Neville Bartos wrote:Free movement between EU member states is not classed as immigration.
Call it "free movement" if you like, but we both know that's nothing more than a technicality. It's immigration.
It would take a momentous fucking argument for anyone to convince me that the whole "freedom of movement" shite is anything other than a ploy by the wealthier nations within this club to gain access to a largely ununionised, cheap workforce from the poorer members in places like Eastern Europe.
Even the most simple-minded fool could see that when the likes of Bulgaria and Romania were brought into the fold we'd see an uneven surge of immigration (or freedom of movement if you like) from these nations.
It's a smart move by those in power really, as they gain access to a cheaper job market, driving down wages, and manage to gag most complaints about it as simply being "racist."
Neville Bartos wrote:There's also no obligation to take refugees. And unless you're a member of Schengen, anyone without EU documentation can be turned away.
There's no obligation, but it's heavily fucking frowned upon if you don't play the game, isn't it? We've seen the shite that gets slung at governments who don't "take their fair share."
Neville Bartos wrote:
Lying, conniving, hypocritical fucktards like Rees-Mogg promised we'd get a deal like Norway. The fucking idiot is even on film espousing his support for a second referendum.
Now he wants to gamble with my fucking livelihood while he stashes his own loot in Dublin, just in case it goes tits up? He can fuck right off, and so can any cunt who agrees with him.
Well, these dolts who are carrying out negotiations are simply representatives of the democratically elected government of this piece of rock we call home, so it's really those who voted the cunts in who are to blame.
Neville Bartos wrote:According to polls the main reasons behind a leave vote were political and judicial autonomy.
You think the majority of people who voted to leave the EU did so because of "judicial autonomy?"
Christ mate, come on. Polls are a pile of shite. They told us that Trump wouldn't win the election, didn't they? The pollsters have constantly been made to look silly of late.
Neville Bartos wrote:No EU member state is legally obliged to allow any non EU citizens to enter that state. Irrespective of how many refugees Germany allows in.
Again, a simplistic way of looking at it. Do you think if the UK said "right, we're taking in absolutely no one" the likes of Merkel would just have shrugged her shoulders and said "ah well, that's how it goes under the rules I guess?"
Of course not. There's political antics that go on mate, you know that. You're being selectively ignorant here.
Neville Bartos wrote:This is exactly the kind of non factual fear mongering I find exasperating.
Almost as exasperating as I find people holding the EU to account for unfettered immigration, but letting our own government off the hook for allowing just as many non EU immigrants in. If we didn't need em, why did the Tories let them all in?
No one is "letting the Tories off the hook" though, are they? The people I know who complain about immigration are constantly banging on about how the Government are at it, and how they're a bunch of wealthy cunts who are playing politics to the benefit of them and their friends.
And we don't "need em," we accept them into the country because they'll work for lower rates of pay for the most part, and aren't overly keen on unionising.
That benefits big business, and at the end of the day it's big business that matters, not the poor sods who are at the bottom of the pile, be they Polish, Pakistani, Romanian or from Dagenham.
I don't see how anyone could have thought free movement on top of expansion into less well developed economies would work.
Of course there's going to be a huge migration of (especially young) workers from east to west.
Given most countries have minimum wage legislation, I think it might have been more about cheaper and more abundant professional workers.
As well as a nice supply of people willing to do the jobs most westerners won't. Cleaners, carers, orderlies, mental health workers, anything involving manual labour.
We use a contract cleaning company and I've not spoken to any cleaner with a British accent in over a decade.
I don't want to sound all right-wing, but I think there might be a lot of people who prefer the welfare state to a job they see as being beneath them.
Not taking in refugees is definitely frowned upon, but frowning is about the most punitive action that can be taken.
Theres always an argument to be made about responsibility in causing the kinds of crises that drive these mass exoduses. Libya, Syria, Iraq, as nasty as the despots who run/ran these places were/are we've seen the havoc the voids they leave cause.
I'm rarely inclined to blame the voting public. Competency and honesty are in short supply in politics these days.
We have a ego driven twat leading one party and a woman with no noticeable principles leading the other.
And waiting in the wings is, of course, Boris. A man of no discernable talent, political or otherwise. Who seems hell-bent on implementing a British version of the right wing popularism that swept Donald Trump to 3 million less votes than the unelectable Hilary Clinton.
And Labour sans Corbyn is a void lacking personality or leadership. Ed Miliband must be kicking himself for shooting his bolt too early. Labour would probably be polling through the roof if he was still captain. And I thought he was a bit wet.
The judicial thing less so, but would you rate immigration above political autonomy?
I'd like to think MOST people didn't vote leave because of lies about Turkey, being confused about where Muslim immigrants come from, or UKIPs rehashed Nazi propaganda posters.
That said for better or worse, I think everyone has a little bit of prejudice in them, so I wouldn't dispute it was a factor.
I'd say predictive polling is pretty flawed. Asking people their reasoning after the fact less so.
Clinton lost because a vote in California is worth less than a vote in Iowa. You'd think polling 4% more votes than your opponent would win it. Not in America.
What could Merkel do? Nothing. It's not simplistic stating the facts. Cameron had already announced we'd take in fuck all refugees. The truth was that the if and how many was a matter for individual government's. Merkel could be annoyed as she liked, but that was it.
Oh come on, mate. I still see people calling out Liberals and lefties as the architects of mass immigration. Which might be a fair point IF we hadn't had years of conservative government's allowing in vast numbers of non EU immigrants. The same government's who had the nerve to trumpet their unrealistically low targets and then act like they had no control when they missed.
So, we have record levels of immigration under the Conservatives + immigration is a huge concern = re-elect the Conservatives. Yes, they've really been held to account.
Capitalism dictating immigration. Nothing new there.
What's the alternative though? If we want these filthy capitalists to invest we have to provide them with an underclass to exploit. Unfortunately our underclass are all on benefits, so we've no choice but to bus them in from abroad.
As for complaining about worker exploitation.
Careful with that kind of talk, I've been called a communist and Trotskyite for far less.
Anyway, Dave, always a pleasure to exchange views with someone as thoughtful as yourself.
Communism deprives no man of the power to appropriate the products of society; all that it does is to deprive him of the power to subjugate the labour of others by means of such appropriations.