The Brexit referendum thread: potential consequences for GB, EU and the Brits in CH - Page 978

fatmanfilms · #**19541** 01.04.2019, 16:57

	Quote:
	Really? Seems immigration featured in two of the top three reasons for Brexit. http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/why_vote_leave.html

Thats an organisation, no proof that voters thought that way & voted due to immigration.

#**19542** 01.04.2019, 17:01

	Quote:	fatmanfilms
	Thats an organisation, no proof that voters thought that way & voted due to immigration.

Websites like that most likely garnered much more traffic, clicks, shares and attention than people taking the time to read the entire Maastricht Treaty to make their minds up, though.

bowlie · #**19543** 01.04.2019, 17:28

	Quote:	fatmanfilms
	Thats an organisation, no proof that voters thought that way & voted due to immigration.

Have you seen this YouTube video of Dominic Cummings, Leaves campaign director?

Only about 97k people have viewed the dissection of “Why Leave won the referendum” in his own words.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDbR...&frags=pl%2Cwn

#**19544** 01.04.2019, 17:46

	Quote:	fatmanfilms
	I don't think they are particularly bothered by immigration, it's just the retainers clutching at straws.

Oh no?

	Quote:
	Brexit: People voted to leave EU because they feared immigration, major survey finds

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a7811651.html

	Quote:
	The two main reasons people voted Leave were ‘immigration’ and ‘sovereignty’

http://csi.nuff.ox.ac.uk/?p=1153 (btw Immigration was No. 1)

fatmanfilms · #**19545** 01.04.2019, 18:00

	Quote:	bowlie
	Have you seen this YouTube video of Dominic Cummings, Leaves campaign director? Only about 97k people have viewed the dissection of “Why Leave won the referendum” in his own words. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDbR...&frags=pl%2Cwn

It's very good, thank you for the link.

A small start up agency beats large established, very much why I would prefer not to be in a huge organisation like the EU.

SponPlague · #**19546** 01.04.2019, 18:01

There was a chinese mathematician who had done good service to the emperor, and was offered his choice of reward. He asked for a chess board, with one grain of rice on square 1, two on 2, four on 3 etc.

They started setting it up and the emperor was chuckling at first.

By the middle of the third row, the mathematicians head was lopped off for impudence!

If UK immigration is a chessboard, at what square are we uncomfortable with available space/resources, and when do we stop?

#**19547** 01.04.2019, 18:03

	Quote:	fatmanfilms
	It's very good, thank you for the link. A small start up agency beats large established, very much why I would prefer not to be in a huge organisation like the EU.

The "established party" joined "start up" in the early 70s, though.

fatmanfilms · #**19548** 01.04.2019, 18:36

	Quote:
	The "established party" joined "start up" in the early 70s, though.

He was unemployed at the start of the campaign, so it's a moot point. As he was born in November 1971, he won't have had a crucial role as an infant in the early 70's

#**19549** 01.04.2019, 19:01

	Quote:	SponPlague
	There was a chinese mathematician who had done good service to the emperor, and was offered his choice of reward. He asked for a chess board, with one grain of rice on square 1, two on 2, four on 3 etc. They started setting it up and the emperor was chuckling at first. By the middle of the third row, the mathematicians head was lopped off for impudence!

off-topic

Was thinking of this some days ago when I could not sleep, mostly I than just pick some math and try to work it out in my head (yes, I like math). When taking 3 cubic mm on average for a single grain of rice the chess board would roughly contain a bit above 55 Cubic kilometers of rice.

(And boy was I happy this was not about a board for draughts)

/off-topic

dandi · #**19550** 01.04.2019, 20:19

	Quote:	SponPlague
	There was a chinese mathematician who had done good service to the emperor, and was offered his choice of reward. He asked for a chess board, with one grain of rice on square 1, two on 2, four on 3 etc. They started setting it up and the emperor was chuckling at first. By the middle of the third row, the mathematicians head was lopped off for impudence! If UK immigration is a chessboard, at what square are we uncomfortable with available space/resources, and when do we stop?

Fake analogy for a fake issue.

Immigration does not grow exponentially. It grows fast at first but it tails off quickly. The analogy with the chess board only works to scare the simpletons that can't think beyond a couple of squares

UK immigration from EU was not that much worse than what other EU countries had such as Italy, Spain, Germany - so "comfortable" is quite relative

Yes, immigration has been one of the main reasons people voted for Brexit (obviously ignoring that EU migration is/was only half of the total UK immigration). And immigration is the only thing that May's deal achieved to (partially) control. But in the end EU should not allow the UK the benefits of the single market without enforcing the free movement criteria, as it does with Switzerland as well

SponPlague · #**19551** 01.04.2019, 20:47

	Quote:	dandi
	Fake analogy for a fake issue. Immigration does not grow exponentially. It grows fast at first but it tails off quickly. The analogy with the chess board only works to scare the simpletons that can't think beyond a couple of squares UK immigration from EU was not that much worse than what other EU countries had such as Italy, Spain, Germany - so "comfortable" is quite relative Yes, immigration has been one of the main reasons people voted for Brexit (obviously ignoring that EU migration is/was only half of the total UK immigration). And immigration is the only thing that May's deal achieved to (partially) control. But in the end EU should not allow the UK the benefits of the single market without enforcing the free movement criteria, as it does with Switzerland as well

Agree it’s not exponential. My point is, people need to decide what capacity they’re able to support locally. Bliar did zero planning and ended up with a disaster - no resources and no local budget to pay for school places, hospitals, housing, you name it...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...would-come-uk/

marton · #**19552** 01.04.2019, 21:33

	Quote:	dandi
	Fake analogy for a fake issue. Immigration does not grow exponentially. It grows fast at first but it tails off quickly. The analogy with the chess board only works to scare the simpletons that can't think beyond a couple of squares UK immigration from EU was not that much worse than what other EU countries had such as Italy, Spain, Germany - so "comfortable" is quite relative Yes, immigration has been one of the main reasons people voted for Brexit (obviously ignoring that EU migration is/was only half of the total UK immigration). And immigration is the only thing that May's deal achieved to (partially) control. But in the end EU should not allow the UK the benefits of the single market without enforcing the free movement criteria, as it does with Switzerland as well

Agreed, the analogy also ignores the well established fact that immigrants are net contributors so the more immigrants then the more resources available!

Source

And an official UK Government report
Our analysis, and that of a number of academics, suggests that across the whole economy inward migration adds more to revenue than to expenditure.

SponPlague · #**19553** 01.04.2019, 21:47

Local councils were allocated resources/grants based on numbers sent there, but the numbers weren’t counted, so the councils lost out. (Sorry, Google can’t find that article for me).

http://theconversation.com/the-huge-...-britain-66077

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-24924219

marton · #**19554** 01.04.2019, 21:55

	Quote:	SponPlague
	Local councils were allocated resources/grants based on numbers sent there, but the numbers weren’t counted, so the councils lost out. (Sorry, Google can’t find that article for me). http://theconversation.com/the-huge-...-britain-66077 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-24924219

But the elephant in this room is that every year there were more non-EU migrants than EU migrants so why focus on EU migrants and associated Labour govt. decisions?
Makes no logical sense unless it is a political ploy to smear Labour??

#**19555** 02.04.2019, 00:13

All four of the second round of indicative votes have failed to achieve majority approval—AGAIN!

#**19556** 02.04.2019, 00:34

Grrr...

That is all.

#**19557** 02.04.2019, 00:36

The Customs Union only lost by 3 votes.

They're pushing it out for a 2nd Ref.

Rob · #**19558** 02.04.2019, 00:43

Seems about right.

#**19559** 02.04.2019, 00:49

Guy Verhofstadt is not impressed.

https://twitter.com/guyverhofstadt/s...31988145287173

Blueangel · #**19560** 02.04.2019, 10:47

	Quote:	marton
	Agreed, the analogy also ignores the well established fact that immigrants are net contributors so the more immigrants then the more resources available!

Which is why there is a flase logic in assuming that immigrants are a drain on social housing and the benefits system. The majority of immigrants move to the UK with a job already, and housing that they 100% pay for themselves.

9 of my family members, including my OH, emigrated to the UK. Not a single one of them did so without either 1) a job to go to, or 2) substantial capital to back them in their job and home search. In fact, the only one who didn't immediately have a job to go to, paid over £330k for his 4 bed detached house in Cheshire in 1999, a couple of months after he arrived.