are you denying that the Tories overspent and have to answer for it?Quote:
Originally Posted by swaledale
Printable View
are you denying that the Tories overspent and have to answer for it?Quote:
Originally Posted by swaledale
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trickytreesreds
Funnily enough I've just got back from Germany, was there during the shopping mall killings and whilst there is certainly disquiet over the number of refugees that have been accepted, apart from those well known bastions of the measured truth tabloid press which in germany as the UK like to peddle fiction and hyperbole as facts, most Germans do not suscribe to what you have just described as one said to me I remember the Red Army faction, the munich olympic massacres.
You really need to calm down and stop reading conspiracy theories, its not good for your mental state - mind you following Forest must be stressful.
Well at least prove that.Quote:
Originally Posted by ramAnag
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.
Its all getting a bit terracy so can I ask a serious question to do with brexit that hasn't been addressed in the previous 453 replies, and I won't support it with anecdotes or opinions:
Why do UK (or for that matter ANY sovereign nation) actually need free movement of people, when labour needs could be managed by the CONTROLLED movement of people?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trickytreesreds
As well as being an unhinged xenophobic, believer in conspiracies you are obviously ****ing blind, because you dont read what Anagram and I said, which was that firstly we have no love for Cameron and secondly we never held that upas reasons why we should remain in the EU.
Jeez you really do demonstrate an inability to understand whats been said (most likley because your so eager to spew out some more xenophobic bile) and rather worryingly a distinctly loose grip on reality!l
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy_Faber
Two reasons really, one the idea was that if people could move freely for economic reasons, i.e.e to work, then people would see each other as fellow citizens and reduce the likely hood of a future war between european nations, seems odd now maybe, but remember this was after WW2 when there had been two european conflicts within decades.
Secondly the freedom of people to move within the EU, was about removing the barriers to trade and employment, increasing flexibility and enhancing that sense of community - if a country was able to block this through controls, then humans being humans all sorts of reasons would be used to gain an unfair advantage by each country, able to access the single market but pick and choose which conditions they observed. Bit like joining a club and being able to only sign up those rules which you like and ignore the ones you dont. Now of course there can be negotiations to chnage these rules but as nay club membe rknows there has to be a consensus.
On the terrorism issue, anyone who thinks that stopping free movement will stop those determined to stop attacks is living in la la land, after all the USA has some of the strictest border controls of any country yet that didn't stop 9/11.
That's great but you didn't answer the question. Most people don't.
Yes i did - if you have controls on movement, then people dont have the freedom to move across the EU, controlled movement would mean that each country would use those controls according to how they thought it would benefit them, thought I'd explained that clearly really, if you dont want to play by the rules dont join the club, if you dont join the club then dont expect to benefit from being a club member, we have decided we dont want to be in the club, but we'd kind of like to still get the benefits we like, will that happen? We shall see - by the way we retained the right to have border controls, just not the right to refuse entry to people who had a legitimate reason to enter the country.
That's an argument in favour (of individual nation states) having controlled immigrationQuote:
Originally Posted by swaledale
Quote:
Originally Posted by 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.