelol
I have asked him this question now 5 times - can the UK sustain net immigration of 330,000 plus each year never answers me?

this question has been answered on numerous occasions, usually directly to you asking Joey.

Yes it can, not only that it benefits from that immigration. The increase in public service provision has to be met by Government though, and they make the political decision not to provide the increase in resources necessary to support the increase in population generally and locally, then have the audacity to blame the immigrants for causing the problem.

 

[davmaher]

I don't doubt that Boston has had significant changes, but a few questions remain. Firstly, is this common everywhere, as the map I posted earlier still suggests that the vast majority of migrants live in large cities. Secondly, is the 'problem' in towns like Boston a rise in population or a rise in population from certain places? They require different solutions as they're different problems.

As I said, migrants will go where the jobs are - if they are in cities (which they tend to be because of their size) they will go there. If they are in places like Boston they will go there. So asking "is this typical" isn't really relevant in relation to cities or country but is relevant to job availability. I know someone who lives close to Boston and he says he voted Leave because the population has increased, putting strain on services. The fact that the increase was due to migrant labour was secondary for him, but the link is still there. In some ways you could argue that Boston is booming, employment is high, house prices are increasing etc. but the locals are desperately unhappy.
Regarding your cities vs. country/towns point, I'm always wary of sweeping generalisations as reality is usually more nuanced than this. Cities such as Birmingham, Derby, Bradford, Hull and Sheffield all voted to leave so giving the impression that the cities overall voted a particular way is misleading. Most of these also have a fairly long history of inward migration.
I voted Remain, by the way, but have found it very difficult listening and reading some of the comments here and elsewhere since we left. No doubt at some point there will be a more detailed and impartial analysis of what went on and why but up to now all that seems to be happening is that people grab onto any tenuous piece of information and try to use it to defend their own position. Often they use the same bit of information and draw opposite conclusions from it.

 

[edge]

How dare you say that to Mr Googlelol
I have asked him this question now 5 times - can the UK sustain net immigration of 330,000 plus each year never answers me?

I know the answer , build a city,(got to be near London ) put a university in it problem solved, or failing that ban the countryside, nobody gets to live there just work and come home to metropolis every night it will cure racism as well .
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...racism&usg=AFQjCNF1q7vVTJYSad2e38CS94k48c8jiQ

 

[Joey66]

this question has been answered on numerous occasions, usually directly to you asking Joey.

Yes it can, not only that it benefits from that immigration. The increase in public service provision has to be met by Government though, and they make the political decision not to provide the increase in resources necessary to support the increase in population generally and locally, then have the audacity to blame the immigrants for causing the problem.

I disagree and that's one of the main reasons the OUT vote won , and no it does not affect me where I live!
I voted OUT as we have lost control of our country!
The size of a small city arriving every 12 months when we have a housing shortage is a major problem of an answer I cannot accept!