They obviously really insist on shooting themselves in the foot repeatedly.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/...-nhs-officials
Not only are they driving away medical personnel, no, they also prevent replacements from coming in.
They obviously really insist on shooting themselves in the foot repeatedly.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/...-nhs-officials
Not only are they driving away medical personnel, no, they also prevent replacements from coming in.
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
Completely agreed I've said for years we need to liberalise non-EU migration.
Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer
Strangely enough, that's not what you're getting what with Brexit being motivated by "get rid of brownie".
A campaign based on racism and xenophobia. Who'd have thought that it would extend to everything?
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
Hey, be careful. His head could explode from exposure to reality.
Congratulations America
It is what we're getting. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43821484
The UK is more friendly to migrants not less post-referendum.
The Windrush scandal is coming to light now but entirely pre-dates the referendum in the actions taken (by people who were on the Remain side incidentally). Its fantastic IMO that the scandal now is that we're too tough on immigration rather than that we're not tough enough - the Overton Window has entirely moved to a more liberal position on non-EU immigration just as I wanted. Job done.
Right. That's why you're having nooooo problems at all getting people to collect your fruits from the field or staff your medical facilities.
Moron. You guys couldn't even wait until the ink was dry to enact all the EU migration rules because you were so desperate for workers. Remember: The very thing you were complaining about? YOU were the FIRST ones to EAGERLY implement them.
And then you whined incessantly about something of your own doing.
And of course Gove will state that the government's more friendly. However, you're once again forgetting one very important fact:
Actions speak louder than words.
And your country is now showing it's true face: A nation of xenophobic racists.
Hell, your OWN LINK disputes your notions. Did you even read it?
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
Come on, you know Brits are best.
Congratulations America
I did read my own link yes. Did you?Another piece of research by Ipsos MORI published in October found the majority of people in Britain want there to be less immigration, but people's perceptions seem to have become more positive since the referendum. That softening of attitudes is backed up in other pieces of research too.
I suspect you're trying to take credit for the positive attitudes of people who didn't vote for Brexit. Also hilarious to see you trying to distract from the finding that the British public remains strongly critical of immigration. But not quite as hilarious as seeing you post something written by Michael Gove
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
No Aimless I'm not.
Surveys show no real movement in the proportion of people who voted for or against Brexit yet (though there's been a small swing of non-voters to against). But there has been a significant improvements in attitudes overall to migration as reported despite the lack of Brexit swing so basic statistical analysis shows that any change in opinion is not linked to changing Brexit opinions.
Also it doesn't say at all that people are "strongly critical" of immigration, you've made that up in your own head. It says that people want there to be "less" immigration, less does not mean strongly critical. If I try to eat less chocolate that doesn't mean I'm strongly critical of chocolate. The facts rather than your fiction show that people view immigration overall to be a positive: https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-...ion-and-brexit
Gove is a very clever man and a politician I admire and respect greatly. A liberal Tory. I would far rather he was our leader than the hostile Theresa May (a Remainer for what little its worth).
This has nothing to do with I said. The article about the survey results do not show the distribution of pro vs. anti immigration sentiments. We know from repeated surveys that have looked at attitudes towards immigration and their relation to positions on Brexit that negative attitudes towards immigration strongly correlate to positive attitudes towards Brexit. It is unlikely that this relationship has changed to a significant extent since the referendum. If the findings are accurate, it's more likely that they reflect stronger support for immigration among those who already supported it. Of course, the findings don't show strong support in the first place.
Like Khen, I think you should read the articles you post:Also it doesn't say at all that people are "strongly critical" of immigration, you've made that up in your own head. It says that people want there to be "less" immigration, less does not mean strongly critical. If I try to eat less chocolate that doesn't mean I'm strongly critical of chocolate. The facts rather than your fiction show that people view immigration overall to be a positive: https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-...ion-and-brexit
You can try to spin that however you like, but that is not the position of people who support immigration.Meanwhile Brits were more likely than several countries including Spain, Denmark, Sweden and Ireland to describe immigration as "more of a problem than an opportunity".
I'm not surprised to see you still tooting the horn of an inveterate liar, but using an article by Gove to inform a discussion about anything other than the pathology of British politics is like using articles by Hannan to inform a discussion about border & trade issues. Gove looks honest, knowledgeable and respectable to people who are dishonest, uninformed and utterly lacking in character.Gove is a very clever man and a politician I admire and respect greatly
Last edited by Aimless; 04-29-2018 at 11:47 AM.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Yes it does.46% > 34%Over the seven waves, the proportion rating the impact of immigration on Britain as positive increased (to 46%) and the proportion saying negative decreased (to 34%), and those scoring it as neutral remained relatively stable.
False. That just shows the UK's position relative to Spain, Denmark, Sweden and Ireland. It says nothing at all about what the net position is (net positive by 12%).Like Khen, I think you should read the articles you post:
You can try to spin that however you like, but that is not the position of people who support immigration.
Playing the man not the ball says more about you than him.I'm not surprised to see you still tooting the horn of an inveterate liar, but using an article by Gove to inform a discussion about anything other than the pathology of British politics is like using articles by Hannan to inform a discussion about border & trade issues. Gove looks honest, knowledgeable and respectable to people who are dishonest, uninformed and utterly lacking in character.
Brexit was definitely not about immigration.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics...emovals-target
Hope is the denial of reality
Pointing out that Gove is a liar is in fact playing the ball, especially when discussing one of his attempts to bullshit or mislead the public.
Close to a third of the public in the UK believes immigration is more of a problem than an opportunity. Presumably, a significant portion of people residing in Britain who are themselves immigrants--whether from the EU or outside it--believe immigration is more of an opportunity than a problem. Gove does not represent this latter group of people, nor did the referendum comply with their wishes. For Gove to attempt to take credit for the views of demographics that he and other Brexiters let down is just pathetic. To attempt to cast this trend as a positive outcome of Brexit is especially deceptive as it is more likely to reflect demographic changes rather than any Brexit-related reversals of opinion on the part of individuals and as it doesn't address the possibility that, without the referendum and the Brexit campaign, attitudes may have been even more positive.
For anyone to assert that attitudes towards immigration are positive in a country that has repeatedly elected a govt promising to reduce immigration by two orders of magnitude is laughable. The most charitable interpretation is that the public has a positive view of immigration in theory but not in practice--that it enjoys a pro-immigration fantasy but rejects the reality.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Close to a third < Close to half.
Close to a third != "that the British public remains strongly critical of immigration."
You have not demonstrated how Gove let anyone down. Disagreeing with you != letting people down.
You're just being small minded here.
Can anyone tell me what this 'meaningful vote' is supposed to be?
Congratulations America
It's nonsense. The date for Brexit has already been set, and negotiations will go on until the last possible minute because they always do. If Parliament rejects whatever deal is on the table then what are the government and the EU going to do, pull an all-nighter and come up with something new, then have another vote?
Parliament will be given a choice between a hard-Brexit and whatever deal the government is able to get. So Labour, having campaigned to for parliament to have a say in the deal to stop any hard Brexit nonsense from the Tories is going to... vote to reject a deal, thus leading to a hard Brexit?
It's almost as brilliant as the plan to take control of our borders from the EU but also simultaneously have a wide open border with Ireland, an EU country.
When the sky above us fell
We descended into hell
Into kingdom come
Completely agreed.
Except that taking control of our borders has nothing whatsoever about having an open or shut border.It's almost as brilliant as the plan to take control of our borders from the EU but also simultaneously have a wide open border with Ireland, an EU country.
We could open the border at Dover/Calais too and still control our borders.
Erm, the WTO would like to disagree with you on that point.
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
No.
So you don't want any trade deals?
Congratulations America
I do.
Trade and control over who gets a work permit, access to welfare, social housing, the NHS etc are two unrelated matters as far as the WTO is concerned. Nor do those controls happen at the border.
Customs & RoO checks, however, will have to. And on this matter the WTO will be strict and require you to enforce tariffs etc, absent a comprehensive trade agreement or unilateral removal of all tariffs etc regardless of country.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
You really don't understand that what you're doing at one part of the border you have to do at all parts of the border for all nations?
You cannot simply say: "Oh, at this border part we don't really look too hard!"
The WTO will squash you like a bug for doing so.
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
Why would anyone bother about trade deals with you if your borders are open anyway?
Congratulations America
So be it. If that has to be done it has to be done. It happens with other nations globally too.
Yesterday I saw the furious debate in the British government aptly described as a tiff between a husband and wife about whether they should buy a Maserati or a Lamborghini while their budget was about right to buy a used Ford Fiesta.
Congratulations America
Oh great, the "technology will solve it!" solution again.
And just how, do you think, will that "technology" be whipped up in the few time that remains? Something like that isn't whipped up inside a month. I'm also willing to bet that none of those guys from the thinktank actually know how to develop such a solution.
If they did and were tasked with developing it personally, they'd probably be running for the hills. Their managers would however rub their hands in glee: Finally something where they can meddle to their heart's content because they know that no one will be able to scrap this abomination once it's under way.
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
Yes again. Because it was and still remains the sole sane solution.
I don't expect it to be ready in months that is what the transition period is for
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote