Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Elivercury)
    It was my understanding that the UK was excluded from any more bailouts?

    That said, if the whole of Europe goes tits up then we are of course going to be hit hard by that. We are protected to a certain extent by having our own currency, but it is not complete immunity by any means.

    Immigration is just such a scapegoat it is ridiculous. The majority of immigration we have is from non-EU countries and they are the ones who are more likely not to work, integrate etc.

    Every study conducted shows incredibly low unemployment/benefits rates associated with EU migrants and they typically contribute heavily to our country.

    We're also excluded from Schengen because we don't have any land borders - we simply sign up to the principal of free movement of workers, which is a requirement if you're going to trade with the EU anyway. So nothing will change.

    Unless we're somehow going to get a better deal than any other country has just because we're the UK. Nonsense.
    We were told last time we weren't included in any bailouts, that didn't last long, so why can they be trusted this time round?

    We are excluded from Schengen, but that is far from having control over the borders because at the end we are still bound by rules on who we let in. Free movement is also not a requirement to trade with the EU. Almost every country in the world trades with the EU and yet only a very few have free travel,, even if we narrow it down to FTAs the same holds.

    As for migrants having lower unemployment and benefits claimed, you cannot really consider the question by looking merely at the migrants, I migrant coming and getting employed means somebody else is unemployed. Suppose 10 migrants come over and get work, unemployment is still going to be maybe 8 or 9 higher, which more than offsets the gain from the migrant, and that's before the wage suppression comes into it. We don't need over 100,000 manual labourers a year from the continent working minimum wage, but we have to take them anyway.

    We also don't need a better deal than any third party, we need a better deal than we have now, which really isn't that hard, no deal is almost as good as our current deal, when we then include all the FTAs we will likely be signing when not encumbered by the rest of the EU it quickly becomes a far better deal.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    We were told last time we weren't included in any bailouts, that didn't last long, so why can they be trusted this time round?

    We are excluded from Schengen, but that is far from having control over the borders because at the end we are still bound by rules on who we let in. Free movement is also not a requirement to trade with the EU. Almost every country in the world trades with the EU and yet only a very few have free travel,, even if we narrow it down to FTAs the same holds.

    As for migrants having lower unemployment and benefits claimed, you cannot really consider the question by looking merely at the migrants, I migrant coming and getting employed means somebody else is unemployed. Suppose 10 migrants come over and get work, unemployment is still going to be maybe 8 or 9 higher, which more than offsets the gain from the migrant, and that's before the wage suppression comes into it. We don't need over 100,000 manual labourers a year from the continent working minimum wage, but we have to take them anyway.

    We also don't need a better deal than any third party, we need a better deal than we have now, which really isn't that hard, no deal is almost as good as our current deal, when we then include all the FTAs we will likely be signing when not encumbered by the rest of the EU it quickly becomes a far better deal.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I would have to agree with you about the bailouts;

    although, we have one of the best positions in the EU. We are not part of the Schegnan agreement (better control of our borders) and we don't have the Euro, any person with a basic concept of economics can see how fortunate we are with not having the euro. We have the best bits of the EU on our side, I don't understand why we would want to throw it away, especially since we will never be able to rejoin (without a lot of hate).

    I kind of agree with you about the migrants, although, it is famous for the migrants to being the jobs that Brits don't want to do (fish factories in Scotland), so it is likely that an Brit would take up the job anyway. Furthermore, in careers like Dentistry, the reason that we have little 'home-grown' workers is due to there aren't any. And they're better at the job a lot of the time. I would prefer to have better teeth rather than the pride of British dentist. Actually, surprisingly, we do need that many construction workers we would be able to use them to our advantage! Our current situation with the housing crisis could be well managed using migrants to help build more homes nationally. There is already a judgement that we don't need them because they're not British, isn't that just arrogance?

    Our trade agreement doesn't restrict us from trading with foreign markets. It is just cheaper if we trade with the EU due to no tariffs, if you were an exporter, why would you trade with USA if it is cheaper to sell it to France?

    Im sorry, I did swerve around some of your points, but I cannot type all day, I have got some revision to do
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Indigo.Brownhall)
    I would have to agree with you about the bailouts;

    although, we have one of the best positions in the EU. We are not part of the Schegnan agreement (better control of our borders) and we don't have the Euro, any person with a basic concept of economics can see how fortunate we are with not having the euro. We have the best bits of the EU on our side, I don't understand why we would want to throw it away, especially since we will never be able to rejoin (without a lot of hate).

    I kind of agree with you about the migrants, although, it is famous for the migrants to being the jobs that Brits don't want to do (fish factories in Scotland), so it is likely that an Brit would take up the job anyway. Furthermore, in careers like Dentistry, the reason that we have little 'home-grown' workers is due to there aren't any. And they're better at the job a lot of the time. I would prefer to have better teeth rather than the pride of British dentist. Actually, surprisingly, we do need that many construction workers we would be able to use them to our advantage! Our current situation with the housing crisis could be well managed using migrants to help build more homes nationally. There is already a judgement that we don't need them because they're not British, isn't that just arrogance?

    Our trade agreement doesn't restrict us from trading with foreign markets. It is just cheaper if we trade with the EU due to no tariffs, if you were an exporter, why would you trade with USA if it is cheaper to sell it to France?

    Im sorry, I did swerve around some of your points, but I cannot type all day, I have got some revision to do
    There are two main points to be made, and end of free movement of people is not an end to immigration, instead it is taking the people you need from wherever you want to, which means there will still be dentists and doctors coming if they are needed and there are people willing to come. The other thing is that you don't necessarily sell to where it is cheapest to sell to, you sell to where the market is.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    There are two main points to be made, and end of free movement of people is not an end to immigration, instead it is taking the people you need from wherever you want to, which means there will still be dentists and doctors coming if they are needed and there are people willing to come. The other thing is that you don't necessarily sell to where it is cheapest to sell to, you sell to where the market is.
    I agree, but we are happily moving who we want at the moment, we are able to reduce our numbers on the borders (by simply letting less people in), we don't need to leave the EU for that. Furthermore, what is the issue if they are paying tax and contributing to society? Which 90% of them are (The Economist).

    We have a market in the EU, we have been surviving perfectly well, we don't really need other markets for our goods, and the exports who want to sell in that market, generally are!

    I think people want change/reform. I my personal opinion, it's too much of a gamble to leave, too much at stake. We do need change, but this will be the wrong change, and it shall hinder us rather than benefit us.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Indigo.Brownhall)
    I agree, but we are happily moving who we want at the moment, we are able to reduce our numbers on the borders (by simply letting less people in), we don't need to leave the EU for that. Furthermore, what is the issue if they are paying tax and contributing to society? Which 90% of them are (The Economist).
    Which is simply false. If somebody comes to our border with a valid EU passport we simply have no choice but to wave them through

    We have a market in the EU, we have been surviving perfectly well, we don't really need other markets for our goods, and the exports who want to sell in that market, generally are!
    Are you trying to say then that we should not endeavour to trade more and instead should be satisfied with trading with but a small portion of the world, damn the other 80%?

    I think people want change/reform. I my personal opinion, it's too much of a gamble to leave, too much at stake. We do need change, but this will be the wrong change, and it shall hinder us rather than benefit us.
    There are two choices in the referendum, leave or a continued march to a federal Europe. The entire history of our relationship with the EU has been one of failed reform, even before we joined we were trying to reform it. Cameron himself proved we cannot reform it as we wish to because even with the threat of leaving no real concessions were given. If that's how we're treated when we threaten to leave, how will they act after we stay? It most certainly won't be a change of opinion to give us what we want.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Indigo.Brownhall)
    You're being ridiculous. If you think that the money is going to be used for anything useful. They claim that a large proportion is going to be spent on the NHS, the NHS needs a better structure not necessarily more money thrown at it. We are have a conservative government. What's the likelihood that they will actually use the money for the people, but instead to lower the 'debt' - and it is highly unlikely that they will either.

    The claim about the migrants is in their 'EU- In or Out' leaflet, it was given to me in the street, I read it and threw it away, but I am sure in any major city you could find it.

    Also for the amount of migrants to the amount of sexual assaults that have been observed, the ratio is minimal. You cannot blame all of the migrants due to what a few have done. That's like blaming the population of Norway for the work of Anders Behring Breivik, or claiming that all of the USA are part of the KKK, since a small proportion of them are.

    Moreover, the Economist claimed that the migrants contributed £5-6 billion to our economy. Plus, the Huffington Post claimed that actually on 10% of migrants actually benefit from our welfare system.


    I'm just going to leave you with this quote from the 2016 EU economic report...

    'It shows that Britain’sEU membership has boosted its trade in goods with other memberstatesby 55 per cent. In 2013, Britain’s goods trade with the EU was£364 billion, so this ‘EU effect’ amounted to around £130 billion.' - A little bit more than our subscription fee, eh?

    To say that I have no researched is a polite way for you to say - 'I don't accept anyone else's opinion'.
    I couldn't agree more. Also, what if Britain wanted to fight somewhere due to the public's interest and nobody raises their hands to support us. Yes, we would have a decent relationship, but not the type where others would be willing to go into war for us. Additionally, look at the debates we've had such a banning Donald Trump, if he came into power and Britain is against him, then perhaps we could be on rough seas and with no longer being part of the EU our little country would be left vulnerable. I agree that we would be able to represent ourselves and our views more such as with laws and binding precedents however with such dangerous debates and our freedom of speech our controversy could go against us when not being controlled.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brussels sprouts
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.