Merged Now What?

[Ambrosia]

Just out of interest, do you have any figures for how many people your rules would affect? I can see the point if they would clear out a few hundred thousand spongers, but if it turned out there were only , say 2000 EU migrants who stay in the UK for more than 5 years on benefits then your system is likely to be more expensive than the existing one.

I don't have any figures. Though I'm not sure why my proposed system would be significantly more expensive than the existing one.

 

[CapelDodger]

@Hlafordlaes :

Hope there is a decent world left. At this juncture in the 21st century, it is clear to me we are on a knife edge. East Asia is dangerous; there are worrisome Chinese moves in the South China Sea and Sea of Japan; Russian planes are buzzing NATO assets in the Baltic in a reckless fashion; the outcome for regimes in the ME is uncertain, including the much ignored but newly worrisome rivalries among factions in the Saudi kingdom and tense need to modernize an economy while remaining in the 9th century; South Asia has a new nuclear rivalry, prompting Pakistan to announce they are toying with making battlefield nukes, and finally Putin's new military adventures in the Black Sea area.

That the gilded dilettantes who currently "run" the UK have indulged in this solipsistic fiasco in the middle of all that calls into serious question the standard of Public School education these days. OFSTED should be sent in forthwith.

And someone, somewhere, will set off a dirty bomb. Whenever that happens, regardless of where, the world will change much for the worse.

There will surely be events in the next couple of years which will provide an excuse to cancel the whole project while the more serious problem of, say, a global financial crash or gay marriage screwing-up the weather. No leadership is going to drive off the cliff just because the GPS tells them to.

 

[CapelDodger]

I am actually wondering exactly how big the UK economy actually is at present. Has anyone actually measured it without the EU financial passport, the euro clearance activity, no access to the EU scientific program, no access to agriculture and fisheries subsidies, falling oil prices, no access to the EU intellectual property approaches and the costs of negotiating various trade deals and changes to legal structures etc when it leaves. Has anyone carried out by the sort of assessment that the rest of the U.K. does when Scotland talks about Independence where everyone looks at what Scotland will lose and how much it will cost. We may be a country of 65 million but the EU is a population of 680 million without us. A very large and close market indeed. It seems like it is quite difficult to identify a solely UK economy as at present it is so tied to various aspects of the EU economy and using its role within the EU has made that work for the UK in order to make that stronger.

I think in a globalised world it's impossible to disentangle any single nation's economy for the rest, apart from the most dirt-poor amd weird autarkies such as North Korea.

The nation-state is obsolete but, like the dynastic state before it, it will cling on tooth and nail until actively dislodged.

 

[The Don]

I am from the UK.

the UK uses a 5 tier points based system for non EU/EEA migration.

What about it, in your opinion, is not working OK?

That's the system for assigning work visas, not the system controlling immigration as a whole (though for many a work visa is an important prerequisite to coming to the UK).

When Mrs Don came to the UK, she came as the spouse of a UK citizen (me) and cases like that are completely outwith that system.

 

[MikeG]

.......Is Mike G's claim true or false?

With a caveat, it was in error.

The caveat is that whilst there is an EU agreement enabling the market, said market, as per the article I linked to, is virtually non-functional.

 

[McHrozni]

I actually agree with you.

The one saving grace might be if the UK could rapidly sign up to non EU trade deals. The deal between Canada and the US with the EU are near completing and could be turned into a bilateral deal. A quick deal here would reassure the markets. (This may be complete crap, my knowledge of economics and trade is negligible, all the qualifications needed to vote exit.)

Maybe, but UK is in no position to make such a deal quicly, US may not be keen to rush in, prefering UK not to trigger A50 at all, and rush jobs are often recepies for disaster anyway.

UK doesn't even know how to proceed. There are two mutually exclusive options: ECC or no ECC? The first one keeps immigration as it is and won't be readily accepted by your average Brexitard, the second one is economically ruinous.

UK needs either a general election, or another referendum on which Brexit to pursue.

McHrozni

 

[MikeG]

.............UK needs either a general election, or another referendum on which Brexit to pursue......

It won't get another referendum. A general election will depend on the state of the Labour Party.

 

[cullennz]

Another referendum would make the UK look even more silly than it does now.

It's pretty simple

Cameron should just grow a pair and veto it.

His careers over any way

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

I am from the UK.

the UK uses a 5 tier points based system for non EU/EEA migration.

What about it, in your opinion, is not working OK?

This is only part of the immigration system for non-EU citizens. As I've maybe mentioned earlier I know many British people living overseas who are unable to return to the country even though they want to thanks to the non-EU immigration rules tightening under the Tories (and that lovely woman Theresa May) because they have non-EU spouses and can't meet the earning criteria to return.

There's plenty of stories you can find about families being put into impossible situations by the non-EU immigration system including the Brain case in Scotland and others.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...amilys-deportation-from-scotland-not-imminent

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/w...d-be-deported-from-scotland-lose-400000-store

Even the link you provide states that the government has made it more difficult for non-EU citizens to come to the UK and that's purely for political rather than practical reasons.

Finally I think points based systems have a fundamental flaw. They assume the government can plan the demographics of a country effectively. That's why they were first introduced in Canada - to promote multiculturalism and to bring in young people. The change was driven by the fact that most immigration under the old system was white Europeans and they wanted to try to adjust that. Maybe the Tories have the opposite plan for their system? Who knows?

You get points for being 'highly educated' as well so most of the immigrants end up being well-qualified and many are under-employed (because there isn't the demand for their skills). Hence the joke in some parts that if you have an accident and need a doctor don't call an ambulance, call a taxi.

Seriously do you think Theresa May could be trusted to decide who and how many immigrants the UK needs today, 5 years from now, 20 years from now? Do you think government legislation will be reactive and well-informed enough to be able to judge whether we need more doctors or more engineers this year? And what kind of doctor? What kind of engineer?

Furthermore personally I don't see why it should only be wealthy, privileged folks from outside the EU who can come here. I really don't think that the Russian oligarchs and Chinese millionaires buying up London are all that wonderful additions compared to normal working Indian families for example.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

I don't have any figures. Though I'm not sure why my proposed system would be significantly more expensive than the existing one.

Well right now there isn't a system or any need for one for the EU immigrants. You are proposing an admin system to process, monitor and enforce these rules for hundreds of thousands of people annually.

 

[cullennz]

We have problems here where we have doctors and surgeons coming in whose qualifications don't match ours.

End up being taxi drivers

They should probably just sit the kiwi exams but it's a bit of a mess

 

[cullennz]

Well right now there isn't a system or any need for one for the EU immigrants. You are proposing an admin system to process, monitor and enforce these rules for hundreds of thousands of people annually.

Is this a joke?

Umm yes

 

[Castro]

Another referendum would make the UK look even more silly than it does now.

It's pretty simple

Cameron should just grow a pair and veto it.

His careers over any way

Would he find a majority in the House of Commons to support him? Wouldn't it be politically suicidal for conservative MPs to approve that?

 

[cullennz]

Would he find a majority in the House of Commons to support him? Wouldn't it be politically suicidal for conservative MPs to approve that?

Mate.

She ain't like it can get any worse.

Turning it into a rather large footnote in history would probably give them kudos at the mo'

 

[abaddon]

With a caveat, it was in error.

The caveat is that whilst there is an EU agreement enabling the market, said market, as per the article I linked to, is virtually non-functional.

Explain Rabobank then, a dutch bank trading in pretty much every European country.

Or Aviva, a UK based insurance company trading in pretty much every European country.

They seem to manage it.

 

[Castro]

Mate.

She ain't like it can get any worse.

Turning it into a rather large footnote in history would probably give them kudos at the mo'

Well, I doubt that conservative MPs would even let him think about it.

 

[cullennz]

Well, I doubt that conservative MPs would even let him think about it.

True.

Bit dumb though

 

[McHrozni]

It won't get another referendum. A general election will depend on the state of the Labour Party.

Your reading comprahension is somewhat lacking.

The question posed wasn't actually whether UK should exit the EU or not, but rahter:

1. Remain in the EU (championed by anyone sane with no narrow self-interest)
2. Leave the EU, but remain in the Common market (champioined by some big businesses and the like)
3. Leave the EU and the Common market (championed by various insane groups from extreme left and right)

The referendum question grouped 2. and 3. together, although they lack any common ground beyond the obvious "leave the EU". That's the easy part, the hard part is what comes now. Options 1. and 2. are far more compatible, but were pitted against each other. Well, what is done is done, but now it really should be determined if UK needs to shoot itself in the foot with a 5'' gun and go for the Norwegian style Common market, or does it utilize the 15'' gun and leave the Common market altogehter.

Since much of the Brexitard campaign was based on points that necessiate leaving the Common market, without telling that loudly and clearly, a referendum on that is probably necessary.

McHrozni

 

[cullennz]

Your reading comprahension is somewhat lacking.

The question posed wasn't actually whether UK should exit the EU or not, but rahter:

1. Remain in the EU (championed by anyone sane with no narrow self-interest)
2. Leave the EU, but remain in the Common market (champioined by some big businesses and the like)
3. Leave the EU and the Common market (championed by various insane groups from extreme left and right)

The referendum question grouped 2. and 3. together, although they lack any common ground beyond the obvious "leave the EU". That's the easy part, the hard part is what comes now. Options 1. and 2. are far more compatible, but were pitted against each other. Well, what is done is done, but now it really should be determined if UK needs to shoot itself in the foot with a 5'' gun and go for the Norwegian style Common market, or does it utilize the 15'' gun and leave the Common market altogehter.

Since much of the Brexitard campaign was based on points that necessiate leaving the Common market, without telling that loudly and clearly, a referendum on that is probably necessary.

McHrozni

Small point

You don't get to chose whether you stay in the common market

The EU does

And they annoyed

Mainly because you can't have your cake and eat it too

 

[McHrozni]

Small point

You don't get to chose whether you stay in the common market

The EU does

And they annoyed

Mainly because you can't have your cake and eat it too

But UK gets to choose whether to try to negotiate it or not. I'm sure a Norway-style deal would be fairly acceptable to the EU - primarily since the EU would get to keep most of the benefits of British membership, with comparably few downsides. It is in the EU's best interests to have UK remain in the Common market, and it is doubly so for the UK.

It's a lousy deal for the UK overall, since it gets to keep most downsides while abandoning most upsides of membership, but you don't get to make idiotic referendum votes and then come out on top.

McHrozni