Sheeple Splinter Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 1 hour ago, Confusion of VIs said: Because the people we want to do trade deals with (China and India) are saying they expect a more liberal visa regime including free movement of labor as part of the package. Whether this would lead to what could reasonably be described as mass migration is anybody's guess, but presumably the non EU immigration will go up significantly. 1 hour ago, the gardener said: Do you do everything someone asks you? Asking for the moon on a stick doesn't mean you get it. What TM actually said according to this article: Quote Negotiating closer trading relationship, PM says she will improve visa offer if India takes back citizens who are in UK illegally https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/nov/07/theresa-may-visa-offer-india-citizens-uk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheeple Splinter Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 (edited) 43 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said: Quite. However, as to the best of my knowledge every country we have recently approached about trade deals China, India and Australia have linked trade with greater freedom of movement, thinking we can become a more global free trading nation while limiting migration is looking increasingly implausible. Hmm. Controlled immigration via visa criteria: Quote Downer told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “We would want to see greater access for Australian businesspeople working in the UK and that’s often been a part of free trade negotiations – it hasn’t always been by the way, but it’s often been part of our free trade negotiations. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jan/21/australia-to-seek-uk-migration-deal-in-brexit-trade-talks Afterall, that was one of the pillars for Brexit. Edited January 30, 2017 by Sheeple Splinter typo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confusion of VIs Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 3 minutes ago, Sheeple Splinter said: Hmm. Controlled immigration via visa criteria: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jan/21/australia-to-seek-uk-migration-deal-in-brexit-trade-talks Afterall.that was one of the pillars for Brexit. But less controlled than at present, so very likely that immigration will go up. Still the architects of Brexit were very careful to avoid saying that controlled migration meant less migration, so no point in complaining about that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confusion of VIs Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 40 minutes ago, Sheeple Splinter said: What TM actually said according to this article: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/nov/07/theresa-may-visa-offer-india-citizens-uk My point wasn't about what May would like, it was about other countries linking free trade with free(r) movement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confusion of VIs Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 49 minutes ago, Sheeple Splinter said: Knowing we couldn't make the EU work. It's almost the anniversary of Cameron's cracking EU deal announcement. Time scale: We will be trading with european countries and the RoW the day after we leave the EU. Lawyers and trade negotiators: not if we attract professionals from the RoW... So you were/are completely defeatist when it comes to dealing with the EU. The relevant time scale is the time taken to build the trade deals that will replace the single market and its linked trade deals. Saying we will be trading the day after is a statement of the obvious, we will be trading but not as freely as the day before. Even if we recruit freely from the RoW (and ignoring the fact we are currently trying to do this but making very slow progress) and assuming that everyone plays nicely and we manage to conclude deals in half the time they have taken to date we are still talking 10s of years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccc Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 11 hours ago, Mikhail Liebenstein said: Not sure what the bet was, you may have mentioned sums of money, but there was no definition or rules. Make it something like "If in 10 years from now, either the U.K. hasn't signed a trade deal with India or if having signed a trade deal with India that the UK won't see increases in immigration from India then you might get some takers. Especially if you agreed to pay the winner £100k on £1k down, " So no trade deal CC pays out, a trade deal and an associated increase in Indian immigration and CC pays out. Trade deal and Indian immigration falls or stays flat and CC wins." So you admit your chat is full of ******** ? My bet was based on your post. End of story. Stop making yourself look even more foolish. Money + mouth. Fire in. You are full of shit and don't have the balls to admit it. £10k bet is on the table. Grab your balls or admit your a pussy. Choice is yours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccc Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 This is amazing - it shows in black and white how full of shite the most angry remainers are. Total pussies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccc Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 £10k Money Mouth Fire In Pussies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riedquat Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 (edited) 9 hours ago, Confusion of VIs said: But less controlled than at present, so very likely that immigration will go up. Still the architects of Brexit were very careful to avoid saying that controlled migration meant less migration, so no point in complaining about that Certainly with countries like Australia it shouldn't be a problem, as long as it works both ways. Probably end up more of an issue for the Aussies I'd have thought, with them getting more immigration. Need to be a lot more careful with places like China and India, although quite what they want to gain by having their useful people pack up and leave (they'll mostly be the ones who can afford to) I can't figure out. Well I suppose both are overpopulated too, so anything to get the numbers down. Controlled migration should mean less migration, if TPTB act responsibly. Like most of your arguments your position appears to be based on the assumption that they won't (which is entirely understandable), and that nothing should be done to make them so (which is entirely incomprehensible). I've still not heard what your solution is to the huge problem we've got with immigration being a big problem of completely undesirable and definitely unsustainable population growth. Bury your head in the sand I suppose. Edited January 30, 2017 by Riedquat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kzb Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 14 hours ago, One-percent said: According to a mate who worked for ici, they made it by the bucket load. They were a chemical manufacturer. That's all you need to know really I think people are getting confused with soya-based meat substitutes. Quorn is made from fungus, not soya. Soy is indeed a pseudo-estrogen. It's a widespread ingredient of loads of foods including bread. Not just vegetarian foods. Some people do link it to male fertility decrease, man boobs, breast cancer and obesity. Come to think about it, maybe the current campaign against sugar is a cover up for the real cause. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steppenpig Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 3 hours ago, ccc said: £10k Money Mouth Fire In Pussies Is that your travel report from your trip to Malaysia? (Sorry, not meaning to interrupt or anything) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccc Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 1 minute ago, Steppenpig said: Is that your travel report from your trip to Malaysia? (Sorry, not meaning to interrupt or anything) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kzb Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 11 hours ago, Confusion of VIs said: Quite. However, as to the best of my knowledge every country we have recently approached about trade deals China, India and Australia have linked trade with greater freedom of movement, thinking we can become a more global free trading nation while limiting migration is looking increasingly implausible. Greater freedom of movement is not the same as uncontrolled mass migration. For one thing, it will be about the movement of employed persons only, not just free movement of people. Having said that, I am not if favour of more freedom of trading with China. They don't play fair. I'm with Trump on this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kzb Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 Confusion of VIs: I've been meaning to ask for some time. it's a bit difficult to be concise but here goes: When you were employed in the EU, presumably you accessed this forum and other mainstream-sceptical sites. You must have been aware of the growing dissatisfaction and alienation amongst the working population of the UK. And that some of this would be directed against the EU. But what about your colleagues? Was this ever discussed? Or were they existing in their own echo-chamber, as it is now called? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confusion of VIs Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 3 minutes ago, kzb said: Greater freedom of movement is not the same as uncontrolled mass migration. For one thing, it will be about the movement of employed persons only, not just free movement of people. Having said that, I am not if favour of more freedom of trading with China. They don't play fair. I'm with Trump on this one. I didn't say it was although others on he thread have described it as that. Yes it will be about freedom of labor rather than full FoM. As to China not playing fair, since when have trade deals been about playing fair. They are about power with the stronger countries always getting the better side of the deal. As the US is a past master of this it's a bit rich that they are now complaining about China. If we are to forge new trade deals as the Brexiteers, we will not be able to be picky about either who we do deals with or their terms. Unfortunately we can expect to see lots more of May sucking up to likes of Trump and Erdogan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confusion of VIs Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 2 hours ago, Riedquat said: Certainly with countries like Australia it shouldn't be a problem, as long as it works both ways. Probably end up more of an issue for the Aussies I'd have thought, with them getting more immigration. Need to be a lot more careful with places like China and India, although quite what they want to gain by having their useful people pack up and leave (they'll mostly be the ones who can afford to) I can't figure out. Well I suppose both are overpopulated too, so anything to get the numbers down. Controlled migration should mean less migration, if TPTB act responsibly. Like most of your arguments your position appears to be based on the assumption that they won't (which is entirely understandable), and that nothing should be done to make them so (which is entirely incomprehensible). I've still not heard what your solution is to the huge problem we've got with immigration being a big problem of completely undesirable and definitely unsustainable population growth. Bury your head in the sand I suppose. China has long encouraged outward migration as they see their huge diaspora as a major source of soft power. For India it is probably more about self respect, they see the days of having to kowtow to their old colonial masters as long past and now want to be treated as equals. The only way Brexit can work is if the UK becomes a more global, open and free trading country. The intellectual leaders of the Brexit campaign know this and also know that doing this while simultaneously reducing immigration would be very difficult, hence they didn't make any claims about reducing immigration. I think migration should be reduced, that this could have been done within the EU and that as the problem is mainly the creation of the UK government expecting leaving the EU to solve the problem is illogical. As to the world's population growth, there is a known way of solving this make people richer and they have less children. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confusion of VIs Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 25 minutes ago, kzb said: Confusion of VIs: I've been meaning to ask for some time. it's a bit difficult to be concise but here goes: When you were employed in the EU, presumably you accessed this forum and other mainstream-sceptical sites. You must have been aware of the growing dissatisfaction and alienation amongst the working population of the UK. And that some of this would be directed against the EU. But what about your colleagues? Was this ever discussed? Or were they existing in their own echo-chamber, as it is now called? In was a long time ago, 90s, so there wasn't the same sense of dissatisfaction. I have kept in contact with a quite a few of the people I worked with and are still there, partly because I still had occasional dealings with Brussels while at the Home Office. They did discus the developing anti EU climate and many suspected that at some point we would vote to leave. They saw this as likely result of the tendency to scapegoat our membership of the EU for any negative consequences arising from UK government decisions/policy. The also saw the UK as very poor in regard to playing a positive role in moving the EU forward in particular wasting capital and energy in political machinations, such as continually pushing for enlargement, rather than practical steps that would benefit the UK, such as developing the single market to fully encompass services. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kzb Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 Watched the BBC parliament channel Brexit economics committee last night. Here are some interesting points: There is an association of 32 countries, within which aircraft parts are traded freely. We are in this grouping, and there should be no problem with Airbus parts being hit by trade restrictions. In the motor manufacturing sector, an issue for trade deals is country of origin. Usually, at least 55% of a vehicle has to be sourced from the stated country of origin. In the UK we are averaging only 41% currently. Germany manages 65%. So it depends how you look at it if you consider this is problem. Personally I think this can only be a good thing, because motor manufacturers will have to on-shore their supply chains to a greater extent, thus providing UK jobs. One MP stated that exports in goods exceeds that in services, which I was a bit surprised at. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheeple Splinter Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 12 hours ago, Confusion of VIs said: But less controlled than at present, so very likely that immigration will go up. Still the architects of Brexit were very careful to avoid saying that controlled migration meant less migration, so no point in complaining about that No, just controlled. EU immigration numbers will fall once FoM is stopped. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheeple Splinter Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 12 hours ago, Confusion of VIs said: My point wasn't about what May would like, it was about other countries linking free trade with free(r) movement. You are not alone in conflating freedom of movement with controlled immigration but the difference is important. TM made her views clear on visas to the Indian representatives i.e. she did not just roll over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confusion of VIs Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 1 minute ago, Sheeple Splinter said: No, just controlled. EU immigration numbers will fall once FoM is stopped. But if we actually enforced the existing FoM rules about being economically self sufficient we could reduce the numbers now. Instead we appear to be happy to let probably another 300k come before we leave and the drawbridge is pulled up - why is that? As to the immigrants coming to work they will still come under whatever permit system is put in place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccc Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 1 minute ago, Confusion of VIs said: But if we actually enforced the existing FoM rules about being economically self sufficient we could reduce the numbers now. Instead we appear to be happy to let probably another 300k come before we leave and the drawbridge is pulled up - why is that? As to the immigrants coming to work they will still come under whatever permit system is put in place. A permit system we are in charge of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confusion of VIs Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 2 minutes ago, Sheeple Splinter said: You are not alone in conflating freedom of movement with controlled immigration but the difference is important. TM made her views clear on visas to the Indian representatives i.e. she did not just roll over. What is said at this stage is pretty irrelevant, we won't know her or the Indian's true positions until the horse trading is over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheeple Splinter Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 12 hours ago, Confusion of VIs said: So you were/are completely defeatist when it comes to dealing with the EU. The relevant time scale is the time taken to build the trade deals that will replace the single market and its linked trade deals. Saying we will be trading the day after is a statement of the obvious, we will be trading but not as freely as the day before. Even if we recruit freely from the RoW (and ignoring the fact we are currently trying to do this but making very slow progress) and assuming that everyone plays nicely and we manage to conclude deals in half the time they have taken to date we are still talking 10s of years. Not defeatist, waited for Cameron's negations, would have preferred negotiations ...EU's not for turning, ...time to move on. Time will tell... hint: WTO/UNECE etc. 10's of days according to the USA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheeple Splinter Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 2 hours ago, Steppenpig said: Is that your travel report from your trip to Malaysia? (Sorry, not meaning to interrupt or anything) Adam's apple wasn't in the list so doubt it was Malaysia! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.