OT. The futures Bright, the Futures Brexit!!!

[Andy_Faber]

No its an explanation as to why the EU is in favour of free movement, so we all play to the same rules. you seem to be obsessed with individual nation states as if the idea of economic and political cooperation is necessarily a bad thing when actually its largely a good thing, even if its been rather badly handled in some ways - immigration controls are a red herring and wont resolve the issues which it seems those who voted Brexit are concerned about.

I'm not trying to make a spat out of this and maybe I didn't phrase it right but I didn't ask why its a good thing for EU, I asked why (or I MEANT to ask why) its a good thing for UK or any other INDEPENDENT nation state. I'm not playing games and thanks for trying, I genuinely have never heard a convincing answer. And remember I voted Remain

[ramAnag]

Well at least prove that.

Cameron /Osborn your saviours

WW3/Pensioners penniless/each house hold 5.5k worse off/3 million lose their jobs/i could go on, but you two lovers have heard it and never explained it.

Well here's just a few examples of Farage's 'flexibility' with the truth that come to mind.
1. The infamous 'Breaking Point' poster...complete misinformation and totally misleading, not to mention...racist.
2. Suggesting Turkey was about to join the EU. Absolute scaremongering tripe.
3. Claiming that the 'majority of our laws are made in the EU'...again complete rubbish.
4. Telling us that 'staying in the EU makes us more vulnerable to terrorism'. Really? How?
5. Our courts can be overruled by the ECJ. Not where national laws, i.e. the majority of our laws, are concerned they can't.
6. His great big £350m pledge. Almost fell over himself running away from that one on the morning of the Brexit 'victory'.

Why do you think I'd ever support Cameron and Osborn on anything except the referendum? Glad to see the back of both of them, just prefer it to have been in different circumstances.

I have no idea what your last sentence rant is going on about, think you've lost the plot.

[ramAnag]

I'm not trying to make a spat out of this and maybe I didn't phrase it right but I didn't ask why its a good thing for EU, I asked why (or I MEANT to ask why) its a good thing for UK or any other INDEPENDENT nation state. I'm not playing games and thanks for trying, I genuinely have never heard a convincing answer. And remember I voted Remain

Surely Swale's point is that, what is (or was) a good thing for the EU would also be a good thing for the the people of the UK and the other independent nation states that make up the EU. How is it not a good thing for people to have their horizons extended by feeling able to work in other countries knowing that their employment conditions will be protected by EU law and that they will be entitled to free health care?

[Ram59]

Trouble is, everyone is able to extend their horizons including convicted rapists, *** offenders and other non desirables. Remember, you are relying on other eu states granting eu citizenship to the right illegal immigrants.

Us leaving does not mean that we cannot access the single market, that we cannot have a certain amount of freedom of movement and that the eu states may not go to war with each other!

[roger_ramjet]

I suspect free movement of labour isnt the problem. Its free movement of "non labour" thats the issue. The free movement of people designed to take advantage of superior benefits available in one country over another is the core of the problem.

In the same way that the Euro cannot work where there is not a common tax/fiscal policy, then mobility of labour cannot work unless there are common policies on public spending and tax, social security, healthcare, free education and so on.

In order for a fully integrated workplace to work there needs to be common rules on all these issues otherwise there will be tidal waves of people moving towards the better conditions which they have not contributed towards. Naturally the local workforce will object to this - as we have seen in this referendum. No matter that the local workforce might be too bone idle to do that work for the same wage.

Hence free movement of labour morphs into being "them bloody foreigners taking our jobs and over-burdening the NHS and NES and our other social services...."

In principle free mobility of labour is a fine objective but it has to be between countries of equal economic activity and with level playing fields. In the original 6 or 9 member EU that we signed up for this could have worked but in the very uneven EU we are now leaving, the expansion into less developed economies has bent labour mobility out of shape.

Monile labour is drawn to those countries providing the better conditions and the workforce in those attractive countries object as market forces then react to the oversupply of labour by evening up / reducing the advantage. Xenophobia, never far under the surface, readily emerges as individuals see their personal conditions eroding

[Andy_Faber]

Surely Swale's point is that, what is (or was) a good thing for the EU would also be a good thing for the the people of the UK and the other independent nation states that make up the EU. How is it not a good thing for people to have their horizons extended by feeling able to work in other countries knowing that their employment conditions will be protected by EU law and that they will be entitled to free health care?

You are both answering a different question! I AGREE that its 'a good thing for people to have their horizons extended by feeling able to work in other countries knowing that their employment conditions will be protected' but that DOESN'T require free movement of labour. It only requires that where a real job exists, its up for grabs to the best person from wherever.

[Andy_Faber]

Roger, very well put.

[ramAnag]

Trouble is, everyone is able to extend their horizons including convicted rapists, *** offenders and other non desirables. Remember, you are relying on other eu states granting eu citizenship to the right illegal immigrants.

Us leaving does not mean that we cannot access the single market, that we cannot have a certain amount of freedom of movement and that the eu states may not go to war with each other!

'Xenophobia' def; 'Having a deep rooted mistrust and fear of foreigners'.

Why is it that every time mention is made of people from 'abroad' the likes of you and Tricky automatically go into 'lowest common denominator' mode? It's like that old 'word - association - football' sketch. I'll say 'foreigner' and you'll say...'convicted rapist'. I'll mention 'Muslim' and you'll come up with....'terrorist' or '*** offender'. What the hell has gone on with you to make you react like that?

I understand that we have to protect ourselves against trouble makers and undesirables. I understand that we should have the right to deport individuals who break our laws or threaten the stability of our society. I understand the intelligent arguments put forward by the likes of RR and the sometimes more pedantic ones introduced by Andy. I understand, even though I still believe that the Referendum was a ridiculous excercise in national 'self harm', that there are two sides to the Brexit argument, but I will never understand the xenophobic hatred that you regularly introduce to this forum.

[Andy_Faber]

Very interestingly, the labour leadership wallah, Owen Smith stated on Newsnight last night that he believes that the UK should looby/negotiate hard to 'do a deal' for free movement of goods and services WITHOUT free movement of labour. Easy for him to say in opposition but maybe a hint of the nature of the negotiations to come.

[ramAnag]

Bound too isn't he Andy? His role would be to try and rescue our trading ability from the 'wreckage' of the Brexit vote whilst simultaneously trying to win back the support of voters in the Labour 'heartlands' who focussed on the impact of immigration.