Poll: The EU Referendum: How Will You Vote? (June Poll)

Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?

  • Remain a member of the European Union

    Votes: 794 45.1%
  • Leave the European Union

    Votes: 965 54.9%

  • Total voters
    1,759
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well... there's no a lot of point arguing with you then, is there?

There is a little, when you stated a 'fact' to backup the first part of your statement, then criticized government policy for the second part, as there is no 'fact' to help you defend the position that social is more under stress due to migration.

Government policies or not, it remains under stress, and is more so because of immigration.
Does this change how I will vote? No.
Do I care regarding this? No.

But you can't cherry pick, use a fact to defend one thing, then blatantly side step the second half.
Nice attempt at evasion.
 
Someone answer me a question please, in Northern Ireland, from what I can tell, it is a legal obligation to be registered on the electoral register. Is this not the same in England? As there have been 250K registrations to vote, this very day. I am aware there is no requirement to actually vote, but is one not meant to be registered?
 
I know more than one health care workers (dentists) that are genuinely peeved when Europeans come to get diagnosed, go home for the treatment, then come back for a fix up when they get a bodge job of a root canal - apparently not uncommon.

I have exactly the opposite experience. Few years ago while visiting my ex's mum I had a tooth problem. However cos I was over there only for long a weekend and we flew back on Monday morning. All the dentist could do for me was to clean the canal and tell me which one is causing the trouble.
When I arrived here my dentist treated wrong canal which meant I had to go back few weeks later and had ruined Christmas.
 
So, I finally watched Brexit: the Movie.

To be honest I needn't have watched much more than the first minute, as it makes it clear what a load of propagandist crap you can expect from the next hour. "We, the people, are being cajoled, frightened and bullied into surrendering our democracy and freedom", it begins atop dramatic music. The first interview tells us "with general elections, it doesn't really matter who you vote for" nicely setting the tone for the kind of considered comment we can look forward to.

So, after a few soundbites, it begins with a section that purports to explain how the EU works but doesn't actually do any such thing. Instead, it just consists of a lot of saying "people don't know how this works" along with some public interviews that may, or may not, be utterly cherry picked; it's hard to tell. There's a few good points in here, the EU does have some issues with people understanding it and knowing about its structures and a bigger problem with getting media engagement, particular in the UK, and there are legitimate criticism of many of the EU's institutions. What B:tM fails to do is make any kind of coherent argument out of all this. Instead it just plays music, shows up a spot of public ignorance, and repeatedly drops assertions about a lack of transparency, accountability and democracy into its narration without without ever really backing them up.

We're then treated to a spot of economic history, in which B:tM harks back to that wonderful golden age of the industrial revolution in which the unfettered hand of the market led to wonders for all. The sharp decline in the average lifespan; epic increase in inequality; child labour; high rates of injury and death; stupidly long working hours; and so forth are apparently not worth a mention nor the levels of corruption and cronyism that actually marked the economy of the industrial revolution. Apparently, it all went wrong for Britain around WWI when we started regulating stuff, and even worse after WWII when we did things like introducing building regulations, cleared the slums and improved the quality of housing for millions. Following that disaster, the UK development in the UK stalled completely and we stopped enjoying any increase in living standards - oh wait, that's tosh, isn't it?

There's a section on fisheries that doesn't seem to have noticed that fish stocks were in decline long before we signed up to the common fisheries policy and, in fact, the decline of fishing probably has a lot more do with decades of overfishing than it does with the EU.

We're also given a long section about how awful protectionism and tariffs are, and how the EU has erected big trade tariffs blocking trade from the outside, which seems blissfully unaware that trade tariffs were much higher before we joined the EU. And some "hilarious" sketches about how all EU companies are totally inefficient unlike those of those nice Asians chaps that doesn't seem to have noticed that many EU companies that are global powerhouses. It does make some good points about protectionism but given that the EU doesn't, in fact, have particularly high trade barriers and the British reaction to the troubles of Port Talbot, I don't see much reason to think that the UK would become less protectionist if we left the EU - and, of course, we'd face new barriers if we didn't re-enter the EEA.

This theme of how terribly awful regulation continues for some time, and along the way we're treated to the greatest hits of the unfettered free market creed. At one point, there's a sequence in which it lists the number of regulations covering various products, 31 for pillowcases, 220ish for glasses, and so on. I don't know whether the numbers are correct, but the fact that they claimed to have sourced them from "various databases" provided by the EU puts the lie to their earlier claims about transparency. What's very telling is that they don't actually tell you what a single one of them are nor name a single one of these regulations they think we should be rid of. The fact is that you, I, and most other people are probably very grateful for these regulations. I like the fact that if I go and buy a pillow case that it comes in a standard size than means it fits my pillows, I like the fact that it's been fire, and allergy, tested and meets minimum standards of construction that make it safe to use. I like that fact that I can go into any shop and know that everything I buy meets these kinds of standards. Regulation makes our lives safer and easier, as welling as being the means by which we tackle collective ills such as air pollution, energy over-use, and climate change.

You'd have thought after poor regulation of the financial markets led to a global recession, people would be a little more thoughtful about displaying such full bore advocacy for slashing regulation, but there you go.

Next up, we have a long section on Switzerland which fails to mention the decade of stagnant growth that Switzerland had before it finally joined the single market and allowed free movement (see this video: Brexit the movie - a Swiss reply). There's a claim that the largest companies in the EU are all Swiss which seems very wrong on the face of it, and a lot of stuff about the amount of regulation with - again - the implication that the UK is being strangled by regulation. The truth, of course, is rather different. The UK ranks 10th in the Economic Freedom of the World rankings, not far behind Switzerland, and well ahead of the USA, while we're in 6th place in the Doing Business rankings, behind fellow EU country Denmark and some 20 places higher than apparently unregulated Switzerland. And, of course, the usual issue with post-Brexit comparisons to Switzerland applies: they have free movement of people as part of the single market whereas prominent Brexiters are saying we won't do that if we Brexit.

It finishes with the by-now well trodden Brexiter pretence to be anti-establishment when, in fact, the Brexit camp is just as packed with establishment figures as the Remain camp. In B:tM we're treated to words from popular right wing establishment figures such as Kelvin McKenzie (former editor of The Sun and the man behind their Hillsborough headlines) and Nigel Lawson (former Chancellor of the Exchequer who laid the foundations of the Credit Crunch with the 'Big Bang').

So, tl;dr: B:tM is a naked propaganda piece which makes no attempt to inform its viewer but instead consists of a series of assertions and precious little in the way of argument. Save yourself an hour and just re-read scorza's posts a few times and you'll gain as much information.


http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/briefings/labour-market-effects-immigration

UK studies find that immigration has small impact on average wages but more significant impacts along the wage distribution: low-waged workers lose while medium and high-paid workers gain
Empirical research on the labour market effects of immigration in the UK suggests that immigration has relatively small effects on average wages but more significant effects along the wage distribution, i.e. on low, medium and high paid workers.

Focusing on the period 1997-2005 when the UK experienced significant labour immigration (see our briefing 'Migrants in the UK Labour Market'), Dustmann, Frattini and Preston (2013) find that an increase in the number of migrants corresponding to 1% of the UK-born working-age population resulted in an increase in average wages of 0.1 to 0.3%. Another study, for the period 2000-2007, found that a 1% increase in the share of migrants in the UK’s working-age population lowers the average wage by 0.3% (Reed and Latorre 2009). These studies, which relate to different time periods, thus reach opposing conclusions but they agree that the effects of immigration on averages wages are relatively small.

The effects of immigration on workers within specific wage ranges or in specific occupations are more significant. The greatest wage effects are found for low-waged workers. Dustmann et al (2013) find that each 1% increase in the share of migrants in the UK-born working age population leads to a 0.6% decline in the wages of the 5% lowest paid workers and to an increase in the wages of higher paid workers. Similarly, another study focusing on wage effects at the occupational level during 1992 and 2006, found that, in the unskilled and semi-skilled service sector, a 1% rise in the share of migrants reduced average wages in that occupation by 0.5% (Nickell and Salaheen 2008).

The available research further shows that any adverse wage effects of immigration are likely to be greatest for resident workers who are themselves migrants. This is because the skills of new migrants are likely to be closer substitutes for the skills of migrants already employed in the UK than for those of UK-born workers. Manacorda, Manning and Wadsworth (2012) analyse data from 1975-2005 and conclude that the main impact of increased immigration is on the wages of migrants already in the UK.
 
I have exactly the opposite experience. Few years ago while visiting my ex's mum I had a tooth problem. However cos I was over there only for long a weekend and we flew back on Monday morning. All the dentist could do for me was to clean the canal and tell me which one is causing the trouble.
When I arrived here my dentist treated wrong canal which meant I had to go back few weeks later and had ruined Christmas.

What?
If the dentist abroad 'cleaned the canal' It mean he physically opened the tooth, and would have then dressed it in a temporary material. How on Earth did your dentist here then treat the wrong tooth? What did he do to the one with the temporary filling?

nitefly said:
I know more than one health care workers (dentists) that are genuinely peeved when Europeans come to get diagnosed, go home for the treatment, then come back for a fix up when they get a bodge job of a root canal - apparently not uncommon.

We've seen both, an excellent standard of work coming from Eastern Europe, and utterly disastrous work also. Alongside people's expectations of what is possible, from 'don't care rip it out' to can you make my teeth whiter, when they are glowing radioactively already. It is true that sometimes you have to start fixing utterly awful work, that has been banged in cheap (to the patient) by someone who knows they won't easily see the patient again for a time. I do feel though that some cutting shops in the UK might not be much better.
 
REMINDER:

Cameron and Farage Live: The EU Referendum

Today on ITV from 9:00pm to 10:00pm

Julie Etchingham presents a live hour-long programme in which David Cameron and Nigel Farage will in turn answer questions from a studio audience in London. Nigel Farage takes questions first, followed by David Cameron.
 

Not sure why you posted that in response to what I wrote but there you go.

I refer you to the recent LSE research that showed no difference in wages that correlates with immigration at the local level (see pages 9/10). Since this study relies on a greater amount of empirical evidence and specifically considers British workers I consider it a more reliable measure of the impact of immigration on British workers.

Even if the findings of the study you cite were to hold up, I would argue that since the effects are small the best response would be to take the overall benefit of increasing wages and a healthier economy and introduce policies to reduce inequality and increase the wages of the poorer paid to conteract the negative effect. Actually, I'd argue we're better off doing that regardless.
 
What?
If the dentist abroad 'cleaned the canal' It mean he physically opened the tooth, and would have then dressed it in a temporary material. How on Earth did your dentist here then treat the wrong tooth? What did he do to the one with the temporary filling?



We've seen both, an excellent standard of work coming from Eastern Europe, and utterly disastrous work also. Alongside people's expectations of what is possible, from 'don't care rip it out' to can you make my teeth whiter, when they are glowing radioactively already. It is true that sometimes you have to start fixing utterly awful work, that has been banged in cheap (to the patient) by someone who knows they won't easily see the patient again for a time. I do feel though that some cutting shops in the UK might not be much better.

Right tooth but wrong canal, it was one of those that has 3 canals. It's beyond me as well. I told her which one and I think I even had a note from the polish dentist dentist. I guess she decided she knew better.
 
Right tooth but wrong canal, it was one of those that has 3 canals. It's beyond me as well. I told her which one and I think I even had a note from the polish dentist dentist. I guess she decided she knew better.

One fills all canals in a tooth when doing a root filling, you don't selectively pick one and fill it. All must be filled as they interconnect. Are you sure your treatment wasn't incomplete, which necessitated you returning to have it completed?
 
I'm no dentist so don't know how it works. Pretty sure she said see you in 9 months for check up after she's done it the first time. It definitely wasn't a planned return though.

e: anyway that is off topic. The point was that people make mistakes/ bad jobs all over the world. I think we can all find plenty of bad politicians, builders, plumbers or whatever other profession here in UK as we could anywhere else in the world.
 
Last edited:
:rolleyes:

Maybe he did but those things you listed have nothing to do with this discussion.

If someone is suggesting we should listen to this bloke because he makes good predictions, then clearly the fact that he makes loads of outlandish ones means that we shouldn't take his one about the EU too seriously?
 
Worrying stat by Richard Osmond last night.
£10 accumulator on Brexit, followed by Boris as next conservative leader, and trump to win in the US, manages a cracking return of just £138.

I find it worrying that the bookies don't consider that combo too strange a possibility.
 
Worried that Farage might make a **** of himself at 9. Amusing they didn't call Gove or Boris in for this though?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom