Why shouldn’t non EU immigrants have equal status with EU immigrants?
Well, if you are going to ask that, why shouldn't all immigrants have equal status with natives?
Well, if you are going to ask that, why shouldn’t all immigrants have equal status with natives?
You'd need to explain how a native would immigrate into the country they already live it. For instance, if I failed to meet the criteria where would they deport me to? ...and when would I apply for citizenship, at birth? Once a year?
If you flesh out the detail of how it would work then I'm happy to answer.
They voted out to favour non EU immigrants.
Favour? Or given them equal status? Why shouldn’t non EU immigrants have equal status with EU immigrants?
yes exactly make them change status from having less status to the same status .
As to the question about why they do not have equal status - that is up to whoever decides not me, but
I suspect its part of the Brexit thing , and perhaps agreements between countries etc.
I’ve got a mate who was a farm contractor, he couldn’t compete on price or hours worked and went into landscape gardening. Anecdotal and might just be perception.
It's called capitalism that 😉 For other lower level work the government runs a scheme that stops people undercutting it's called the minimum wage. It's part of a cost, you can raise it and pay more for your fruit and veg if you want 😉
Lots of things are down to perception and what the papers told people, reinforced by some smart facebook stuff and years of niggling lies from the likes of UKIP and other politicians happy to blame the EU as it's easier than fixing stuff. Though point that out and your just part of the system/expert not required
EU residents have/had equal rights as it's reciprocal. As for racists etc. did we get any racist remain voters 😉
Meanwhile reading assessments from both sides of the Atlantic Trump is completing the shove in the back to try and help May on her way, nice little bit of praise for BoJo too, hard brexit is a Russian Win
You’d need to explain how a native would immigrate into the country they already live it.
Sorry, I don't understand what you are getting at here at all. I was trying to point out that if you don't see why non-EU immigrants shouldn't have the same status as EU immigrants, then you've kind of missed the purpose of the EU entirely. It's about creating a larger economic unit which benefits the people inside it.
<div class="bbp-reply-author">outofbreath
<div class="bbp-author-role"></div>
</div>
<div class="bbp-reply-content">
Favour? Or given them equal status? Why shouldn’t non EU immigrants have equal status with EU immigrants?
Non EU immigrants status is bestowed on them by the government, not the EU. But if you believe that anyone involved plans to improve things for non-EU immigrants, I suspect you zip up the back. Straight away after the brexit vote India said they wanted better access to visas and were refused.
</div>
It’s called capitalism that
Certainly is, and I totally agree that the EU has been superb at creating a neo-liberal free market in Europe (assuming you think that's a good thing). I was just agreeing with the point made by someone else that some leavers might not be racist (well countryist), in fact their vote might be determined by the opposite of countryism, they might think that people with the get-up-and-go to come to the UK from abroad are so much better that they are difficult to compete with. (I've no idea if that was the case with my farm contractor buddy, I've no idea how he voted, I'm just supporting the idea that it might be a possibility.)
I was just agreeing with the point made by someone else that some leavers aren’t racists
I don't think many people have ever disputed this, we are still yet to find the racist remainers though 😉
Certainly is, and I totally agree that the EU has been superb at creating a neo-liberal free market in Europe
We have a free market within the UK, and Germany has a free market between its regions, so why not?
Serious question by the way to the forum - ready to be convinced.
We have a free market within the UK, and Germany has a free market between its regions, so why not?
No idea, you'd have to ask someone who doesn't think free markets are good idea or google it. I'd guess their answer would be "because protectionism".
Why shouldn’t non EU immigrants have equal status with EU immigrants?
Well it was rules of the club to look after each other first then to look outside. Now we have kicked that into touch the UK population can look forward to the same painful visa process as everyone else. Don't worry though we are in such a strong position with every country we will be able to dictate that our people can work visa free and our goods can travel without tariff but the deals won't need to be reciprocal...
I really hope that for a short time at least that some kind of visa extra scrutiny is put in place for uk travellers just so people can see the consequences of their actions.
There's an argument against free markets, I think. When countries in the free market zone are too disparate, it allows the poor ones to be exploited. But the EU is not meant to be like unequal, which is why it has entry criteria.
There are still poor areas in the EU of course but they try to mitigate this by investing lots of money in the poorer areas to bring them up, rather than allowing them to be exploited. At least, that's what I think they do. So that's not quite 'free market neoliberalism' is it?
UK population can look forward to the same painful visa process as everyone else
The shame of it!
‘So that’s not quite ‘free market neoliberalism’ is it?'
I have no idea, supporters seem to think the free "markety-ness" is a benefit and opponents seem to argue against it on the basis it's a neo-liberal club for rich countries so I've always assumed that it was quite 'free markety'. Zero tariffs on goods is a pretty neo-liberal concept. People who like state intervention certainly don't typically like the EU. (Or not until recently when they all suddenly saw the benefits of liberal economics.)
But if you believe that anyone involved plans to improve things for non-EU immigrants, I suspect you zip up the back. Straight away after the brexit vote India said they wanted better access to visas and were refused.
For now.
This time next year we'll be begging them to come here to help us rebuild hospitals and schools. It'll be like post-war Britain.
The irony of this of course isn't lost on me. The more gammony end of Leave voted that way, and I quote a friend of a friend here, because "there are too many ****ing ****s here." So by voting leave we disenfranchise and discourage EU migrants meaning we have a greater reliance on immigration from outside the EU. They'll get the opposite of what they wanted. Again.
by voting leave we disenfranchise and discourage EU migrants meaning we have a greater reliance on immigration from outside the EU
I don't think anyone has ever disputed that obvious fact, but what's wrong with immigration from outside the EU? If they can do the job does it really matter if their skin tone is slightly different?
what’s wrong with immigration from outside the EU? If they can do the job does it really matter if their skin tone is slightly different?
It matters greatly if you're racist.
If they can do the job does it really matter if their skin tone is slightly different?
Nothing but people complaining about immigration are not going to avoid immigration. It's just ironic in many ways. Like most brexit things it just doesn't have any logic to it
Why shouldn’t non EU immigrants have equal status with EU immigrants?
Why indeed not? Level up, not down. Let's free up migration (as regards workers and their families) with every country as we* sign trade agreements with them… that's what most of our trading partners want anyway… and it's good for us. Win, win. No need to burn our existing agreements and rights to achieve this though, is there? No need whatsoever.
[ *we means either EU, or UK, depending on at what level our trade agreements are made in future … but you'd be mad to bet against this still being the EU, even if our "customs arrangements" aren't quite "a customs union" or "the customs union" or whatever. Note that in several EU trade negotiations, the UK was the main block to loosening rules for movement of workers. Our politicians are the sticking point, with their "controls on immigration" mugs and "tens of thousands" targets… they understand the power of the anti-immigrant vote, and playing to the "legitimate concerns" of the millions of bigots here. ]
what’s wrong with immigration from outside the EU? If they can do the job does it really matter if their skin tone is slightly different?
It matters greatly if you’re racist.
A strong argument to vote leave, then.
If they can do the job does it really matter if their skin tone is slightly different?
Nothing
Good.
Like most brexit things it just doesn't have any logic to it
People in Slough obviously think it *does*. If they want people from their home countries to have the same immigration status as EU citizen why shouldnt' they? It's not racist, it's perfectly reasonable.
Your making the assumption there that people thought that far ahead aren't you.
Your making the assumption there that people thought that far ahead aren’t you.
Well the guy who made the comment about the motives of leave voters in Slough obviously did.
A strong argument to vote leave, then.
No, level up, not down. We do not need to Leave the EU to liberalise our immigratuon rules.
Well the guy who made the comment about the motives of leave voters in Slough obviously did.
and such you are confusing one with many, individuals with groups.
As for saying the logic holds up does it? Has any of it happened, will any of it? Is it not people extrapolating what they want from how they chose to see leave? So far the plan is to give equal rights to EU and non EU by taking those away from the EU.
Slough (SL1) voted out to close the door after having arrived. Reduce further competition. SL4, was one of the strongest remain votes in the country. SL4 is Windsor.
As for saying the logic holds up does it?
I think so. Governments needs immigration to keep the GDP going Northwards to win votes, if we get less from the EU we'll be getting more from elsewhere. But don't ask me, ask Cougar he raised it on this occasion, I just agreed with his logic.
Has any of it happened, will any of it? Is it not people extrapolating what they want from how they chose to see leave?
Quite likely, maybe they're assuming there will be more non-eu immigration because they want to get their extended families here, and maybe you're assuming there won't because you don't want to give up house space for their extended families. Or maybe TiRed is right, or maybe the person who raised the point about Slough people voting to get their families here was wrong. Who knows - working out motives is impossible, and not very helpful in working out what the best course of action is.
We do not need to Leave the EU to liberalise our immigratuon rules.
Perhaps not, but at least one poster thinks that's why they voted Leave in Slough and if he's right they thought a Leave vote *would* liberalise our immigration rules, and we can all follow the logic Cougar stated.
there were 17.4 million different reasons for a brexit vote, problem is you can't reconcile the zero immigration group with the I want more from the asian subcontinent group.
If you took the vote and broke it down to subgroups, you would have a range, From adopt the euro, schengen, through to repatriate everyone whose great grand parents weren't born in England.
The votes closeness would hint that the majority were indifferent to the EU.
Why shouldn’t non EU immigrants have equal status with EU immigrants?
Why shouldn't immigrants from Bangladesh have equal status with people from Birmingham ?
The votes closeness would hint that the majority were indifferent to the EU.
Nail hit in the head IMV. IIRC it was number 8 on the nations priority list before the vote. I suspect in hindsight many UKIP votes were just a protest vote at a time when the LibDems were in government and had therefore stopped being a viable protest vote.
<div class="bbp-reply-author">"mrmo
<div class="bbp-author-role">
<div class="">Member</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="bbp-reply-content">
there were 17.4 million different reasons for a brexit vote, problem is you can’t reconcile the zero immigration group with the I want more from the asian subcontinent group."
I honestly don't think there's a real "I want more from the asian subcontinent group". The simple fact is, that's nothing at all to do with the EU, it's the UK government that sets non-EU immigration targets and priorities. So leaving the EU to increase asian immigration is like leaving the EU to increase the number of bits of pepperoni on your Meat Feast.
</div>
But the idea that this government, or any government in the current climate, is going to significantly increase immigration from the asian subcontinent to any degree is just silly. The current one is working to reduce the number of feepaying students from there ffs let alone workers and permanent residents.
So this "group" can be split nicely into 2. 1) people who don't know wtf they're doing and 2) liars. And overwhelmingly the latter- seeing Farage and other UKIPpers claiming to be pro immigration was hilarious. What had any of these guys ever done for non-EU immigration before?
Just to go back to the mythical output of Eastern Europeans: I work with a lot of Poles in Edinburgh as a joiner. I would say my output was about the same; they do longer days but you do need to factor in the 40@5mins fag breaks a day (smiley face) so roughly the same time spent working. Edinburgh has a desperate shortage of trades folk so the more migrants the merrier IMO.
I can see though how the agricultural sector is different: If you are a native of say Linconshire then the offer of doing really intense, shitty seasonal work at very low hourly rates is not a very attractive prospect particularly if you lose benefit entitlements ; it is more attractive if you've come from abroad. do a shit job for a short time, get paid loads then move on to something else somewhere different. Not great if Linconshire is your home.
The national association of Curry houses supported the Leave campaign as they were told it would increase the numbers of asians chefs coming to the UK .
Their hopes were dashed and they felt cheated when TM visited India and said there would be no more visas for asians to come in the UK .
do a shit job for a short time, get paid loads then move on to something else somewhere different.
Yup. A physically hard and possibly mind numbing job is going to be a lot harder if that is your job for the next fifty years and you wont ever be able to buy a house and get some decent savings vs a few years of that and then head home with enough cash to buy something nice and have enough funds to relax a bit.
When at uni I spent a couple of hours doing hard work for long hours to get some spending money. Would have been a bit harder to motivate without the knowledge it was temporary (a STW example would be the occasional threads about spending a couple of years in Saudi Arabia etc for a ton of cash. Some people decide a year or two of crap is worth it).
For the mythical output I remember the same being said for India IT. I spent a few weeks in India running some training. I actually had a complaint about me when as they were running behind schedule I wanted them to work late to catch up. I had to point out that not only would I be working late doing the training but I would also be putting in several more hours either side of the training doing my day job.
The votes closeness would hint that the majority were indifferent to the EU.
I am indifferent to the EU. I voted remain because I looked at what we get versus what we would lose by leaving and came to the conclusion (strongly) that we should remain.
That decision was made objectively with no bias, no racism and hopefully only a small amount of ignorance.
I am indifferent to the EU. I voted remain because I looked at what we get versus what we would lose by leaving and came to the conclusion (strongly) that we should remain.
And on the other side you would have leavers, who heard the £350M, they need us, easy trade deals and thought all sounds good why not vote leave it won't cause me any harm.
There should NEVER have been a referendum because the majority of the electorate would never put the thought in to be able to give a proper answer, and the question should never have been as broad as stay or go, with no definition of what go meant.
I sort of twigged pretty early that leaving something you’ve been in for 40 years an was going to be a bit of an undertaking and as it appears an undeliverable.
Manufacturing saying they’ll walk and now finance kicking off an donny sort of tarmacing on May biggly(that he was a gs kinda guy) over trade makes you kinda wonder.
Quote from mooman on another thread
The whole Brexit thing is just an amusing game now of winding of the Remoaners.
So on that basis I think we can conclude a) that a competence test before voting would potentially have excluded mooman from the polling booth and b) he’s just trolling and therefore fair game. 😎
Molgrips - no need to defend him anymore.
Serious Brexies with real points to discuss are of course welcome and should be treated robustly but fairly.
Not great if Linconshire is your home.
That's true regardless of Brexit 🙂
Molgrips – no need to defend him anymore.
Don’t be cruel, he liked that high horse
There should NEVER have been a referendum because the majority of the electorate would never put the thought in to be able to give a proper answer, and the question should never have been as broad as stay or go, with no definition of what go meant.
And you had had an excellent chance to make that point in the run up to the 2015 general election, however the government were elected on a manifesto of giving us that vote, a vote that all major political parties have campaigned on at some point over recent years.
Come off it, Cameron promising a ref. was simply because he, or the Conservatives generally, were scared of losing enough votes to UKIP that Labour might unseat them.
This was never about the good of the country, and is simply the result of Conservative cowardice.. They are not trying to stay in power by virtue of being a good government that makes the country better, they are trying to stay in power by defeating thier 'opponents'. Completley backwards.
Come off it, Cameron promising a ref. was simply because he, or the Conservatives generally, were scared of losing enough votes to UKIP that Labour might unseat them.
whats that ninfan and context in a different location 🙂