Brexit Opinions/predictions?

Firstly I wish I say great debate from both
@ByEeek and @paul514. To be honest with you it is refreshing to see good sensible debate on this subject without petty name calling anywhere nevermind an open Internet forum.

I’ll try to answer you're question but largely I agree with Paul but not totally. So what would I do?
I would change the laws and regulations of whom can enter the country, I'd completely overhaul the policies set up by new Labour and removed the damaging and disastrous immigration cap the Conservatives have implemented. My system would be a point system, if an employer wanted to employ anyone in a skilled role whom has advertised unsuccessful within the UK that person would automatically be granted UK citizenship, short of that migrants would be scored on their skills vs our national requirements. Of course asylum seekers are a completely different issue and should be treated differently.

You pointed out the Tories don't want high immigration, well they do and are placing smoke and mirrors up to make out they are ‘trying’ but it's ‘complicated’ it isn't. We don't need huge numbers of unskilled workers to pack meat in factories flooding the market with this labour pushes wages down, back it up with equal opportunities think tanks, looking for prejudice where is does not exist and you again pump the smoke and mirrors into the situation. The irony is they are doing this then they reach the ‘cap' and literally stop the NHS importing a skilled Dr’s, I would give details about this DR and quote how I know but I need to be careful what I say on an open forum.

Unfortunately I'm not the PM I don't have all the magic answers, I don't believe the Conservatives will provide the type of change we need, but as Paul pointed out a meaningful Brexit will greatly reduce the government's ability to use smoke and mirrors to divert attention away from the what they want are are actually doing, they can't falsely blame the EU when we are not in it.

I’d go further than advertising here first then off to getting an immigrant, there would have to be a mechanism to train a person to do that role

It doesn’t need to be compared to pre EU days and no one is saying that.

One can simply look at what was going on 20 years ago to see the difference without going back 50 years.

It isn’t to do with wealth more people come from outside the Eu because we let them. They can’t come if we don’t it’s as simple as that.

As for what’s changed in that 20 year period inside the EU it’s simple the easy The old soviet block countries joined at the start of the new century.

This really isn’t rocket science.

People on my side of the fence say.... train people who already live here and pay people more if your job is less appealing.

You don’t need 600,000 people coming in per year if you do that.

I’d go further than advertising here first then off to getting an immigrant, there would have to be a mechanism to train a person to do that role

Burton Bridge and Paul... great debate from both of the ERG. All we need is Colin Dent to make it quorate. No doubt they will blame bad negotiation... as was demanded by the extreme right group. No doubt they will huff and puff the 'will of the people' even if terrified to double check. No doubt anyone who questions them will be branded undemocratic scum and swept under the carpet.

While I don't disagree with you if you are saying that meaningful training for young people needs to be reintroduced, rather than just academia or pseudo vocational workplace based courses which are clearly not working?

I believe training to be separate issue to migration, if we reintroduced or enforced real apprenticeships from today, it would take over a decade for the results to show, in the short term those skills will need to be imported. This imported skill can be used for training to make our children's lives better and debt free.

Unfortunately we both know this is not what our current Government wishes to do mind you.

They will be forced to eventually even if they don’t want to.

People on my side of the fence say.... train people who already live here and pay people more if your job is less appealing.

Completely agreed. So why are we spending so many billions on Brexit (3000 civil servants and counting so far) when we could spend that money on training and education?

But the caviat is that companies won't / can't pay more if they can't cover their costs when selling into a global market.

Neither of these issues has anything to do with Brexit or immigration for that matter. We choose how much to spend on education and training and we choose how much the minimum wage is. Leaving Europe isn't going to solve anything. What it is going to do is put a squeeze on businesses trying to recruit. No longer able to recruit from abroad, businesses will be left with few choices and none of them particularly positive. In a service economy like ours, people are the primary input into service businesses and if the people aren't there, the business dries up - just as steel production dried up with the mineral reserves that fed it.

Completely agreed. So why are we spending so many billions on Brexit (3000 civil servants and counting so far) when we could spend that money on training and education?

But the caviat is that companies won't / can't pay more if they can't cover their costs when selling into a global market.

Neither of these issues has anything to do with Brexit or immigration for that matter. We choose how much to spend on education and training and we choose how much the minimum wage is. Leaving Europe isn't going to solve anything. What it is going to do is put a squeeze on businesses trying to recruit. No longer able to recruit from abroad, businesses will be left with few choices and none of them particularly positive. In a service economy like ours, people are the primary input into service businesses and if the people aren't there, the business dries up - just as steel production dried up with the mineral reserves that fed it.

A company that can’t pay the wage needed for a decent life or to train someone to carry out a role for them doesn’t sound like a worthwhile business to protect whilst harming citizens.

Sorry I'm not sure what you mean?

OK firstly service industries don't make any money, they are secondary tax consumers we need to start manufacturing again so that needs to change and it must change if we are ever going to make a successful debt free country for our children's children.

Perhaps. But we don't live in a bubble. If a company in the UK can't afford to pay decent wages, you can bet your bottom dollar a company elsewhere is. So it is a balance. If no company can pay decent wages, there is no economy. Where do you draw the line? On the one hand you want jobs and the taxes that they pay. But on the other hand your saying you want more pay. And when you have more pay, inflation goes up, prices go up and you are back to square one. That is why it costs £10 for a pint in Sweeden. High standard of living. High prices. Are they better off than us? And then you go to India where people get paid a pitance, but you can eat like a king for a few dollars a day. Who is better off?

A couple of things. Firstly, we do manufacture stuff. Loads of it. We manufacture more stuff now by value than at any time in history. Except the things we manufacture are high value, high tech items. We forget that the word labour force comes from the fact that in yesteryear industry was literally built on physical labour. Men physically shovelled coat into furnaces or steam engines. Men physically carried products on and off ships. That will never happen again. We have robots and automation and precision tooling. And that is a good thing. The idea that we should go back to the days where men hammered bits of metal all day is ridiculous. And you are right, the service sector doesn't make money. But then neither does manufacturing. If we are going down that hole, only digging resources out of the ground makes money. But you are thinking of Britain as a bubble. It is not. Our service economy services the world. Mining companies and factories around the would need access to financing - we do that. They also need insurance - we do that too. And increasingly, they require software to run their machinary - we do that as well. And so on and so on. And all of thoses companies need accountants and sandwich shops and hair salons and so on. All indirectly servicing companies that dig stuff out of the ground. What we have is fine. It is better than manufacturing. Are you really saying that sitting in an office is worse than labouring in a factory where you would go deaf, or get killed, or mamed by machinary? You do know what life expectancy was during the industrial revolution don't you?

Perhaps. But we don't live in a bubble. If a company in the UK can't afford to pay decent wages, you can bet your bottom dollar a company elsewhere is. So it is a balance. If no company can pay decent wages, there is no economy. Where do you draw the line? On the one hand you want jobs and the taxes that they pay. But on the other hand your saying you want more pay. And when you have more pay, inflation goes up, prices go up and you are back to square one. That is why it costs £10 for a pint in Sweeden. High standard of living. High prices. Are they better off than us? And then you go to India where people get paid a pitance, but you can eat like a king for a few dollars a day. Who is better off?

That's the capitalist version of events that the right wing have pushed on to the working class to make them believe that by looking after the system that benifits them the most, it will benifit us the most. The truth is very different, gap between the richest and poorest grows faster in unregulated capitalist economies

Manufacturing does make money, it takes materials adds labour and ships a product for a higher price.

It creates something tangible for export.

I take your point on low end manufacturing, there is no point in trying to compete for those roles.

If we cite steel for a moment we don’t really make regular steel but high grade stuff as a small example.

Of course. But it only makes money because the primary industry is there to supply it with raw materials that it can add value to. But if you take that argument forward, tertiary or service industry also makes money. Except their added value is the skills and specialist knowledge provided by service companies. In one of your other posts you suggested that companies should train their own staff. Except it isn't economical to do so. Companies are specialists in what they do. Training is in itself a specialist skill. I have just spend 2.5 years training to be a teacher having been a software developer. As a former developer I could never have trained people up to be software developers. It is a completely different skill set. And if I did train people up, I would become a pure cost to the business and would not be earning money through my software development.

So the idea that companies should just "do the right thing" is laughable. Under your system of forcing companies to pay a decent wage, you would just see mass unemployment and a slow down in economic activity. You get the same thing happen if you put up taxes to pay for social wealfare.