Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

[Paul the Wolf]

People generally aren’t coming to the UK for the shitty benefits. They’re coming for employment.

I think the concern from low-skill British workers has been about downward pressure on wages. Certainly that’s how it’s been portrayed in the British press.

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...dom-movement-euroep-foreign-posted-workers-eu

This is it, I was looking at Sky News yesterday afternoon talking mainly about BJ's proposal and the reaction to it from Leavers, Remainers, Tories, Liberals, Labour, political commentators and so on, and 90%+ is absolute drivel from all sides.
Quite often I tune in to Sky review of the papers and usually there's one pro-Remain and one pro-Brexit journalist or writer etc and the drivel gets even worse again from both sides. I can't get the BBC but can read the British press online.

You can see what's being fed to the British public from an outside point of view. You can guarantee that what commentators have said on the news will feature in this thread.

It's like the football, people's comments on the match reflect what the commentators have said. Having watched a United match with french commentators who are not biased gives people a different aspect than having Keane or Souness influencing people's judgment.

 

[MikeUpNorth]

I can see this and it has nothing to do with FOM ideology. I already told you that the UK could have done it early but they decided not to. As for Croatia, they aren't part of Schengen, they will at the end of that transitional period, currently they are in a different territory, there are border controls.

All a Croatian has to do to enter Schengen countries, or any other EU state, is show their passport. That's it. No one is asking them about their intention to work, or anything else, at the border.

 

[JPRouve]

All a Croatian has to do to enter Schengen countries, or any other EU state, is show their passport. That's it. No one is asking them about their intention to work, or anything else, at the border.

Which is enough, you just need to know who they are, when they entered and left. And by the way that's not true, border police is entitled to ask about your host identity and refuse entry if they suspect that you are entering for non touristic reasons.

 

[Walrus]

Me - Google what is Brexit ?

Google -



I honestly can't wait until these old white men die off.

True, but I equally hate that “you’re not, I am” line and general sentiment, where [mostly] white males are repeatedly told they don’t understand and aren’t allowed an opinion on these matters because they are white males. That very notion is the exact sort of racism that we are trying to stamp out. It also creates a divisive and hostile culture - “them and us”.

 

[MikeUpNorth]

Which is enough, you just need to know who they are, when they entered and left.

None of the countries in the Schengen zone know when a Croatian, or anyone else present in the block, including non-EU citizens, have entered or left their national territory. Some of the people circulating in the Schengen zone will have the right to work, some won't, and some will have the right to only work in one specific Schengen country. You've created a myth in your own head about the link between border controls, entry and right to work.

 

[Maticmaker]

imagine if Corbyn got elected and the Uk were still in the EU , there'd be another 3 years of this nonsense.

I agree, it was clear from the beginning that the EU would not (could not) discuss trade deals whilst the UK was still in the EU. It was also clear that the UK was going to use its withdrawal requirements as a 'poker hand' in agreeing such deals. It was stalemate from day one. Parliament backed May in her A50 request and from then on it was downhill. The referendum was framed as a binary IN/OUT, because in reality that's what it was and has always been.
Extensions are pointless, wasting everyone's time.

 

[JPRouve]

None of the countries in the Schengen zone know when a Croatian, or anyone else present in the block, including non-EU citizens, have entered or left their national territory. Some of the people circulating in the Schengen zone will have the right to work, some won't, and some will have the right to only work in one specific Schengen country. You've created a myth in your own head about the link between border controls, entry and right to work.

So this isn't a thing?

 

[MikeUpNorth]

So this isn't a thing?

This has precisely nothing to do with the right to work.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

To me this is obvious, but maybe not... Please consider the example of new countries joining the EU and the transitional arrangements that are put in place.

https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=466&langId=en

As you can see, for 7 years people from Croatia (in this example) are free to travel throughout the EU unrestricted, but Croatians do not have the right to work in another EU country. This shows that it is of course technically possible and mirrors the situation that would occur in a European Union where member states were free to set their own rules on eligibility to work, without automatic Freedom of Movement for Workers. Like the Croatians, people could travel around as they please, unrestricted, but would not be permitted to work without first obtaining permission from the nation state.


Yes, that would be impossible as people from Manchester have exactly the same documents (passports) as the people from London. And for economic reasons you don't want to restrict movement of workers within a currency block, in this instance the Pound Sterling zone.

Freedom of movement has existed since the beginning and was a main reason I voted for remaining in 1975. There were no currency zones, every country had their own currency.
British people are having their rights taken away by people who have been given false information by the media or because of other more sinister reasons.

What does the average person who voted leave care what nationaity their nurse is as long as they are getting care?

My original point was not about denying other EU citizens their rights but about the UK denying British citizens their rights.

 

[TheReligion]

Me - Google what is Brexit ?

Google -



I honestly can't wait until these old white men die off.

Ermm yeah. I don't particularly think Greer came out of this looking particularly smart either in my opinion. Making sweeping statements based on her friend who can't speak Polish on the tube is a bit daft then when being asked to explain it snapping "well I'm foreign and you're not" is weak and not the basis for a meaningful discussion.

 

[MikeUpNorth]

Freedom of movement has existed since the beginning and was a main reason I voted for remaining in 1975. There were no currency zones, every country had their own currency.
British people are having their rights taken away by people who have been given false information by the media or because of other more sinister reasons.

What does the average person who voted leave care what nationaity their nurse is as long as they are getting care?

My original point was not about denying other EU citizens their rights but about the UK denying British citizens their rights.

I'd imagine no one cares about the nationality of nurses, so long as there are enough nurses in the country.

But people do care about their wages being undercut by 'posted' workers. https://www.theguardian.com/comment...dom-movement-euroep-foreign-posted-workers-eu

I've posted this article earlier, but it was ignored. There are problems with Freedom of Movement of Workers in the modern world which need to be addressed, whether Britain leaves the EU or not.

 

[JPRouve]

This has precisely nothing to do with the right to work.

This has everything to do with preventing/reducing illegal activities by knowing who enters your country and with which rights.

 

[diarm]

It would be interesting to run a poll to see what percentage of British people voted remain but believe in leave.

In this thread alone, it appears that almost every beligerent arguer for brexit, actually voted remain, even while they're buying all the myths pedalled by the leave campaign.

The idea that the EU are refusing to compromise and both sides share equal blame for this impasse is a myth. The EU has compromised while the UK government has negotiated in bad faith, refused to compromise in anyway seriously and acted deliberately to paint the EU in a poor light. They have even leaked documents which explicitly reveal this to be policy.

The idea that the EU and Ireland are taking a hard line on Northern Ireland simply to punish the UK for Brexit is a myth. It's also incredibly insulting and dismissive of the genuine concern for peace and security on this island. Every time someone insists on repeating it, it demonstrates an ignorance and total lack of care for the real issues which will result from an enforced border between Ireland and Northern Ireland.

The idea that Irish people are too stupid to have opinions unclouded by an imaginary hatred of the English is a myth, and an offensive one at that. We are telling you what we know will happen in the result of a hard border and yes, we are not allowing some of you to simply ignore the part your country played in the situation. That is not hatred, it is merely accountability. This isn't us jumping on an opportunity to finally get one back on the UK, it is us fighting to maintain peace in a situation that has arisen through no fault of our own.

@TheReligion instead of telling us what you haven't said, why not tell us your actual opinions? Instead of slagging off the EU, why not tell us how they can be softer in their approach to Northern Ireland and where they can compromise? Start engaging on the actual issues and stop pretending you're a victim.

 

[MikeUpNorth]

This has everything to do with preventing/reducing illegal activities by knowing who enters your country and with which rights.

I'll give you a concrete example of the situation right now:

• Croatians are free to enter the Schengen zone (and all EU countries) at any point of entry simply by showing a valid passport
• All EU countries have now dropped restrictions on Croatians' right to work, with one exception: Austria
• Croatians need a work permit to take employment in Austria
• It is theoretically known which Croatians are within the Schengen zone at any point in time due to border checks at the entry points to the Schengen zone
• But it is unknown, and unknowable, which Croatians are within Austria
• The only thing stopping Croatians working illegally in Austria is the checks done by employers (and government agencies working with employers)

Does this matter to Austria? Does it fatally undermine their ability to stop Croatians breaking their employment laws? No.

If Austria were somehow granted a right to require Belgians to also have work permits to take employment in Austria, all that would change is that employers in Austria would ask Belgians for their permits, like they do with Croatians. Nothing would change regarding border checks, or entry to the country.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

I'd imagine no one cares about the nationality of nurses, so long as there are enough nurses in the country.

But people do care about their wages being undercut by 'posted' workers. https://www.theguardian.com/comment...dom-movement-euroep-foreign-posted-workers-eu

I've posted this article earlier, but it was ignored. There are problems with Freedom of Movement of Workers in the modern world which need to be addressed, whether Britain leaves the EU or not.

That article is about posted workers which are temporary workers and has rarely if ever been brought up in this thread and is doubtful one of the main reasons for leavers or that most voters have never even heard of it. And the problem at Uskmouth is because of the employer not the employees.
There are British workers working on the black in the UK, there are French workers working on the black in France, this is not a FoM problem.

 

[finneh]

I maybe completely ignorant here so please correct me if I am but:

• EU allows restrictions on the freedom of workers on new countries that have entered the EU, which illustrates that the four freedoms are not absolutely sacrosanct
• EU member states in the Schengen Area have no knowledge of who is in their country, because any state has the right to offer an external citizen the right to work and that worker can then travel freely from one member state to another (not working)
• Northern Ireland would be perfectly within its rights to legalise cannabis and this wouldn't trigger border checks, despite something being legal on one side of the border but illegal on the other side of the border. This would be controlled the same way that the US controls cannabis being taken across state borders
• Some elements of taxation such as VAT are already calculated and allowable without the implementation of a hard border

If these points are correct (and again they may not be), surely that means four things:

• Firstly the four freedoms are negotiable as they already restrict the ability to work for new members; meaning in theory the UK could be offered a deal whereby they stay in the EU and are granted for example a net maximum per annum level on immigration for EU workers (something that would make a remain vote in a second referendum a home run and would justify a second referendum with both sides of the argument having changed: remain and leave)
• Secondly traveling between Ireland and Northern Ireland isn't an issue irrespective of Brexit, since someone from Senegal who had the right to work in Italy could freely travel throughout 26 EU countries without any checks. He wouldn't be able to work in the other 25 countries, but that would be the same with ROI and NI post Brexit. So an English man could travel to NI, then to ROI, then to Italy and it wouldn't be an issue in the same manner (again though he couldn't work outside of the UK)
• Goods travelling between the two Nations could be policed the same way cannabis is policed between US states. In the scenario of chlorinated chicken being deemed compliant with post Brexit UK standards, but not EU standards; this produce would be legal in NI but illegal in the ROI. If you were found smuggling across the border you would be charged in the same manner.
• Taxation issues are already calculated without a hard border, so further duties could be calculated in the same fashion.

If I'm missing something could someone could enlighten me?

 

[TheReligion]

It would be interesting to run a poll to see what percentage of British people voted remain but believe in leave.

In this thread alone, it appears that almost every beligerent arguer for brexit, actually voted remain, even while they're buying all the myths pedalled by the leave campaign.

The idea that the EU are refusing to compromise and both sides share equal blame for this impasse is a myth. The EU has compromised while the UK government has negotiated in bad faith, refused to compromise in anyway seriously and acted deliberately to paint the EU in a poor light. They have even leaked documents which explicitly reveal this to be policy.

The idea that the EU and Ireland are taking a hard line on Northern Ireland simply to punish the UK for Brexit is a myth. It's also incredibly insulting and dismissive of the genuine concern for peace and security on this island. Every time someone insists on repeating it, it demonstrates an ignorance and total lack of care for the real issues which will result from an enforced border between Ireland and Northern Ireland.

The idea that Irish people are too stupid to have opinions unclouded by an imaginary hatred of the English is a myth, and an offensive one at that. We are telling you what we know will happen in the result of a hard border and yes, we are not allowing some of you to simply ignore the part your country played in the situation. That is not hatred, it is merely accountability. This isn't us jumping on an opportunity to finally get one back on the UK, it is us fighting to maintain peace in a situation that has arisen through no fault of our own.

@TheReligion instead of telling us what you haven't said, why not tell us your actual opinions? Instead of slagging off the EU, why not tell us how they can be softer in their approach to Northern Ireland and where they can compromise? Start engaging on the actual issues and stop pretending you're a victim.

1) I've not slagged off the EU as you put it

2) I'm not belligerent arguer for Brexit

3) I'm not pretending to be a victim

4) No one is ignoring history or the horrendous actions by the British in Ireland over the years

5) No one is saying Britain should not fulfill its responsibilities regarding Ireland

What's your point again?

 

[JPRouve]

I'll give you a concrete example of the situation right now:

• Croatians are free to enter the Schengen zone (and all EU countries) at any point of entry simply by showing a valid passport
• All EU countries have now dropped restrictions on Croatians' right to work, with one exception: Austria
• Croatians need a work permit to take employment in Austria
• It is theoretically known which Croatians are within the Schengen zone at any point in time due to border checks at the entry points to the Schengen zone
• But it is unknown, and unknowable, which Croatians are within Austria
• The only thing stopping Croatians working illegally in Austria is the checks done by employers (and government agencies working with employers)

Does this matter to Austria? Does it fatally undermine their ability to stop Croatians breaking their employment laws? No.

If Austria were somehow granted a right to require Belgians to also have work permits to take employment in Austria, all that would change is that employers in Austria would ask Belgians for their permits. Nothing would change regarding border checks, or entry to the country.

Of course it undermines their ability to prevent croatians, they don't know which croatians are within Austria. And employers being crooks isn't exactly inimaginable, you seem to think that you can actually trust them when working on the black is extremely common and has direct consequences on the issue that you have been talking about many time, downward pressure on wages. But I get it, you think that employers will honestly do the job or that companies will be tightly checked, they won't and the people that you want to protect will be the first victims.

 

[Sweet Square]

True, but I equally hate that “you’re not, I am” line and general sentiment, where [mostly] white males are repeatedly told they don’t understand and aren’t allowed an opinion on these matters because they are white males. That very notion is the exact sort of racism that we are trying to stamp out. It also creates a divisive and hostile culture - “them and us”.

Who is saying this ? Where in the media are white men not having their voices heard ? Genuinely interested if you have any examples.

These types of white middle men view someone disagreeing with them as a form of censorship. The guy in the audience didn't even listen to the reply from Geer instead he went on to accuse her of label the whole of Britain racist! 1)She literally didn't do that 2)Her friend was getting abuse because of the language she speaks not because of her race, its xenophobia not racism.

She was right to shut him down at the end.

Ermm yeah. I don't particularly think Greer came out of this looking particularly smart either in my opinion. Making sweeping statements based on her friend who can't speak Polish on the tube is a bit daft then when being asked to explain it snapping "well I'm foreign and you're not" is weak and not the basis for a meaningful discussion.

Again your a copper, right ?

Did you miss the part where Greer said her friend can't speak polish on the bus or tube because of the abuse from passengers ? And the part where Greer talks again about her friend being hassled by passengers for speaking polish ? Greer mentions as well the effect its have on her friend child, the child is losing her maternal language.

Did you watch the clip, at all ?

 

[TheReligion]

Who is saying this ? Where in the media are white men not having their voices heard ? Genuinely interested if you have any examples.

These types of white middle men view someone disagreeing with them as a form of censorship. The guy in the audience didn't even listen to the reply from Geer instead he went on to accuse her of label the whole of Britain racist! 1)She literally didn't do that 2)Her friend was getting abuse because of the language she speak not because of her race, its xenophobia not racism.

She was right to shut him down at the end.


Again your a copper, right ?

But really. Did you miss the part where Greer said her friend can't speak polish on the bus or tube because she gets abuse from passengers ? And the part where Greer talks again about her friend being hassled by passengers for speaking polish ? Greer mentions as well the effect its have on her friend child, the child is losing her maternal language.

Did you watch the clip, at all ?

What the feck has my job got to do with anything? What is it that you do again? Totally irrelevant. Or are you trying to suggest I'm a thick, racist brexiteer because I'm a cop? Do share..

And you totally missed the point it seems. Greer's personal story about her Polish friend is of course upsetting and unacceptable but you can't frame the whole of the country in that light because of it. It wasn't the point she made that was the issue, it was how she made it.

 

[MikeUpNorth]

Of course it undermines their ability to prevent croatians, they don't know which croatians are within Austria. And employers being crooks isn't exactly inimaginable, you seem to think that you can actually trust them when working on the black is extremely common and has direct consequences on the issue that you have been talking about many time, downward pressure on wages. But I get it, you think that employers will honestly do the job or that companies will be tightly checked, they won't and the people that you want to protect will be the first victims.

And what if they somehow DID know which Croatians were in Austria... what difference would it actually make? They're legally allowed to be in the country regardless. As far as I know, they're not microchipping people at the border and then covertly following them around to see if they happen to be working illegally on the black market somewhere in the country.

 

[MikeUpNorth]

Of course it undermines their ability to prevent croatians, they don't know which croatians are within Austria. And employers being crooks isn't exactly inimaginable, you seem to think that you can actually trust them when working on the black is extremely common and has direct consequences on the issue that you have been talking about many time, downward pressure on wages. But I get it, you think that employers will honestly do the job or that companies will be tightly checked, they won't and the people that you want to protect will be the first victims.

This is exactly how it works for the 22m non-EU citizens in the EU - the vast majority of these people being within the Schengen zone. We rely on employers to check their right to work at the time of hiring. Indeed, the only way an employer even knows whether someone is an EU citizen or a non-EU citizen is by checking their documents when they hire them.

 

[diarm]

1) I've not slagged off the EU as you put it

2) I'm not belligerent arguer for Brexit

3) I'm not pretending to be a victim

4) No one is ignoring history or the horrendous actions by the British in Ireland over the years

5) No one is saying Britain should not fulfill its responsibilities regarding Ireland

What's your point again?

6) You are not engaging honestly on issues.

You have slagged off the EU every time you have pretended that they have acted as equally poorly in these negotiations as the UK government. The behaviour of several British politicians over the last few years has been nothing short of shameful and you acting like the EU have acted just as poorly is very wrong.

You have continually pretended to be a victim rather than debate properly with issues raised. I'm not going to go back over every example but a read through my last ten posts shows numerous examples.

You have called the history boring and continually said it shouldn't be a factor in Britain being allowed to leave the EU. You equated Irish posters bringing up these issues to Brits complaining about Danish vikings.

Plenty of people have said exactly that. Suggesting that Ireland and the EU compromise on the border issue is arguing that the UK be allowed to ignore its responsibilities.

 

[sun_tzu]

This is exactly how it works for the 22m non-EU citizens in the EU - the vast majority of these people being within the Schengen zone. We rely on employers to check their right to work at the time of hiring. Indeed, the only way an employer even knows whether someone is an EU citizen or a non-EU citizen is by checking their documents when they hire them.

indeed - I have to see an EU passport to employ somebody - or if a non EU passport documentation that confirms the right to work
If we leave with no deal I assume I will have to see a UK passport - or any other passport and documentation that confirms the right to work
It shouldnt be that difficult though I have some concerns for EU residents currently working in the UK (and UK citizens in the EU) as I suspect if a lot of people at once need that documentation the civil service might be pretty shit at processing things in a timely manner

 

[Sweet Square]

What the feck has my job got to do with anything? What is it that you do again? Totally irrelevant. Or are you trying to suggest I'm a thick, racist brexiteer because I'm a cop? Do share..

Hey remain voters can be just as thick and racist as any leave voter. But yeah I sort do because its literally becoming a common thing with you now. Be it calling the first black person to represent her party at PMQs a ''moron''(Abbott literally went to Cambridge and has won awards as a MP), thinking the troubles in NI are similar to the fecking vikings and now this.

I'm sure your perfectly nice etc etc but you do seem to share a lot views similar to well that audience member.

And you totally missed the point it seems. Greer's personal story about her Polish friend is of course upsetting and unacceptable but you can't frame the whole of the country in that light because of it. It wasn't the point she made that was the issue, it was how she made it.

Again she DIDN'T! The audience member asked Greer to explain her comments about why it's bad being foreigner in Britain. At no point did Greer framed the whole of Britain as anything.

Also its Question Time, Greer hasn't got time to give a whole ted talk. Just google xenophobia brexit spike.

 

[TheReligion]

6) You are not engaging honestly on issues.

You have slagged off the EU every time you have pretended that they have acted as equally poorly in these negotiations as the UK government. The behaviour of several British politicians over the last few years has been nothing short of shameful and you acting like the EU have acted just as poorly is very wrong.

You have continually pretended to be a victim rather than debate properly with issues raised. I'm not going to go back over every example but a read through my last ten posts shows numerous examples.

You have called the history boring and continually said it shouldn't be a factor in Britain being allowed to leave the EU. You equated Irish posters bringing up these issues to Brits complaining about Danish vikings.

Plenty of people have said exactly that. Suggesting that Ireland and the EU compromise on the border issue is arguing that the UK be allowed to ignore its responsibilities.

I've called the history boring? No I haven't. I said the poster was boring. Let's not make things up!

We seem to have a difference in understanding with regards to slagging off. If that's the case I've slagged off the UK equally, if not more so, during the points raised as I've been pretty clear on my thoughts with how it has conducted itself.

You seem to want to argue about things that simply haven't been said or suggested. I didn't bring up the Vikings either.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

?

This is exactly how it works for the 22m non-EU citizens in the EU - the vast majority of these people being within the Schengen zone. We rely on employers to check their right to work at the time of hiring. Indeed, the only way an employer even knows whether someone is an EU citizen or a non-EU citizen is by checking their documents when they hire them.

I don't see what point you are trying to make,for a start the Uk isn't in Schengen and already has border controls. As an employer in the UK whenever you employ someone you need to have the National Insurance number of the person and I've been through this process with British and immigrants from EU and non-EU countries. So what control doesn't the UK have?

All you are talking about are illegal immigrants but they could be EU citizens being paid on the black or non-EU visitors overstaying their tourist visa and working on the black or a British person getting paid cash in hand or a rich person earning a fortune and not declaring their revenue. What has this got to do with FoM?

 

[MikeUpNorth]

?

I don't see what point you are trying to make,for a start the Uk isn't in Schengen and already has border controls. As an employer in the UK whenever you employ someone you need to have the National Insurance number of the person and I've been through this process with British and immigrants from EU and non-EU countries. So what control doesn't the UK have?

All you are talking about are illegal immigrants but they could be EU citizens being paid on the black or non-EU visitors overstaying their tourist visa and working on the black or a British person getting paid cash in hand or a rich person earning a fortune and not declaring their revenue. What has this got to do with FoM?

The point I was making which started this whole conversation is that the EU should be changed to allow member states to restrict Freedom of Movement for Workers. i.e. Any member state should be able to decide independently which EU nationals are allowed to work in its country. It would go a long way to addressing the concerns of voters in the UK, and across the continent.

@JPRouve said this was a technical impossibility, rather than simply politically undesirable. I have been trying to show that it's possible to have freedom of general movement without freedom to work, and then we can argue about whether its something the EU should consider or not. The Schengen thing is a complete red herring.

 

[Sweet Square]

I didn't bring up the Vikings either.

Christ. Maybe we Brits should have a right go at the Danes for burning our villages and raping our women. When does it stop?

Your reply here

Yeah it's ridiculous isn't it.

 

[JPRouve]

This is exactly how it works for the 22m non-EU citizens in the EU - the vast majority of these people being within the Schengen zone. We rely on employers to check their right to work at the time of hiring. Indeed, the only way an employer even knows whether someone is an EU citizen or a non-EU citizen is by checking their documents when they hire them.

And my point is that many employers don't care about that which is a problem for the people that you mentioned earlier, if you don't vet people at the border they will do whatever they want and you won't be able to do anything efficient about it. The 22m of non-EU citizens are vetted and for the most part went through airports where border police won't let you in if they have any suspiscion, they also chose the country where they want to settle and have no intention to move unlike the 17m of EU citizens.

PS: I never said that it was impossible, I said that it wasn't palatable. You are the one who talked about impossibility.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

What the feck has my job got to do with anything? What is it that you do again? Totally irrelevant. Or are you trying to suggest I'm a thick, racist brexiteer because I'm a cop? Do share..

And you totally missed the point it seems. Greer's personal story about her Polish friend is of course upsetting and unacceptable but you can't frame the whole of the country in that light because of it. It wasn't the point she made that was the issue, it was how she made it.

https://www.standard.co.uk/panewsfeeds/farage-felt-awkward-on-train-9158785.html

Nigel Farage has said he felt "awkward" on a recent train journey in central London when he heard only foreign languages spoken by his fellow passengers.
"I got the train the other night, it was rush hour, from Charing Cross, it was the stopper going out. We stopped at London Bridge, New Cross, Hither Green.

"It wasn't until after we got past Grove Park that I could actually hear English being audibly spoken in the carriage. Does that make me feel slightly awkward? Yes.

"I wonder what's really going on. And I'm sure that's a view that will be reflected by three quarters of the population, perhaps even more.

Answering further questions at the press conference about why he felt awkward Mr Farage said: "Because I don't understand them."

 

[TheReligion]

Hey remain voters can be just as thick and racist as any leave voter. But yeah I sort do because its literally becoming a common thing with you now. Be it calling the first black person to represent her party at PMQs a ''moron''(Abbott literally went to Cambridge and has won awards as a MP), thinking the troubles in NI are similar to the fecking vikings and now this.

I'm sure your perfectly nice etc etc but you do seem to share a lot views similar to well that audience member.


Again she DIDN'T! The audience member asked Greer to explain her comments about why it's bad being foreigner in Britain. At no point did Greer framed the whole of Britain as anything.

Also its Question Time, Greer hasn't got time to give a whole ted talk. Just google xenophobia brexit spike.

Abbott is a moron. Her race is irrelevant. She once stated that white people love to divide society and that Mao did more good than bad during his reign. I mean the woman is known for being a fool and making inflammatory, offensive and contradictory comments. Look what she was saying about Thatcher the other day.

PS I didn't bring up the Vikings. Look it up.

You make yourself look silly by trying to counter anything I say with "you're a copper". You know that right?

 

[MikeUpNorth]

My best go at answering your points...

I maybe completely ignorant here so please correct me if I am but:

• EU allows restrictions on the freedom of workers on new countries that have entered the EU, which illustrates that the four freedoms are not absolutely sacrosanct Correct
• EU member states in the Schengen Area have no knowledge of who is in their country, because any state has the right to offer an external citizen the right to work and that worker can then travel freely from one member state to another (not working) Correct
• Northern Ireland would be perfectly within its rights to legalise cannabis and this wouldn't trigger border checks, despite something being legal on one side of the border but illegal on the other side of the border. This would be controlled the same way that the US controls cannabis being taken across state borders Correct. For example, Luxembourg is the first EU country planning to legalise cannabis. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...e-first-european-country-to-legalise-cannabis. I'm not sure if/how the other EU countries would try and prevent the product entering their territories given there is no hard border.
• Some elements of taxation such as VAT are already calculated and allowable without the implementation of a hard border Yes, VAT rates vary between EU member states

If these points are correct (and again they may not be), surely that means four things:

• Firstly the four freedoms are negotiable as they already restrict the ability to work for new members; meaning in theory the UK could be offered a deal whereby they stay in the EU and are granted for example a net maximum per annum level on immigration for EU workers (something that would make a remain vote in a second referendum a home run and would justify a second referendum with both sides of the argument having changed: remain and leave) My view is that it is technically possible, but not politically possible as the EU is ideologically attached to the 'indivisibility of the four freedoms'. I agree with you that this should be how the EU evolves where right to work is decided more at a national level.
• Secondly traveling between Ireland and Northern Ireland isn't an issue irrespective of Brexit, since someone from Senegal who had the right to work in Italy could freely travel throughout 26 EU countries without any checks. He wouldn't be able to work in the other 25 countries, but that would be the same with ROI and NI post Brexit. So an English man could travel to NI, then to ROI, then to Italy and it wouldn't be an issue in the same manner (again though he couldn't work outside of the UK) The UK and Ireland have a Common Travel Area. There is no issue with people travelling within the islands whatever happens. ROI is not in Schengen, so a person needs to show documentation to travel from ROI to Italy.
• Goods travelling between the two Nations could be policed the same way cannabis is policed between US states. In the scenario of chlorinated chicken being deemed compliant with post Brexit UK standards, but not EU standards; this produce would be legal in NI but illegal in the ROI. If you were found smuggling across the border you would be charged in the same manner. NI will need regulatory alignment with the EU single market for goods to avoid a hard border. This would mean chlorinated chicken would remain illegal in NI, even if legal in the rest of the UK.
• Taxation issues are already calculated without a hard border, so further duties could be calculated in the same fashion. The issue with NI and ROI being in different customs territories is enforcement. If you could trust businesses and smugglers not to cheat the rules and to abide by the customs rules without inspections, then there would be no need for a hard border. But you can't just trust people.

If I'm missing something could someone could enlighten me?

 

[TheReligion]

Your reply here

Yes. I didn't bring up the Vikings. I said the way the conversation had turned was ridiculous.

 

[diarm]

I've called the history boring? No I haven't. I said the poster was boring. Let's not make things up!

We seem to have a difference in understanding with regards to slagging off. If that's the case I've slagged off the UK equally, if not more so, during the points raised as I've been pretty clear on my thoughts with how it has conducted itself.

You seem to want to argue about things that simply haven't been said or suggested. I didn't bring up the Vikings either.

No but you agreed with it and seemed to think it was all a fine big joke.

You've accused posters of slagging off the English when they were genuinely debating issues and bringing up important points. Your difference in understanding falls somewhere between what you do being acceptable and what others do being unacceptable.

You haven't been clear on your points at all. You offer vague comments about shared blame and compromise but disappear behind a victim card when pushed on elaborating on how these compromises can happen.

Then you drag whoever is debating with you down into this tedious tit for tat on semantics. It's disingenuous and dishonest and you should rightly be called out for it.

 

[diarm]

Ermm yeah. I don't particularly think Greer came out of this looking particularly smart either in my opinion. Making sweeping statements based on her friend who can't speak Polish on the tube is a bit daft then when being asked to explain it snapping "well I'm foreign and you're not" is weak and not the basis for a meaningful discussion.

How is a very specific example of a personal friend experiencing abuse on the tube a sweeping statement?

 

[TheReligion]

No but you agreed with it and seemed to think it was all a fine big joke.

You've accused posters of slagging off the English when they were genuinely debating issues and bringing up important points. Your difference in understanding falls somewhere between what you do being acceptable and what others do being unacceptable.

You haven't been clear on your points at all. You offer vague comments about shared blame and compromise but disappear behind a victim card when pushed on elaborating on how these compromises can happen.

Then you drag whoever is debating with you down into this tedious tit for tat on semantics. It's disingenuous and dishonest and you should rightly be called out for it.

I'm sorry but that's untrue, much like the other presumptions you make about others who have a difference of opinion then you.

The issue a number of hardcore CE posters have still it seems is they can't follow forum advice of criticising the post not the poster.

@Sweet Square and others epitomise that in how they go about trying to make a point and it's rather tedious and reinforces the reasons a number of general Caf posters stay out of the select gentleman's club which is the CE forum. Either conform with the masses or be painted to be a problem and hounded out.

 

[TheReligion]

How is a very specific example of a personal friend experiencing abuse on the tube a sweeping statement?

The sweeping statement was how difficult it was to live in the UK as a foreigner at the moment. When she was asked to explain she provided this very narrow story.

I don't necessarily disagree with her point but she didn't put it across very well at all and then followed it up with "well I'm foreign you're not" as if only her opinion counts.

 

[diarm]

I'm sorry but that's untrue, much like the other presumptions you make about others who have a difference of opinion then you.

The issue a number of hardcore CE posters have still it seems is they can't follow forum advice of criticising the post not the poster.

@Sweet Square and others epitomise that in how they go about trying to make a point and it's rather tedious and reinforces the reasons a number of general Caf posters stay out of the select gentleman's club which is the CE forum. Either conform with the masses or be painted to be a problem and hounded out.

it is impossible to criticise your posts without criticising you as a poster because 9 times out of 10, your posts offer nothing of substance. You offer a glib sentence like "the EU and Ireland need to compromise as well" but despite being asked how on numerous occasions to elaborate on that opinion, you refuse to do so.

Nobody is asking you to conform with the masses. Only to back up your opinions with fair and rational arguement.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

The point I was making which started this whole conversation is that the EU should be changed to allow member states to restrict Freedom of Movement for Workers. i.e. Any member state should be able to decide independently which EU nationals are allowed to work in its country. It would go a long way to addressing the concerns of voters in the UK, and across the continent.

@JPRouve said this was a technical impossibility, rather than simply politically undesirable. I have been trying to show that it's possible to have freedom of general movement without freedom to work, and then we can argue about whether its something the EU should consider or not. The Schengen thing is a complete red herring.

Which goes back to my original point - what concerns across the continent? the UK you mean, you're talking about illegal workers employed by British companies not complying with employment regulations which is again not a FoM issue.
And if the UK restrict EU people's movement why shouldn't other EU countries stop UK citizens. You say Ok they can but they don't want to because they don't have the same vision and have not been subjected to the same lies through the British media.

Freedom of movement doesn't just mean immigrants into the UK it also means UK citizens being able to move to the EU. If this had been the case in my time, my life would have been completely different. I was lucky.