Current Affairs EU In or Out

In or Out

  • In

    Votes: 688 67.9%

  • Out

    Votes: 325 32.1%
  • Total voters
    1,013
Status
Not open for further replies.
orchard said:
So, free stuff's good?

Seriously though, you don't really mean 'free' do you, it's just a mantra that doesn't stand up to scrutiny?
Click to expand...

It is free movement though; free as in people are freely allows to move within the EU without restriction.
 
orchard said:
So, free stuff's good?

Seriously though, you don't really mean 'free' do you, it's just a mantra that doesn't stand up to scrutiny?
Click to expand...

Of course I'm not talking about free in the financial value sense but rather the freedom sense. For all of it's flaws, the EU did facilitate a good deal of freedom in goods, services and people. If those can be retained outside of the EU then I suspect few 'remainers' would quibble, but I suspect that won't be the case at all.

I think we forget at times that all seven billion or so of us on this planet are all human beings, and there is far more that binds us together than distinguishes us. Those mental barriers tend to come down when we work, play and love with those that were originally perceived as different. Just as the EU isn't perfect, I won't sit here and pretend globalisation is either, but it's infinitely better than the fear peddled by Trump, Farage, Viktor Orban et al.
 
Yes, but those intolerant parties (that you don't tolerate particularly well), are simply filling a vacuum where they are the only ones offering a(n) (unsavoury) 'solution' to the lack of geographical and social responsibility inherent within the dominant neo-liberal system.


Bruce Wayne said:
Of course I'm not talking about free in the financial value sense but rather the freedom sense. For all of it's flaws, the EU did facilitate a good deal of freedom in goods, services and people. If those can be retained outside of the EU then I suspect few 'remainers' would quibble, but I suspect that won't be the case at all.

I think we forget at times that all seven billion or so of us on this planet are all human beings, and there is far more that binds us together than distinguishes us. Those mental barriers tend to come down when we work, play and love with those that were originally perceived as different. Just as the EU isn't perfect, I won't sit here and pretend globalisation is either, but it's infinitely better than the fear peddled by Trump, Farage, Viktor Orban et al.
Click to expand...
 
Bruce Wayne said:
I'm not sure what you mean by that?
Click to expand...
That after a couple of decades where Corporations have been unfettered to pursue profit at the expense of virtually everything else, is it surprising that the citizen's that permitted this abuse attempt to re-empower themselves by recourse to the nation-state to effect a more just society? That opportunists are positioning themselves to take advantage of this mass-movement of sentiment shouldn't be surprising either.
 
orchard said:
That after a couple of decades where Corporations have been unfettered to pursue profit at the expense of virtually everything else, is it surprising that the citizen's that permitted this abuse attempt to re-empower themselves by recourse to the nation-state to effect a more just society? That opportunists are positioning themselves to take advantage of this mass-movement of sentiment shouldn't be surprising either.
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to be deliberately obtuse, but I'm still not really sure I recognise the world you're painting. Do you have an example to illustrate what you mean?
 
Bruce Wayne said:
I think the free movement of goods, services, ideas, culture and people is a very good thing, yes.
Click to expand...

Until it takes away your job, or you have to pay extra to fund it, or it allows unfettered access for terrorists, or it undermines social cohesion, or it's raises crime, or...... The ideal is wonderful, the reality is different. Movement of goods, services, ideas, culture can happen without almost none of the downsides....the mass movement of people, while also bringing benefits, contains all of the downsides unfortunately......
 
peteblue said:
Until it takes away your job, or you have to pay extra to fund it, or it allows unfettered access for terrorists, or it undermines social cohesion, or it's raises crime, or...... The ideal is wonderful, the reality is different. Movement of goods, services, ideas, culture can happen without almost none of the downsides....the mass movement of people, while also bringing benefits, contains all of the downsides unfortunately......
Click to expand...

I'll attempt to address these one by one Pete:

  • Taking my job - I have no right to a job. None whatsoever. I make a living because people feel I offer enough value to pay me. The moment I don't is the moment they stop paying me. It's incredibly naive, not to mention entitled, to expect anything as though its your birthright.
  • Paying extra to fund it - Official figures show that migrants pay far more into the treasury than they receive in public services, so the only people paying extra to fund it is the migrant. Where things have broken down is how we respond to things, as most local funding is determined by the census, so allows for little in the way of adaptability to (relatively) rapid changes in population. You would imagine in 2016 that there is a better way of determining the population of an area, and therefore its level of funding than a once every ten year survey. Solve that and you solve any problems associated with population change (whether domestic or otherwise)
  • Unfettered access to terrorists - that simply isn't true. For instance, 3 of the 4 bombers on 7/7 were British citizens, with the 4th a Jamaican who had lived in Huddersfield for most of his childhood. I believe most of those committing atrocities throughout Europe were also nationals of the country they terrorised.
  • Undermining social cohesion - Here is the OECD definition of that btw "A cohesive society works towards the well-being of all its members, fights exclusion and marginalisation, creates a sense of belonging, promotes trust, and offers its members the opportunity of upward mobility." Now tell me, honestly, is it people like Farage or your average migrant here for a better life that is excluding and marginalising others?
  • Raises crime - Again, that isn't true. Indeed, a recent study - http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/28732/ - found that crime actually fell in areas of the country with high immigration, especially from eastern Europe.
 
Bruce Wayne said:
I'll attempt to address these one by one Pete:

  • "Taking my job - I have no right to a job. None whatsoever. I make a living because people feel I offer enough value to pay me. The moment I don't is the moment they stop paying me. It's incredibly naive, not to mention entitled, to expect anything as though its your birthright."

    You may not have a right to a job, but you do not need additional competition from additional millions for it. There is an uneven playing field for UK nationals at the moment. What is the benefit of having UK nationals not in work......
  • "Paying extra to fund it - Official figures show that migrants pay far more into the treasury than they receive in public services, so the only people paying extra to fund it is the migrant. Where things have broken down is how we respond to things, as most local funding is determined by the census, so allows for little in the way of adaptability to (relatively) rapid changes in population. You would imagine in 2016 that there is a better way of determining the population of an area, and therefore its level of funding than a once every ten year survey. Solve that and you solve any problems associated with population change (whether domestic or otherwise)"

    In terms of immediate public services that may be true. But infrastructure such as railways, hospitals, etc etc have had to be built and paid for over many years. Indeed the national debt had to paid off over generations, by UK nationals. Migrants who have done this for 40+ years can claim to have paid in, but not ones who fly in and out or indeed do not even work.
  • "Unfettered access to terrorists - that simply isn't true. For instance, 3 of the 4 bombers on 7/7 were British citizens, with the 4th a Jamaican who had lived in Huddersfield for most of his childhood. I believe most of those committing atrocities throughout Europe were also nationals of the country they terrorised."

    Of course it is true, due to open Borders with Eire it was even true of the IRA. We also have the issue not just of how easy it is for people to come in, but in the case of some of these trouble makers just how impossible it is to throw them out. These 'nationals' you speak of are almost universally 1st or 2nd generation immigrants who have been radicalised by the very people we cannot remove.......
  • "Undermining social cohesion - Here is the OECD definition of that btw "A cohesive society works towards the well-being of all its members, fights exclusion and marginalisation, creates a sense of belonging, promotes trust, and offers its members the opportunity of upward mobility." Now tell me, honestly, is it people like Farage or your average migrant here for a better life that is excluding and marginalising others?"

    The average migrant causes no trouble at all and are welcome. But it cannot be denied that some immigrants have no intention of integrating. France wants its immigrants to become French, speak the language and integrate, most will but many won't. This causes the fear, the Ferages of this world then use that to push their own agendas. To ignore it is to passively support it......
  • "Raises crime - Again, that isn't true. Indeed, a recent study - http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/28732/ - found that crime actually fell in areas of the country with high immigration, especially from eastern Europe."

    There are over 12,000 Muslims in UK prisons. I read somewhere that of terrorists locked up in the UK over 90% are Muslim. This is way out of proportion to the actual populations and says that something is wrong. There is no doubt that criminals as well as good people come to the UK and so it's a balance of 'benefit' over 'crime increase'. How do you explain to a mother or a husband that their child or wife have been killed by someone who shouldn't have been in the country or had done the same crime in their own country and then moved here. I know this is extreme, but it does happen, and even one instance scares people....
Click to expand...

So I think I will stick with a view that movement of good etc etc is fine, even the solicited and vetted movement of people is fine, but this open to everyone access is not in our national or individual benefit......
 
Just heard a very good debate on LBC not racist in anyway just practical, and information I did not know it was about Poland having the highest immigration population in the UK - the history was fascinating as fa back in history when brits used to got there when they were a booming nation way back - to the 1930's - the war years - the communist rule under the USSR - then the joining of the EU when Blair, southern Ireland, and one other EU country immediately gave them freedom of movement - Germany France the big EU countries did not !
What did alarm me Poland is known to be an anti muslim country the EU have funded five airports in which free movement the UK is the most popular destination it also added that the UK citizens have also migrated there as house prices food etc is cheap and they have nice holiday resorts etc - The polish are hard working people, and are well liked, but unfortunately they are exposed in the UK by employees who go out there as legal gang masters to seek cheap labour - benefits from the UK have been taken back as many polish people have returned of their own free will after doing well over in the UK.
Just as the UK citizens on a smaller scale have settled there a good informative debate until Brexit was mentioned as their Government are not very happy with it and indeed they are a right wing centralist government and there is a bit of unrest there, as in many EU countries.
A very good informative debate, balanced, and our history with them is very strong, but not perfect, but they love the UK way of life , and accept our culture very well maybe is why they tend to settle here the most.
They are worried Brexit may upset the terms they have now, but will still stay as they love the UK.
 
peteblue said:
So I think I will stick with a view that movement of good etc etc is fine, even the solicited and vetted movement of people is fine, but this open to everyone access is not in our national or individual benefit......
Click to expand...

I still can't see 1) what it is about free movement of people you are so against, and 2) what will change in the future.

The points you made against movement of people were all debunked by @Bruce Wayne, and I'm sure you knew most of what he wrote before he posted it. Increased risk of terrorism? It's scare-mongering at its worst.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top