Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
TheCountOfNowhere

Ex banker macron says to ex banker may we can change our minds on brexit

Recommended Posts

I've been saying this before the GE even happened. The first past the post voting system meant that we were never going to see an increase in Tory majority in parliament. Brexit voters were a mix of Labour (northern) UKIP and Tory. It was always more likely to be a hung parliament.

Why would she hold a snap general election, not turn up to debates and alienate her core boomer voters by proposing social care out of house values and ending the triple lock?

It's almost as if May and the tories had always planned a watered down Brexit after the referendum as it would be the easiest to negotiate with the EU (i.e freedom of movement baked into the deal).

IMG_3446.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Three quarter want managed migration. If we don't lose the freedom of movement clause the Torys will never get back into power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Blod said:

Three quarter want managed migration. If we don't lose the freedom of movement clause the Torys will never get back into power.

Yep. They fear being left at the back of the queue so they'll panda  to what ever keeps power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the better approach would be to remove the motivation/excuses for the demands on immigrant work force. This would mean significant investment in our youth, not charging them £9k a year to stay off the dole, so won't happen.

You dont think they'll have their cake and eat it? Anyone you thinks the elite will allow the ceasing of cheap labour flows is having a laugh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, PopGun said:

Maybe the better approach would be to remove the motivation/excuses for the demands on immigrant work force. This would mean significant investment in our youth, not charging them £9k a year to stay off the dole, so won't happen.

You dont think they'll have their cake and eat it? Anyone you thinks the elite will allow the ceasing of cheap labour flows is having a laugh.

One of the main purposes of free movement is to avoid having to train people here, so this is unlikely to change even if we lost free movement.  We're inclined towards a low-skill economy, so we'll just carry on with that.  

What they ought to do is tax businesses employing foreign labour, proportional to the number they employ.

This way you can raise or lower the tax in order to control the flow of people, you profit from the demand from foreign workers, but you keep free movement and so can potentially keep whatever trade agreement that is contingent on it.

Oh and have an 18 year residency requirement for benefits, that's a no brainer.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, maverick73 said:

Yep. They fear being left at the back of the queue so they'll panda  to what ever keeps power.

So will Labour. There will be a massive movement toward any party willing to offer a future to our young by campaigning for a return to domestic control of migration. Public focus is squarely on that issue, soft/hard Brexit is purely a media construct. In the eyes of two thirds we only Brexit if that control is returned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The election made no sense as any political advisor with even basic skills could have seen the risk.

Looks like any exit won't have much meaning or May calls a referendum on the exit deal for approval. Although what implications a no gives is an interesting thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, DrBuyToLeech said:

What they ought to do is tax businesses employing foreign labour, proportional to the number they employ.

This way you can raise or lower the tax in order to control the flow of people, you profit from the demand from foreign workers, but you keep free movement and so can potentially keep whatever trade agreement that is contingent on it.

Oh and have an 18 year residency requirement for benefits, that's a no brainer.

Though all very logical we may not be allowed to impose taxes like those nor implement residency rules. We either Brexit or don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, interestrateripoff said:

The election made no sense as any political advisor with even basic skills could have seen the risk.

Looks like any exit won't have much meaning or May calls a referendum on the exit deal for approval. Although what implications a no gives is an interesting thought.

The opposite.  Nobody expected any other result than a whopping Tory majority because nobody expected May and her inner cabal of advisors to be so utterly inept.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ElPapasito said:

The opposite.  Nobody expected any other result than a whopping Tory majority because nobody expected May and her inner cabal of advisors to be so utterly inept.

They weren't inept. They did it on purpose so they could get a soft Brexit. As the Count says, this was all done on purpose so the bankers don't lose their cash cows.

Edited by fru-gal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, sideysid said:

I've been saying this before the GE even happened. The first past the post voting system meant that we were never going to see an increase in Tory majority in parliament. Brexit voters were a mix of Labour (northern) UKIP and Tory. It was always more likely to be a hung parliament.

Why would she hold a snap general election, not turn up to debates and alienate her core boomer voters by proposing social care out of house values and ending the triple lock?

It's almost as if May and the tories had always planned a watered down Brexit after the referendum as it would be the easiest to negotiate with the EU (i.e freedom of movement baked into the deal).

This has crossed my mind a few times.

Trouble is....once you start down this route, you see it everywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, sideysid said:

I've been saying this before the GE even happened. The first past the post voting system meant that we were never going to see an increase in Tory majority in parliament. Brexit voters were a mix of Labour (northern) UKIP and Tory. It was always more likely to be a hung parliament.

Why would she hold a snap general election, not turn up to debates and alienate her core boomer voters by proposing social care out of house values and ending the triple lock?

It's almost as if May and the tories had always planned a watered down Brexit after the referendum as it would be the easiest to negotiate with the EU (i.e freedom of movement baked into the deal).

IMG_3446.JPG

It's as plain as the nose on my face.

The saying quoted to me is along the lines of "don't attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity", but nobody is that stupid. This was theatre.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DrBuyToLeech said:

One of the main purposes of free movement is to avoid having to train people here, so this is unlikely to change even if we lost free movement.  We're inclined towards a low-skill economy, so we'll just carry on with that. 

How long before other countries realise the futility of training people only for them to clear off and work elsewhere? Can't imagine them keen on the idea of funding our training for us indefinitely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Blod said:

Three quarter want managed migration. If we don't lose the freedom of movement clause the Torys will never get back into power.

Agree. There can be no question of a 'soft' brexit.

In order to carry out the wishes of the majority in the referendum, it will mean controlling immigration, not being under any control from the ECJ and therefore not in the single market.

This is simply a given. Anything else would just be absurd as we would effectively still be in the EU.

What part of 'WE WANT TO LEAVE' do these people not understand? Any sort of jurisdiction by the ECJ or the EU over the UK must end and the UK must be clear to deal with its borders as it wishes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Errol said:

Any sort of jurisdiction by the ECJ or the EU over the UK must end and the UK must be clear to deal with its borders as it wishes.

Yeah, we want to be the ones to decide to continue letting just as many people in as before the referendum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, LC1 said:

Yeah, we want to be the ones to decide to continue letting just as many people in as before the referendum.

I'm fine with this. At least then we will know exactly who is responsible, and the option would always be open to kick them out or vote in a protest party in a revolution.

With the EU, it's impossible to fight back. It's always the fault of someone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

these stories almost make me think they are putting political speed bumps in the brexit highway to make the masses change their mind. 

surely bankers would not do that :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Errol said:

I'm fine with this. At least then we will know exactly who is responsible, and the option would always be open to kick them out or vote in a protest party in a revolution.

With the EU, it's impossible to fight back. It's always the fault of someone else.

That could explain why politicians love it so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, iamnumerate said:

That could explain why politicians love it so much.

Yes, it could well be.

I also intuitively prefer having nationally elected politicians who are directly accountable make these kind of decisions.

But the problem is, many who voted for Brexit thought they were voting for lower immigration. They'll be waiting a long time for it and may never live to see the day, I suspect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Errol said:

Agree. There can be no question of a 'soft' brexit.

In order to carry out the wishes of the majority in the referendum, it will mean controlling immigration, not being under any control from the ECJ and therefore not in the single market.

This is simply a given. Anything else would just be absurd as we would effectively still be in the EU.

What part of 'WE WANT TO LEAVE' do these people not understand? Any sort of jurisdiction by the ECJ or the EU over the UK must end and the UK must be clear to deal with its borders as it wishes.

You are not keeping up. The hard Brexit bus has come and gone, the option now is soft Brexit (EEA Norway type deal) or no Brexit.

Immigration levels are at their current high level because that's what the government wanted. They had lots of levers they could have pulled to reduce it but decided not to, so it far fetched to think that giving them a few more levers not to pull would have made any significant difference.  

Edited by Confusion of VIs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Conservatives back down now they will lose massively and the ground is open for Farage to return. The referendum result was clear. The recent election had nothing to do with Brexit and was fought on internal issues (tax, care etc).

With the right backing, Farage could lead a movement that could cause significant amounts of trouble. 

Edited by Errol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said:

Immigration levels are at their current high level because that's what the government wanted. They had lots of levers they could have pulled to reduce it 

Not really. Most of the immigration over the last ten years has been EU based. There are no levers to pull. In the EU we have no choice but to admit them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   100 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.