Hall Of Fame
I actually sympathise to an extent with your feelings on this Fire. Over the last few months, as negotiations have slowly developed and the parties have attempted to define their stances (or not, some might feel!), I have personally had very mixed feelings on this.Originally Posted by great_fire
On the one hand I have read the various sides of the economic arguments and have come to the conclusion that the evidence for substantial economic damage that would be caused by a hard brexit (leaving the Customs Union with no agreement) seems to outweigh, quite substantially any possible benefits from leaving without a deal and attempting to compensate with trade deals worldwide. Probably the most compelling summarised data is:
https://www.bloomberg.com/gadfly/art...tmare-for-many
although there are many other reports that back this scenario up.
I have argued on here about my concerns over immigration, especially into Northern towns such as my home town being used to undercut local work forces and pin wages down. However, last week’s episode of the Mash Report (of all things!) brought to my attention the report from the Centre for Economic Performance in 2016 that researched the economic impact of immigration to the UK overall (from 1995 to 2015) and found that, in contrast to making regions with heavy EU immigration poorer, it actually helped made the regions wealthier. It actually makes a very interesting read:
http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/brexit05.pdf
It can still be said that this positive economic data can be negated by the slightly less positive immigration data from the rest of the world (which we have discussed previously and I know your feelings on this!), which tend on balance to have an older workforce with greater integration challenges. However, crucially, when you put all of this together, the net economic +/- of immigration is minimal and looking at it purely from an economic point of view there is little there to persuade me away from the softer Brexit option with as much CU/SM benefit as possible, with the obvious trade-offs on free movement or whatever we are bargaining with/against.
That leaves the very important aspect of the cultural impact of immigration and again focused on the Northern towns. I have made clear on here my concerns about unstructured and unfocused immigration that has allowed segregated cultures to develop in many towns and in my opinion this issue will remain and escalate until politicians lead a strong initiative to integrate. I can totally understand how these areas, with large Leave voters will feel disappointed with Corbyn’s policy shift and were quietly (or vociferously!) hoping that he would put the pressure on May also for a hard Brexit and a solid halt to immigration. However, there is far more to consider than this when balancing up final stances.
In fairness to Corbyn on his decision here, the former bland non committed approach up to now has allowed him to keep his cards on the table, look at research data as it has unfolded, examine the stance of the Tories and monitor the range of opinions in his own party before making this, relatively small, policy development. That way he has avoided any accusations of U-turns and this fits within the party’s general ‘jobs first Brexit’ that they have blandly stuck to so far. He has played, and continues to plays a savvy approach to Brexit, even now getting many plaudits from business and economic leaders in response to his speech, in contrast to the Tories perceived ‘irresponsible’ and ‘business wrecking’ plunge towards a hard Brexit. These times are not strange – they are downright ****ing weird!
It will of course cause a huge backlash from the former labour supporting Leave voters, but Corbyn at the same time has to balance that with the huge strength of feeling within party members, his own cabinet and even his own former convictions to arrive at this policy shift that at least, and at last puts some clear water between the two parties. I support it but with a heavy heart and not without reservations, just through the balance of evidence presented so far.
Moderator
This thread has been moved to the Internet Millers Board. It is something that I'm trying out on the main board that will give visability to the O/T subjects but not over the football subjects.
The football subjects will have a full line of info yet these O/T topics won't.
It may change back and if it does then normal access with information will return
Hall Of Fame
How is that relevant?
Whether the economy gets better or worse we voted to leave not leave in name only.
Corbyn knows the EU won't accept his "Customs Union" idea anyway, he's just politicking to try and bring down the government, the lie of him being a "principled" politician has been busted forever, it's a Blair-like move.
Last edited by great_fire; 27-02-2018 at 02:53 PM.
Hall Of Fame
Wow kerrempo. 4 right wing terror plots foiled recently yet it's still naughty of me to call em fascists. At what point can I call them names then? As for your pal Mr gfirehow can you be sure he is not recruiting for these organisations ?You take that risk when you appear to encourage him to make extreme right wing comments on here. Hope You have a good lawyer to defend you on that one If it turns out to be right and someone accused you of supporting terrorist activities.
Moderator
Kerr Avon is not kempo neither are any of the other names strangely linked with kempo. Let's leave it out regarding kempo he hasn't posted on this thread and doesn't merit it!
Last edited by frogmiller; 27-02-2018 at 03:17 PM.
Hall Of Fame
If he ain't then I suspect another multi it does not make sense for a member of the legal profession to come on here joining in with knockabout political arguments on a football message board don't you think? It compromises him professionally it's like Kempo giving out medical advice on a footy message board as a doctor. If Kerr does work in the legal trade and he feels he needs to post on here surely his opinions would be Slap Down the centre to show his lack of bias. It's like poddington. He never joins in political debate because he's a teacher. What would the kids and parents say to him If they disagreed with his views on here? What if he started swearing or making offensive statements ? They are both public figures surely.
Hall Of Fame
Trans***ual model Munroe Bergdorf sacked by L'Oreal for calling white people "he most violent and oppressive force of nature on Earth" has just been appointed a Labour Party LGBT advisor.
Wow, just wow.
Gee I wonder why it's thought there may be up to 10,000 grooming gang victims in Rotherham now?
Last edited by great_fire; 27-02-2018 at 04:21 PM.
Moderator
Kerr has been posting for as long as I can remember and his IP addy hasn't changed and there aren't any other poster with that IP address. I've had arguments with him in the past but I would never say he's not entitled to give his view whether it is legal or otherwise. I have also learnt from him which isn't a bad thing.
What people do at work and get paid for isn't the same as what they do in their private life surely. Everyone behaves as society excepts. If they don't and it doesn't break the law or hurt anyone doing it what right do we have to condenm them? Each to their own.
As for being public figures then the user name just allows us to guess what they do with them keeping their identity secret. Unless they let you know what they do for a living then we can only guess.
Hall Of Fame
Kerr openly says he in the legal business Frog. My argument is his views on here makes me suspicious he isn't. Maybe he is who he says he is, all I would say is that if he is, he doesn't represent the legal profession very well in my opinion. I'm sure he will be on shortly arguing his case eh?
Last edited by rolymiller; 27-02-2018 at 05:17 PM.
Hall Of Fame
You are also getting into a deeply philosophical debate about "breaking the law" Frog. What is the law? Who makes the laws? Why? Who do they serve to protect? Can laws be changed? What IS breaking the law? I could go on...all very subjective stuff. My arguments with Kerr are often based on me believing the law is unfair to certain groups of people he plainly thinks it is fair to all-no he'll pick me up on that..as fair as it can be in his opinion. Get ya sen a book on sociology and law and you'll understand what i'm getting at.
Last edited by rolymiller; 27-02-2018 at 05:49 PM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote