Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?

  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
horsechoker said:
According to the BBC a decision will be made tomorrow whether UK citizens will need a visa to visit Europe in the event of No Deal.
Click to expand...
oates and I were talking about this this morning - he pointed out that we never needed one before we were in the EU! Anyway, it's a ridiculous suggestion. UK citizens can even visit the USA with just an ESTA, which only takes 5 minutes to sort out.
 
Penna said:
oates and I were talking about this this morning - he pointed out that we never needed one before we were in the EU! Anyway, it's a ridiculous suggestion. UK citizens can even visit the USA with just an ESTA, which only takes 5 minutes to sort out.
Click to expand...
The ESTA is technically a Visa though, so even if it was something like that, then the answer is yes you need a visa.
 
Penna said:
oates and I were talking about this this morning - he pointed out that we never needed one before we were in the EU! Anyway, it's a ridiculous suggestion. UK citizens can even visit the USA with just an ESTA, which only takes 5 minutes to sort out.
Click to expand...

Only under certain circumstances. You still technically need a visa, people just don't notice because of the US visa waiver program for countries like the UK. It's also worth remembering that there is a long list of reasons why UK people are not allowed to use the visa waiver program including any criminal record at all, travel to a number of forbidden other countries and so on.
 
Just been watching All out Politics on Sky News - Brexiters still saying it's all Project Fear and going for the non-existent WTO Deal. Four and a half months to go and no hope whatsoever of the UK agreeing with itself on an outcome, nevermind with the EU. Insanity.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
Just been watching All out Politics on Sky News - Brexiters still saying it's all Project Fear and going for the non-existent WTO Deal. Four and a half months to go and no hope whatsoever of the UK agreeing with itself on an outcome, nevermind with the EU. Insanity.
Click to expand...

The proof will be in the chlorinated pudding.
 
The brexiteers have a terrific use of language.
"WTO deal", it's ingenious.
 
Gordon Brown at the Institute for Government

Q: What sort of new measures would you introduce on immigration?

Brown says the UK is proposing “point control” as a way of handling immigration after Brexit. People won’t think that amounts to real change.

But other EU countries impose measures despite free movement, he says. For example, jobs have to be advertised locally. Migrants can be required to register. Or they can be required to leave if they don’t find a job.

He says the UK government has not adopted measures like this, even though they are allowed under freedom of movement.

If these things were known in 2016, there would have been a “very different” debate in the referendum.

  • Brown says EU referendum would have been “very different” if UK government had imposed migration measures allowed under free movement
Well what more is there to say. Heads in the sand.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
Gordon Brown at the Institute for Government

Q: What sort of new measures would you introduce on immigration?

Brown says the UK is proposing “point control” as a way of handling immigration after Brexit. People won’t think that amounts to real change.

But other EU countries impose measures despite free movement, he says. For example, jobs have to be advertised locally. Migrants can be required to register. Or they can be required to leave if they don’t find a job.

He says the UK government has not adopted measures like this, even though they are allowed under freedom of movement.

If these things were known in 2016, there would have been a “very different” debate in the referendum.

  • Brown says EU referendum would have been “very different” if UK government had imposed migration measures allowed under free movement
Well what more is there to say. Heads in the sand.
Click to expand...

To be fair it's probably the best reason for Brexit. British people can't trust their politicians to know or apply the publicly available rules of a common market. So logically they shouldn't let them work in a common market.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
Gordon Brown at the Institute for Government

Q: What sort of new measures would you introduce on immigration?

Brown says the UK is proposing “point control” as a way of handling immigration after Brexit. People won’t think that amounts to real change.

But other EU countries impose measures despite free movement, he says. For example, jobs have to be advertised locally. Migrants can be required to register. Or they can be required to leave if they don’t find a job.

He says the UK government has not adopted measures like this, even though they are allowed under freedom of movement.

If these things were known in 2016, there would have been a “very different” debate in the referendum.

  • Brown says EU referendum would have been “very different” if UK government had imposed migration measures allowed under free movement
Well what more is there to say. Heads in the sand.
Click to expand...

This isn't news, I've known this for years. I'm not sure what his point is really.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
Gordon Brown at the Institute for Government

Q: What sort of new measures would you introduce on immigration?

Brown says the UK is proposing “point control” as a way of handling immigration after Brexit. People won’t think that amounts to real change.

But other EU countries impose measures despite free movement, he says. For example, jobs have to be advertised locally. Migrants can be required to register. Or they can be required to leave if they don’t find a job.

He says the UK government has not adopted measures like this, even though they are allowed under freedom of movement.

If these things were known in 2016, there would have been a “very different” debate in the referendum.

  • Brown says EU referendum would have been “very different” if UK government had imposed migration measures allowed under free movement
Well what more is there to say. Heads in the sand.
Click to expand...

The government and the people that prop it up have a vested interest in cheap labour. They also have a vested interest in deregulation and tax avoidance. #Brexit
 
Rado_N said:
It's not, it's a visa waiver.

That sounds pedantic, but it's purpose is to avoid the hassle of visas.
Click to expand...

In My opinion it is. I travelled the world and I don't need any paper to travel to many countries and no need to play anything. ESTA is a very easy to get visa (like there are others for some countries more diffiicult like there are others even more difficult for other countries) but it doesn't matter how they name it but is a visa. I got denied the ESTA and I couldn't fly because a layover in the US because a problem with my passport. I took a next day flight direct to Mexico and allowed me to travel and checked me there and let me go after 15 min.

Canada was without a visa till 2 years ago for european countries, and now they have ETA (similar to ESTA). If is not a visa, what is it? (even if is just for money)

EU is planning to do the same, so if it happening, Uk will have to do the same. 5 minutes and no biggy, but forget to spend the whole year in any Mediterranean villa
 
Rado_N said:
It's not, it's a visa waiver.

That sounds pedantic, but it's purpose is to avoid the hassle of visas.
Click to expand...
you can call it what you want (and you're technically right) but something that requires you to fill in a form with your passport details in order to gain entry to a country for a set amount of time is a visa in my eyes.
 
Tell me a powerful group somewhere isn't trying to feck up this country.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
Gordon Brown at the Institute for Government

Q: What sort of new measures would you introduce on immigration?

Brown says the UK is proposing “point control” as a way of handling immigration after Brexit. People won’t think that amounts to real change.

But other EU countries impose measures despite free movement, he says. For example, jobs have to be advertised locally. Migrants can be required to register. Or they can be required to leave if they don’t find a job.

He says the UK government has not adopted measures like this, even though they are allowed under freedom of movement.

If these things were known in 2016, there would have been a “very different” debate in the referendum.

  • Brown says EU referendum would have been “very different” if UK government had imposed migration measures allowed under free movement
Well what more is there to say. Heads in the sand.
Click to expand...

I've banged on for quite some time that Labour should have put out a very strong message on immigration. They were in the perfect position to implement measures in a fair and non-aggressive manner but they didn't want to talk about it and here we are.

Blair and Brown started this feeling of poor immigration control and set up the tories to win votes on it usually in a cruel manner.
 
Adisa said:
Click to expand...

Pretty much why Remain did lose and will lose if there is a another referendum. Remain has to make a moral, ethical, progressive(In terms of moving the country forward) argument to why the country should remain. Stating facts about why leaving would be awful(Or worse stating that actually it's to difficult/impossible to leave)is never going to work.
 
Sweet Square said:
Pretty much why Remain did lose and will lose if there is a another referendum. Remain has to make a moral, ethical, progressive(In terms of moving the country forward) argument to why the country should remain. Stating facts about why leaving would be awful(Or worse stating that actually it's to difficult/impossible to leave)is never going to work.
Click to expand...
Fair comment. Remainers need to spend more time explaining how countries in the EU will benefit from membership over the next 20 to 40 years and why the UK should be one of them. Leavers say negative things about the EU of course, but they also seem better at putting a positive spin on leaving, 'control', saving contributions, new trade deals and so on.

I feel fingers twitching at keyboards about to tell me the Leavers are wrong, which is kind of the point, we need to hear more about why the EU is a good thing.
 
Sweet Square said:
Pretty much why Remain did lose and will lose if there is a another referendum. Remain has to make a moral, ethical, progressive(In terms of moving the country forward) argument to why the country should remain. Stating facts about why leaving would be awful(Or worse stating that actually it's to difficult/impossible to leave)is never going to work.
Click to expand...
Surely the reasons as to why it would be awful and detrimental pretty much serve as the compelling reasons to stay. Nothing negative about that, just the plain facts.

Also, those who’s heads are firmly embedded in Brexit land would probably easily dismiss the virtues of remaining as they would the fears of leaving so it wouldn’t make a difference anyway.
 
Sweet Square said:
Pretty much why Remain did lose and will lose if there is a another referendum. Remain has to make a moral, ethical, progressive(In terms of moving the country forward) argument to why the country should remain. Stating facts about why leaving would be awful(Or worse stating that actually it's to difficult/impossible to leave)is never going to work.
Click to expand...

On the other hand leave won last time and they still can't tell anyone what the benefits are.
 
711 said:
Fair comment. Remainers need to spend more time explaining how countries in the EU will benefit from membership over the next 20 to 40 years and why the UK should be one of them. Leavers say negative things about the EU of course, but they also seem better at putting a positive spin on leaving, 'control', saving contributions, new trade deals and so on.

I feel fingers twitching at keyboards about to tell me the Leavers are wrong, which is kind of the point, we need to hear more about why the EU is a good thing.
Click to expand...

They lie, you mean. Should Remain just lie about everything, maybe they'll get more votes.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
On the other hand leave won last time and they still can't tell anyone what the benefits are.
Click to expand...

The sales pitch true or not was pretty clear: sovereignty, millions not sent to the EU and control over immigration.

Most of the EU benefits stated during the debates were just rebuffed as possible to get outside the EU namely trade and defence.

Remain did not sell the benefits of the EU they focused on risks and threats and true or not that's harder to get across to the public without substantial evidence
 
Smores said:
The sales pitch true or not was pretty clear: sovereignty, millions not sent to the EU and control over immigration.

Most of the EU benefits stated during the debates were just rebuffed as possible to get outside the EU namely trade and defence.
Click to expand...

The sales pitch for Leave was easy, just lie about everything without backing it up. After all the voters didn't care or check whether it was true or not. They heard what they wanted. Moreover, the Leave campaign knew this. Just get the gullibles to do their work for them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.