Is it right for the media to use images of refugee tragedy?

[SuperMikey]

If Merkel/Germany was so keen and desperate for all these extra people to save their economy, why was she trying to get rid of many to other nations? Why aren't they laying old planes direct from Syria to Munich Airport?

 

Because they've taken in an amount they feel will work well for their economy without being a financial burden in the short-term, but there are still hundreds of thousands of people out there who need to be settled, and many other European countries who can benefit from having these people in their country as Germany will do. Look, there's even a Wikipedia page I can show you to help you grasp the concept of migrants being good for a country's economy!

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ageing_of_Europe

[colehillsaint]

What Merkel really meant was "We're stuck with these people now that have fled the horrors of Hungary and Greece, so look at how great we are, can the Holocaust be forgotten now, thanks"

 

Yes, and my take is that if she wants it forgotten it's quite big of her to mention it one more time.

[Whitey Grandad]

Is everyone being sterilised now? I must've missed that memo. If that's not the case I suppose there would be people younger than them at some stage to replace them.

 

You need to look at the demographics. When these younger people get old there will be far more old people than there are now. Then they will need even more younger people to pay for them. It's not a steady-state system, if it were there would be no need for more taxpayers to pay for the oldies.

[SuperMikey]

You need to look at the demographics. When these younger people get old there will be far more old people than there are now. Then they will need even more younger people to pay for them. It's not a steady-state system, if it were there would be no need for more taxpayers to pay for the oldies.

 

But now you're just talking about population growth in general - that's a different topic. The global population has exploded recently, but Europe itself is a rapidly ageing continent and, as such, will experience a labour shortage in the future due to lower birth rates and higher life expectancy. Other continents like Africa and Asia are seeing huge population growth as quality of life there increases - birth rates are sustained at the high levels that they have traditionally been at, but life expectancy is up and infant mortality is down. It's only logical to capitalise on the young populations of these areas to our advantage and that's exactly what Germany is doing. It's not only a humanitarian act, but also a clever economic one too.

[Sour Mash]

Because they've taken in an amount they feel will work well for their economy without being a financial burden in the short-term, but there are still hundreds of thousands of people out there who need to be settled, and many other European countries who can benefit from having these people in their country as Germany will do. Look, there's even a Wikipedia page I can show you to help you grasp the concept of migrants being good for a country's economy!

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ageing_of_Europe

Oh I see, its now exactly the amount they want and need, no more, no less

 

God knows why Merkel was trying to get other nations to take some of them.

[SuperMikey]

Oh I see, its now exactly the amount they want and need, no more, no less

 

God knows why Merkel was trying to get other nations to take some of them.

 

I don't remember saying that, although perhaps in your alternative reality I did. Maybe in that reality you're not so much of a tedious c*nt.

 

Cheery pip!

[Whitey Grandad]

But now you're just talking about population growth in general - that's a different topic. The global population has exploded recently, but Europe itself is a rapidly ageing continent and, as such, will experience a labour shortage in the future due to lower birth rates and higher life expectancy. Other continents like Africa and Asia are seeing huge population growth as quality of life there increases - birth rates are sustained at the high levels that they have traditionally been at, but life expectancy is up and infant mortality is down. It's only logical to capitalise on the young populations of these areas to our advantage and that's exactly what Germany is doing. It's not only a humanitarian act, but also a clever economic one too.

 

No, I wasn't talking about population growth, I was referring to the policy of encouraging an immigrant workforce in order to pay for the indigenous elder population, a workforce who will have not contributed anything to their own pension plans and will become an even bigger demand once they themselves get old.

[holepuncture]

Couple of links from the facebook lot

 

https://www.facebook.com/LordChips/videos/10153011938595863/?fref=nf

 

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10153689358808969&set=p.10153689358808969&type=1

 

No idea if its a photoshop or not?

[Batman]

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/09/08/the-5-awkward-questions-they-wont-answer-about-the-drowned-boy-syria-and-our-moral-duty/

 

http://www.ibtimes.com/isis-weapons-europe-greek-coast-guard-seizes-islamic-state-ship-smuggling-ammunition-2076983

[Jonnyboy]

There have been some pretty doom laden views expressed on here lately, from a (claimed) ever poorer future for our children to what appears to be a call for mass culling of Humanity! I for one however am far from convinced that we as a species are nearly as 'screwed' as some would have you believe.

 

One of the ironies of the world today is that most people get the impression that things are getting worse and worse while the truth is that for the majority of people on the planet life is actually getting better - and quite significantly better for many. Worldwide poverty and death rates are plummeting while many major diseases (like tetanus and polio) have nearly been eliminated. Malaria, the disease that has killed more people than any other throughout history, is in steep decline because of medical advances and the splendid efforts of international organisations such as the World Health Organisation. Despite the rise of ISIS war related deaths have actually been declining since World War II ended and that decline continued after the Cold War eliminated most communist governments in 1991.

 

But if the 'big picture' then for humanity is not nearly as bleak a some say then why do most people think otherwise? You can place much of the blame for this pervasive sense of doom on the mass media and their most effective marketing tool; FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt). We are saturated with news - both via the traditional media and now the Internet - and all this good news about the modern world is drowned in a veritable torrent of head line grabbing despair. Good news just isn't 'news' as those who set the news agenda see it - it certainly won't make you money or get you noticed.

 

So bugger off SWF doom mongers - Humanities manifest tendency towards violence and self-destruction can be matched I think, and then overcome perhaps one fine day, by our innate ability for cooperation, compassion and inventiveness. That's the future I prefer to believe in anyway.

 

Great post. The tabloids have a lot to answer for.

[bungle]

Great post. The tabloids have a lot to answer for.

 

I chap called Gregg Easterbrook wrote a book about this, called "The Progress Paradox" - e.g., why everyone feels worse while everything is getting better. Would like to read it - read one of his other books, Sonicboom, on globalisation and capitalism, which was excellent.

[Batman]

http://news360.com/article/311820821

 

How long before something big kicks off in Europe.?

 

Germany now deciding go down the border control route.

 

The whole European response has been nothing but bizarre

Edited 13 September, 2015 by Batman

[Colinjb]

http://news360.com/article/311820821

 

How long before something big kicks off in Europe.?

 

Germany now deciding go down the border control route.

 

The whole European response has been nothing but bizarre

 

It goes to show, the European Union is nothing of the sort. It's too politically complex to react to a crisis so... every man for himself!

 

The sooner we are out the better!!

[Crab Lungs]

http://news360.com/article/311820821

 

How long before something big kicks off in Europe.?

 

Germany now deciding go down the border control route.

 

The whole European response has been nothing but bizarre

 

I'm giving it around 6 months before the first genuine ISIS-related incident.

[Badger]

I'm giving it around 6 months before the first genuine ISIS-related incident.

 

I expect The Sun's offices might have set themselves up as a target given the 'Wham, Bam..' headline last week.

[Lord Duckhunter]

It goes to show, the European Union is nothing of the sort. It's too politically complex to react to a crisis so... every man for himself!

 

The sooner we are out the better!!

 

Two major pillars of the eu are The Euro and Schengen , both have shown to be totally unworkable as soon as they're put under any stress . The EU is a flawed ideological idea and the sooner it is broken up , the better.

[Batman]

 

edit. I see Most of western europe has shut up shop

what ever happened to the hug a migrant stance much of the continent had a couple of weeks ago?

 

nice to see them toughening their stance. Waaaaay too late but nice to see

Edited 14 September, 2015 by Batman

[Batman]

Razor wire fence now being put up to keep migrants out of EU countries

 

 

well well well

[Whitey Grandad]

Two major pillars of the eu are The Euro and Schengen , both have shown to be totally unworkable as soon as they're put under any stress . The EU is a flawed ideological idea and the sooner it is broken up , the better.

The Euro's working fine. I have never had any problems with it.

[aintforever]

The Euro's working fine. I have never had any problems with it.

 

I've never had a problem with any money. You hand over bits of paper or coins and get stuff in return, a very simple concept, hard to go wrong.

[Orange]

I cannot believe the way Merkal and others on the continent have acted.

 

Summed up for me on the news last night- the reporter asked a man making his way to Germany whether he thought he'd be welcomed, and he responded with a big smile saying 'yes of course, my brother has shown me the videos/photos etc on the internet. Unfortunately for this man Germany has now shut its borders. But that's what they've done, through their reckless moral grandstanding, lured millions of people into believing a false dream, and then for some bizarre reason been shocked that the stream of people hasn't stopped.

[Badger]

I cannot believe the way Merkal and others on the continent have acted.

 

Summed up for me on the news last night- the reporter asked a man making his way to Germany whether he thought he'd be welcomed, and he responded with a big smile saying 'yes of course, my brother has shown me the videos/photos etc on the internet. Unfortunately for this man Germany has now shut its borders. But that's what they've done, through their reckless moral grandstanding, lured millions of people into believing a false dream, and then for some bizarre reason been shocked that the stream of people hasn't stopped.

 

Merkel has been naive in the extreme is she thinks Germany can accept 800,000 this year, and then the tide will stop. Are they realy going to turn away the 800,001st and onwards on the grounds'we've satisfied our moral duty'. The 800,000 will soon become 1.6m as this bloke proves, many will have family they want to bring, and the human rights lobby will insist they should be able to. And on and on it goes.

 

I feel sorry for the German people and what Merkel has dumped on them.

[alpine_saint]

I cannot believe the way Merkal and others on the continent have acted.

 

Summed up for me on the news last night- the reporter asked a man making his way to Germany whether he thought he'd be welcomed, and he responded with a big smile saying 'yes of course, my brother has shown me the videos/photos etc on the internet. Unfortunately for this man Germany has now shut its borders. But that's what they've done, through their reckless moral grandstanding, lured millions of people into believing a false dream, and then for some bizarre reason been shocked that the stream of people hasn't stopped.

 

I had this exact conversation with my wife (Austrian) last night. Germany has done the wrong thing for the right reasons. By saying they will take 100s of 1000s of refugees, those involved feel they have a welcome invitation and are even more determined to risk the journey.

 

Germany has a habit of doing the wrong thing for the right reason; they arguably started all the Balkan Wars by recognising the independent sovereignty of Croatia.

[holepuncture]

Water canon, army and riot police deployed in Hungary, Migrants throwing bricks etc in return. Not looking good.

[st alex]

Yes, barracking is indeed a word and seemingly more appropriate to what you were wishing to express, so you have learned something new.

 

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/barrack

 

Interesting that you are concerned over infrastructure such as housing and the railway network and yet not a peep out of you about the need for schooling and health care provision for these immigrants/migrants/refugees. Perhaps you would care to apportion blame for those services onto the government from over 30 years ago for not having the foresight to have anticipated the size of population we would have once the EU allowed freedom of movement between member states and also allowing for the refugee situation arising from humanitarian crises like the one in the Middle East.

 

Interesting that you have some sort of persecution complex because only a "handful of posters" dare to express differing views to yours and gang together to shout you down. If it is indeed only a handful, then it is logically only a minority, but obviously quite a powerful one, given their ability to forge such a strong alliance that they are capable of shouting down the views of the majority.

 

In reality it is silly to label those who express doubts about the ability of our infrastructure to cope with such an influx of immigrants as being "anti-foreigner". There have been enough former immigrants into this country from many years ago who have expressed the opinion that our infrastructure cannot cope with too many more, so how ironic is that? Are they therefore anti-foreigner too?

 

Because of the strain placed upon our housing, education and health services because of immigration, there is growing support amongst the electorate for us to leave the EU, so that we can set our own immigration policies. That will enable us to take in only those from other countries who we wish to allow in, freeing up space for us to take our share of genuine refugees.

 

In terms of public facilities weather it be education, health care, infrastructure, housing it doesn't really matter where the population increase comes from?

 

Simply supply and demand, if EU migrants are here working and asylum seekers are given the right to work (and various studies show that overall migrants are contributing massively to the economy) then they are all paying into the government coffers through taxes that should be finding it's way back into public services, if it's not then it's the government that's at fault, not migrants.

[buctootim]

I had this exact conversation with my wife (Austrian) last night. Germany has done the wrong thing for the right reasons. By saying they will take 100s of 1000s of refugees, those involved feel they have a welcome invitation and are even more determined to risk the journey.

 

Germany has a habit of doing the wrong thing for the right reason; they arguably started all the Balkan Wars by recognising the independent sovereignty of Croatia.

 

Their mistake is to treat the issue as though its a finite, manageable of number. Its not, its an elastic number dependent on how risky and expensive the journey is and the degree of certainty that they will be welcomed and supported in a country with a much higher standard of living and security than they have now. If it costs £10,000 to travel , there is a 30% risk of death and you end up in Turkey only the desperate will risk it. Make the journey safer, cheaper and offer a guarantee of settlement in Germany and hundreds of thousands will make a logical choice to move.

[alpine_saint]

Their mistake is to treat the issue as though its a finite, manageable of number. Its not, its an elastic number dependent on how risky and expensive the journey is and the degree of certainty that they will be welcomed and supported in a country with a much higher standard of living and security than they have now. If it costs £10,000 to travel , there is a 30% risk of death and you end up in Turkey only the desperate will risk it. Make the journey safer, cheaper and offer a guarantee of settlement in Germany and hundreds of thousands will make a logical choice to move.

 

Completely agree. I think we are saying the same thing.

[Orange]

Merkel has been naive in the extreme is she thinks Germany can accept 800,000 this year, and then the tide will stop. Are they realy going to turn away the 800,001st and onwards on the grounds'we've satisfied our moral duty'. The 800,000 will soon become 1.6m as this bloke proves, many will have family they want to bring, and the human rights lobby will insist they should be able to. And on and on it goes.

 

I feel sorry for the German people and what Merkel has dumped on them.

 

Exactly, it's almost insanely naive, a lot of it must be down to their guilt complex. If there was one ethnic group with a fixed and manageable number of people, fleeing persecution, then it's different and quotos etc can work. But it's not the case. Watching BBC news earlier today their tone as certainly changed from the hysteria they were spouting 2-3 weeks ago, they were even admitting that a lot of the people in Serbia, Croatia, Hungary etc are from all parts of Africa and even beyond : Nigeria, Ghana, even Bangladesh.

 

It's not a politically correct comment to make, but most of these hundreds of thousands of people, if Germany are to let those sorts of numbers in, will have kids at a much higher birth rate than Europeans, transforming even more the ethnic make up of the country in the long run.

[Batman]

I read now that that he RN is diverting major warships to actively 'deter' people smuggling boats from reaching Europe.

 

 

waaaay too late but good to see

 

but, germany once again have helped ruin this part of the world...well done

[aintforever]

 

but, germany once again have helped ruin this part of the world...well done

 

A bit harsh considering we ****ed up the whole region by starting the war in Iraq, then helped overthrow the government of Libya and encouraged the people of Syria to fight against Assad.

[Batman]

the UK is now up to 580,000 incoming migrants a year.

 

the EU is set to have to house 1m additional people this year alone

 

 

just keep em coming.

[aintforever]

the UK is now up to 580,000 incoming migrants a year.

 

the EU is set to have to house 1m additional people this year alone

 

 

just keep em coming.

 

Luckily we will soon have the chance to leave the EU and put a stop to this madness.

[hypochondriac]

Luckily we will soon have the chance to leave the EU and put a stop to this madness.

 

You do know there is zero chance the British public will vote to leave don't you?

[Batman]

Luckily we will soon have the chance to leave the EU and put a stop to this madness.

 

Sadly, the U.K. Will vote to stay IMO.

 

Just heard a news clip on LBC of a Syrian trying to get to Germany.

 

He said he will take his family back to his home in Syria if he can't get to and settle in Germany.

 

 

Something is wrong with all of this when Syrians/migrants are "fleeing" Turkey... The place where thousands of Brits, let alone Europeans go on holiday every year

 

Fantastic

Edited 22 September, 2015 by Batman

[Wes Tender]

You do know there is zero chance the British public will vote to leave don't you?

 

No, he doesn't and neither do you.

[hypochondriac]

No, he doesn't and neither do you.

 

OK then.

[Wes Tender]

OK then.

 

OK then. You've no doubt gazed deep into your crystal ball which is infallible. Whilst you're at it, could you pm me the next winning lottery numbers?

 

When Dave first promised that the EU referendum would be held in 2017, there was much anger that it was to be so far away, as one was promised in the General Election before, so there was little excuse for not stating that one would be held say six months after this election. Now it seems as if the tardiness in holding the referendum will massively benefit the "leave" lobby, because immigration is fast becoming the major issue. Every month that passes will strengthen the desire for us to be able to set our own border controls, so that we don't have to allow unfettered migration from any other EU member state and we would have the ability to lay down firm guidelines on which immigrants from other parts of the World we were prepared to take.

[hypochondriac]

OK then. You've no doubt gazed deep into your crystal ball which is infallible. Whilst you're at it, could you pm me the next winning lottery numbers?

 

When Dave first promised that the EU referendum would be held in 2017, there was much anger that it was to be so far away, as one was promised in the General Election before, so there was little excuse for not stating that one would be held say six months after this election. Now it seems as if the tardiness in holding the referendum will massively benefit the "leave" lobby, because immigration is fast becoming the major issue. Every month that passes will strengthen the desire for us to be able to set our own border controls, so that we don't have to allow unfettered migration from any other EU member state and we would have the ability to lay down firm guidelines on which immigrants from other parts of the World we were prepared to take.

 

Well let's meet back here then after we haven't voted to leave and you can admit you were a buffoon for thinking the British public will vote to leave. On balance most dislike a lot of the EU but they also recognise the good it does and they won't put business at risk. The stay in lobby will use scare tactics and they work every time. Generally people vote for the status quo rather than move to an unknown position with too many intangibles. I expect it will be similar to the Scottish referendum but without the caricature of the evil English.

 

There is no chance we will vote to leave, none whatsoever. If you truly believe we will then you are going to be disappointed. I haven't put my position here by the way, just saying what is obvious to most people. You can cling to your "opposition growing every day" stuff if you like though.

Edited 23 September, 2015 by hypochondriac

[Whitey Grandad]

Leaving the EU would make no difference to the numbers of immigrants coming to the UK.

[Batman]

Leaving the EU would make no difference to the numbers of immigrants coming to the UK.

 

well, it would. there would be huge pressure to put quotas on everyone coming. rather than just non EU peeps

[Wes Tender]

Well let's meet back here then after we haven't voted to leave and you can admit you were a buffoon for thinking the British public will vote to leave. On balance most dislike a lot of the EU but they also recognise the good it does and they won't put business at risk. The stay in lobby will use scare tactics and they work every time. Generally people vote for the status quo rather than move to an unknown position with too many intangibles. I expect it will be similar to the Scottish referendum but without the caricature of the evil English.

 

There is no chance we will vote to leave, none whatsoever. If you truly believe we will then you are going to be disappointed. I haven't put my position here by the way, just saying what is obvious to most people. You can cling to your "opposition growing every day" stuff if you like though.

 

You said that Bertrand was a crap signing.

 

Verbal said that I need not worry my Ukippy head that Corbyn would be elected leader of the Labour Party, it was never going to happen. Not that I was worried; it was what I hoped for.

 

The buffoon here is you, dismissing the chances of us leaving the EU as non-existent. Somebody with a more measured approach would speak of it as being unlikely, or improbable and I have no problem with that viewpoint. It is the idiots who state categorically that there is no chance at all of it happening.

 

Having dismissed the possibility as zero chance, you have been drawn into some debate into your position, which is to dismiss us leaving the EU out of hand, whilst simultaneously talking in terms that suggest that it is not impossible that we might leave. You admit that many dislike the EU. You rely on the likelihood that the pro-EU lobby will have to resort to scare tactics to secure their position. You compare it to the Scottish referendum when there are huge disparities between that and the EU referendum, and where it was even thought that the Scots would vote to leave up to a couple of weeks before the actual vote.

 

You seem to have swallowed all the arguments yourself that will be employed by the stay in lobby, that business will be put at risk, that is better to maintain the status quo than to take a leap into the unknown.

 

The counter position in the campaign to leave will naturally also invlove scare tactics; the pro-EU lot don't have a monopoly on that. Immigration will play a major part in that debate, but also the loss of sovereignty, prevalence of the European Court of Law over our own legal system, the huge cost of membership, are all factors to be considered. They will not only refute vigorously the lie that we will stand to lose business, but they will argue that by trading with the rest of the World, we can actually increase our business activity. They will point to other nations thriving on World trade, whilst pointing to those EU nations who despite their trade within Europa and massive subsidies, nevertheless have basket case economies and massive unemployment.

 

Whereas you claim that "most people" believe that it is obvious that we will not leave, I will counter that by claiming that "most people" (including me), consider that the position that they would find most acceptable is the one whereby we return to our membership of what we originally joined, solely a Common Market for trade. All of the federalist claptrap that was added in successive treaties that we subsequently signed up to which resulted in a European Union should have been put to the British electorate in a referendum at the time that they were signed.

 

Therefore, in my opinion, there should be a third option in the referendum, which should allow the opportunity to stay in the EU purely on a trade basis and nothing more. As that is not going to happen, then those who would prefer that position should recognise that their best chance of achieving it would be to vote to leave.

[hypochondriac]

You said that Bertrand was a crap signing.

 

Verbal said that I need not worry my Ukippy head that Corbyn would be elected leader of the Labour Party, it was never going to happen. Not that I was worried; it was what I hoped for.

 

The buffoon here is you, dismissing the chances of us leaving the EU as non-existent. Somebody with a more measured approach would speak of it as being unlikely, or improbable and I have no problem with that viewpoint. It is the idiots who state categorically that there is no chance at all of it happening.

 

Having dismissed the possibility as zero chance, you have been drawn into some debate into your position, which is to dismiss us leaving the EU out of hand, whilst simultaneously talking in terms that suggest that it is not impossible that we might leave. You admit that many dislike the EU. You rely on the likelihood that the pro-EU lobby will have to resort to scare tactics to secure their position. You compare it to the Scottish referendum when there are huge disparities between that and the EU referendum, and where it was even thought that the Scots would vote to leave up to a couple of weeks before the actual vote.

 

You seem to have swallowed all the arguments yourself that will be employed by the stay in lobby, that business will be put at risk, that is better to maintain the status quo than to take a leap into the unknown.

 

The counter position in the campaign to leave will naturally also invlove scare tactics; the pro-EU lot don't have a monopoly on that. Immigration will play a major part in that debate, but also the loss of sovereignty, prevalence of the European Court of Law over our own legal system, the huge cost of membership, are all factors to be considered. They will not only refute vigorously the lie that we will stand to lose business, but they will argue that by trading with the rest of the World, we can actually increase our business activity. They will point to other nations thriving on World trade, whilst pointing to those EU nations who despite their trade within Europa and massive subsidies, nevertheless have basket case economies and massive unemployment.

 

Whereas you claim that "most people" believe that it is obvious that we will not leave, I will counter that by claiming that "most people" (including me), consider that the position that they would find most acceptable is the one whereby we return to our membership of what we originally joined, solely a Common Market for trade. All of the federalist claptrap that was added in successive treaties that we subsequently signed up to which resulted in a European Union should have been put to the British electorate in a referendum at the time that they were signed.

 

Therefore, in my opinion, there should be a third option in the referendum, which should allow the opportunity to stay in the EU purely on a trade basis and nothing more. As that is not going to happen, then those who would prefer that position should recognise that their best chance of achieving it would be to vote to leave.

 

:lol: There aren't enough facepalms in the world for that comment. You sad sad sad man, comments on signings are not remotely comparable to a vote to leave Europe. Besides that not being what I meant (and my subsequent explanations which you ignored) how s an initial reaction of a saints signing anything to do with the vote to leave the EU?

 

I hear there are rumours that Hitler who has been cryogenically frozen on his secret moon base is due to return next year just in time to conquer Britain and force all those who vote to stay in the EU to join his galactic slave ships. Granted, in that scenario I could very much see us voting to leave but short of that or a similar scenario, we won't be voting to leave no matter how much you jump up and down or invent fictional instances where we will. I haven't swallowed any arguments you fool, I didn't give my opinion or signal which way I would be voting! I just outlined the very effective arguments that the stay in camp will be using. And they will be effective because that's how human nature works. You can pretend that the leave camp will have equally strong arguments but the truth is they won't. The majority of the business community want to stay in and that's where the money resides, what the majority of the papers will campaign for and ultimately they will get what they want. Faced with a scenario of some more immigrants or the apocalyptic trashing of London as the financial capital of the world and the loss of their reputation at the top table then the public will vote for the lesser of two evils every time (hint- they will vote to keep the immigration thing.)

 

When the vote comes round feel free to bump this thread and have a good laugh at my expense. Or not...

Edited 23 September, 2015 by hypochondriac

[aintforever]

Leaving the EU would make no difference to the numbers of immigrants coming to the UK.

 

Of course it would, we would have complete control of our borders. We could make net migration zero if we wanted.

[Wes Tender]

:lol: There aren't enough facepalms in the world for that comment. You sad sad sad man, comments on signings are not remotely comparable to a vote to leave Europe. Besides that not being what I meant (and my subsequent explanations which you ignored) how s an initial reaction of a saints signing anything to do with the vote to leave the EU?

 

I hear there are rumours that Hitler who has been cryogenically frozen on his secret moon base is due to return next year just in time to conquer Britain and force all those who vote to stay in the EU to join his galactic slave ships. Granted, in that scenario I could very much see us voting to leave but short of that or a similar scenario, we won't be voting to leave no matter how much you jump up and down or invent fictional instances where we will. I haven't swallowed any arguments you fool, I didn't give my opinion or signal which way I would be voting! I just outlined the very effective arguments that the stay in camp will be using. And they will be effective because that's how human nature works.

 

When the vote comes round feel free to bump this thread and have a good laugh at my expense. Or not...

 

Your response proves that you have totally lost it. Buffoonery at its best. Why not try and engage in sensible debate instead of going off on a mad rant?

 

I have given several reasons which voters might feel justify their desire to leave, but somehow you choose to dismiss them as fictional. Any sane person would accept them as being valid reasons, so I will draw my own conclusions as to whether you are able to debate the issues with any sanity.

 

I don't see you refuting my claim that the majority position is quite possibly that if permitted to, they would vote to remain in Europe solely on a trading basis.

 

I don't need to know which way you would vote. As you insist that there is absolutely no chance of us voting to leave, then it is clear that you consider that anybody who votes to leave for whatever reason, might as well not bother, as there can never be enough of them to win. All those UKIP voters, the traditional core of Tory Euro-sceptics, the anti-Europe Trade Union members, the Corbyn left-wingers, they have no clout at all to change the game, despite there being another couple of years in which political circumstances could drastically alter the whole scenario.

 

A week is a long time in politics - Harold Wilson

In politics, there is no use in looking beyond the next fortnight - Joseph Chamberlain

Events, dear boy, events - What Macmillan feared most, apparently.

[Wes Tender]

I see that Hypo has added some extra substance to the post which I had quoted entirely verbatim.

 

Maybe he will also now admit that any concerns that people might have over what they consider to be the shortcomings and problems caused by the EU are not fictional figments of their imagination.

[Whitey Grandad]

Of course it would, we would have complete control of our borders. We could make net migration zero if we wanted.

 

We have complete control of our borders now regarding no-EU people and a fat lot of good that is. If we left the EU and stayed in the EEA then the rules on movement of EU nationals would not change.

[hypochondriac]

Your response proves that you have totally lost it. Buffoonery at its best. Why not try and engage in sensible debate instead of going off on a mad rant?

 

I have given several reasons which voters might feel justify their desire to leave, but somehow you choose to dismiss them as fictional. Any sane person would accept them as being valid reasons, so I will draw my own conclusions as to whether you are able to debate the issues with any sanity.

 

I don't see you refuting my claim that the majority position is quite possibly that if permitted to, they would vote to remain in Europe solely on a trading basis.

 

I don't need to know which way you would vote. As you insist that there is absolutely no chance of us voting to leave, then it is clear that you consider that anybody who votes to leave for whatever reason, might as well not bother, as there can never be enough of them to win. All those UKIP voters, the traditional core of Tory Euro-sceptics, the anti-Europe Trade Union members, the Corbyn left-wingers, they have no clout at all to change the game, despite there being another couple of years in which political circumstances could drastically alter the whole scenario.

 

A week is a long time in politics - Harold Wilson

In politics, there is no use in looking beyond the next fortnight - Joseph Chamberlain

Events, dear boy, events - What Macmillan feared most, apparently.

 

Your response once again proves you are disconnected from reality but if you are happy with your delusion then who am I to criticise? Live in your mental fairy world if you like, we still aren't going to vote to leave.

 

You make no valid reasons, just because you want something to be true doesn't mean it's going to happen. I want saints to win the champions league but unlike the likes of mlg I'm not going to invent fictional future scenarios where this could happen, I simply look at the situation and the history and accept that no matter what I want it isn't going to happen. I suspect that people would rather be in Europe on a trading basis but that offer isn't on the table and the majority won't be going for the incredibly radical step of complete removal from the EU and what that entails. with the possible hope that they could join a trading union at some point in the future. Again, if you believe they will then that's fine but I presume you will be coming back on here to apologise once we vote not to leave?

 

Of course voting even if you know you won't win is important. Look at Scotland, they have gained much from the independence referendum despite losing. Personally I hope the vote is close enough that politicians won't get complacent or consider it a ringing endorsement of the EU. Keep clinging to your delusion if you wish but it will just make you look a little foolish won't it.

[buctootim]

well, it would. there would be huge pressure to put quotas on everyone coming. rather than just non EU peeps

 

Like in the 1950s, 60s and early 70s you mean? When we weren't part of the EU / EC.

 

The EU has just become the convenient scapegoat for all the things people dont like about globalisation. If there was no EU you'd still have massive inward and outward movement of people.

[Wes Tender]

Your response once again proves you are disconnected from reality but if you are happy with your delusion then who am I to criticise? Live in your mental fairy world if you like, we still aren't going to vote to leave.

 

You make no valid reasons, just because you want something to be true doesn't mean it's going to happen. I want saints to win the champions league but unlike the likes of mlg I'm not going to invent fictional future scenarios where this could happen, I simply look at the situation and the history and accept that no matter what I want it isn't going to happen. I suspect that people would rather be in Europe on a trading basis but that offer isn't on the table and the majority won't be going for the incredibly radical step of complete removal from the EU and what that entails. with the possible hope that they could join a trading union at some point in the future. Again, if you believe they will then that's fine but I presume you will be coming back on here to apologise once we vote not to leave?

 

Of course voting even if you know you won't win is important. Look at Scotland, they have gained much from the independence referendum despite losing. Personally I hope the vote is close enough that politicians won't get complacent or consider it a ringing endorsement of the EU. Keep clinging to your delusion if you wish but it will just make you look a little foolish won't it.

 

I just love the debating position that states that if someone adopts an alternative position, they must be deluded, a bit simple, a buffoon, disconnected from reality, etc. It really is an arrogant position to adopt and left-wingers in particular are especially good at it, (not that I insinuate that you are left-wing).

 

I have given several valid reasons why people might vote to leave the EU, but you seem not have the comprehension to recognise them, or more accurately, you seem to think that they are fictional, like MLG's dreams about the Champions League. You don't appear to realise the irony that I question your judgement by reference to your knee-jerk reaction on the Bertrand signing and you demand to know what that has to do with our membership of the EU and in the next breath you make a connection yourself between a footballing analogy and Europe.

 

Do I have an admission from you that many people would rather be in Europe on a trading basis only? Would you say that they might conceivably even represent a majority, or at the least a very sizeable proportion compared to those who are happy to stay in, or those who want to leave? If so, there is a strong case that could be made that they should have the opportunity to vote for that in the referendum.

 

Failing that, despite your assurances that the vote is such a foregone conclusion, the best way for them to secure concessions from the EU towards things like border controls on immigration, the regaining of lost sovereignty, the cost of our membership etc, is obviously to vote to leave.

 

In view of your last paragraph wherein you show some sensible balance by recognising that the Scotland Independence cause derived some benefit from running the vote so closely, it is indeed to be hoped that there are enough buffoons, deluded and simple-minded people amongst the electorate who will vote to leave, in order that we can also force through some concessions from the EU.

[hypochondriac]

I just love the debating position that states that if someone adopts an alternative position, they must be deluded, a bit simple, a buffoon, disconnected from reality, etc. It really is an arrogant position to adopt and left-wingers in particular are especially good at it, (not that I insinuate that you are left-wing)

 

As opposed to the debating style which involves bringing up a comment I mistakenly made over a year ago? (and subsequently clarified on a number of occasions.) It's not an alternate position that makes you a buffoon, simply your utter refusal to see the reality of a situation due to your UKIP bias.

 

I have given several valid reasons why people might vote to leave the EU, but you seem not have the comprehension to recognise them, or more accurately, you seem to think that they are fictional, like MLG's dreams about the Champions League. You don't appear to realise the irony that I question your judgement by reference to your knee-jerk reaction on the Bertrand signing and you demand to know what that has to do with our membership of the EU and in the next breath you make a connection yourself between a footballing analogy and Europe.

 

I clearly comprehend them, none of the meagre offerings you have proffered will make any difference and that is the point.

Do I have an admission from you that many people would rather be in Europe on a trading basis only? Would you say that they might conceivably even represent a majority, or at the least a very sizeable proportion compared to those who are happy to stay in, or those who want to leave? If so, there is a strong case that could be made that they should have the opportunity to vote for that in the referendum.

 

That may be the case and if we were to vote for that option then I would consider it to be much closer. We aren't voting for that though so not sure why you are bringing it up. People who want a renegotiation aren't suddenly going to vote to leave no matter how much you wish it were true.

 

Failing that, despite your assurances that the vote is such a foregone conclusion, the best way for them to secure concessions from the EU towards things like border controls on immigration, the regaining of lost sovereignty, the cost of our membership etc, is obviously to vote to leave.

We wouldn't be securing concessions in that scenario- obviously not. If we vote to leave in the referendum then we would leave.

 

In view of your last paragraph wherein you show some sensible balance by recognising that the Scotland Independence cause derived some benefit from running the vote so closely, it is indeed to be hoped that there are enough buffoons, deluded and simple-minded people amongst the electorate who will vote to leave, in order that we can also force through some concessions from the EU.

 

I don't consider everyone buffoons, simple minded or deluded- Just you and other ukippers who believe they have any chance of winning. It's cute really.

Edited 23 September, 2015 by hypochondriac