LondonMix

I have never said that anyone's decision to vote one way or another was wrong. In fact, I've explicitly said that I respect people who want to leave, particularly for sovereignty. However, it is not a question of viewpoint to say something that is factually incorrect like that other countries have free trade with the EU without a free movement of people. It simply isn't. And if you read through my posts, almost every comment I have made has been concerning the factual accuracy of statements that have been made. And I have definitely not insulted or belittled anyone Jules. I really resent the implication that I have.

What's your problem maxxi? Seriously- stop trying to put words in my mouth and stop stirring shit for no reason just because you are bored.

Indeed, why have you posted this here? The BofE has nothing to do with the EU vote at all.

Agreed with all of that

I really don't get how people can't see the only way to stop population growth in London is to kill jobs growth. The two go hand in hand in the most basic way.

Robbin-- and how is the EU responsible for the NHS and school places? EU migrants pay more in taxes than they use in services (fact). The lack of public services is due to austerity. If all the immigrants left, there would be a bigger hole in the public finances to provide NHS services and school places and service levels would be even worse not better. There have been studies that prove immigration has not had any major impact on low-skill wages. I can link to it if you don't take me at face value. That idea is a total misconception. I agree about house prices. Immigration has helped drive economic growth through the importation of skills, particularly in London. The rapid expansion of jobs this has allowed has led to a rapid expansion of population. Jobs growth in London unsurprisingly has equaled population growth. So without all those new jobs, there would be less pressure on housing. I'm not sure an economically stagnant city that is not creating jobs though is anyone's idea of a better situation... Surely a more logical response is to increase building (particularly by the government as the private sector is failing to meet demand). Killing growth seems like a weird way to address a housing problem.

That's not true Louisa. Having a trade agreement with the UK does not mean those countries have tariff free trade. They just have better than WTO terms. No country has tariff free access to the EU block without also being part of the free movement of citizens and paying a contribution to the EU. No one. The Canada deal covers many (though not all goods) but does not cover any services for instances. When you are part of the EEA (free trade zone) then everything is covered and there are less bureaucratic checks (which also increase the cost of doing business). Louisa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Blah Blah, with respect, that is nonsense. There > are 46 nations who trade tariff free with the EU > and do not have to accept any of the rules and > regs surrounding free movement of labor. Yes, > Norway and Switzerland do have to accept tariffs > as part of the deal they achieved with the EU, but > that's primarily because they are smaller nations > on the periphery of the EU and those deals were > tailored to suit the needs of both parties > individually. The UK with a population of 60 odd > million, would be in a similar position to the > United States, India or Australia. None of which > pay any tariffs on trade. > > Louisa.

Robbin, France and Germany have both said they won't start negotiating the new trade agreement until after Brexit has been concluded in two years. The main reason they've given is they want to settle the fate of EU citizens living in the UK before starting trade negotiations because they don't want Britain to use that as a bargaining chip. The EU has also said that the UK has 3 models it can adopt with the EU post Brexit-- the Norway model (which still requires payments to the EU and still requires unlimited EU immigration) but is tariff free; the Canadian model which is just being finalized (you can see the terms), or WTO rules (which is what everyone without an explicitly agreed trade agreement uses with the EU including the US) which includes tariffs. robbin Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I should have added: the 'good reason' for them > not doing so is that it would damage them as well > as us! Nobody sensible thinks tariffs are a good > idea and I'm sure they don't either (after all, > they are in the EU free trade organisation!). So > why would they cut off their noses to spite their > faces?

You think the UK is in grinding economic decline right now Robbin? I suppose that explains a lot if that's really how you perceive the UK despite it having a very high growth and job creation rate.

Robbin, I never said that there wasn't a two year period to complete Brexit. In fact, I've said that explicitly before. After the referendum nothing will change, including EU law, migration or trade until the 2 years of negotiation period have expired. The fate of the British citizens in the EU (over 1m) and the legal status of the EU citizens already living in the UK all need to be agreed and formalized during that period amongst hundreds of other things. However, without a new trade agreement at the end of the two year period, it is the law that tariffs would have to go up otherwise other members of the WTO could ask for penalties. Industrialists may push for a new agreement to be negotiated during that two year window as its naturally in their interest. However, France and Germany (the actual politicians responsible for carrying out an agreement) have explicitly stated they won't start trade negotiations until after the 2 year period has expired. Of course you can choose to believe they are bluffing but I believe they mean what they have explicitly said as they have good reason for doing so.

I'm not mad at anyone. No need to FRET. I do wonder if London will exit the UK though along with Scotland :)

Ah, Greece had that option and overwhelming wanted to stay in. Anyhow, being part of a federation doesn't guarantee anything. The US still has cities that go bankrupt (literally, filed for bankruptcy and defaulted on state pension obligations) in recent years. Louisa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > LM Greece is far from perfect as a nation, and if > anything to me it proves the failings of the EU > and more especially the single currency. Nations > with completely different cultural, economic and > political constructs have inevitably failed to > work together and the consequences of the single > market are that its not the political classes who > suffer, but the ordinary working people! Greece > caused its own mess, but if it wasn't restricted > by the EU it would be able to deal with that mess > independently and possibly more successfully too. > > Louisa.

I was joking back-- I should have used a smiley face....

Are you voting leave just to piss of metropolitan ED elites then?!

The electorate don't have to be slow witted to be misinformed. There is a reason why we have elected representatives. Sorting through the pros and cons of major legislative decisions is a full time job. MPs have staff and specialists to help advise them as well. maxxi Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Loz Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > maxxi Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > > > As no side has chosen to use The Clash's > "Should > > I Stay Or Should I Go?" as their theme I am > > putting > > > it forward as the anthem for the 'Others'. > > > > Given the next two lines, I can fully > understand > > the Remain campaign not selecting it. > > Oh I think there are enough experts on board to > explain to the slow-witted electorate that > 'double' is actually more manageable than > 'trouble' and would lead to a speedier resolution > to all matters (particularly those arising around > "which clothes even fit me" - a reference to > European v UK sizes there I think). > > I would have thought the bi-lingual nature of the > latter part might have swung it? > > "Come on and let me know (Pero tienes que decir) > Should I cool it or should I blow? (?Me debo ir o > quedarme?)"

I really can't follow what you are saying. You think the young Greeks will get jobs of the EU falls apart? The debt they have is entirely of their own doing. They elected ineffective governments and were professional tax dodgers. Louisa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > LM I am not trying to rationalise anything, I have > stated my reasoning behind leaving many times and > frankly it must be getting boring for those who > don't give a toss either way. The EU will probably > collapse at some stage whether we remain or not, > no arrogance intended. It's just a failed/failing > organisation for the reasons I've stayed and it is > unsustainable. It's nothing about seeing myself as > European or not. Do you think unemployed Greek > 18-35 year olds will be worrying about if they're > considered European or whether they can get a job? > I personally think the latter is more important to > them. I love Europe, I visit other EU states > regularly, I enjoy produce from the continent, I > shop in Lidl! It's not about nationalism for me at > all. It's about democracy, and ta about > sustainability. > > Louisa.

Agreed. Elections are won on vague and simply seductive slogans. Take back control can mean whatever anyone who hears it wants it to mean. As House of Cards taught us, the vaguer the better when dealing with the electorate. Loz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Jeremy Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > The public should have to pass some sort of > basic > > IQ test before being allowed to vote. > > Nobody ever won an election by assuming the > general public is intelligent. That's why the > Brexitters' "take back control" mantra (which > Boris answered pretty much every question with in > last night's debate) has been so effective.

I think voting to leave on the assumption it will all be alright because the rest of the EU will collapse in our absence is a bit arrogant. The EU very well may carry on. If that's how you are rationalising the unsubstantiated idea that outside the EU, the UK is economically better off, I'd give that a lot more thought. Just make your argument simple Louisa. You don't see yourself as European and therefore you don't want to have a top layer of democratically elected European government, regardless of whatever the economic and other strategic advantages may be. That's fine but please stop trying to rationalise it with half baked ideas.

Anyone else notice that stores are now just calling their store locations Dulwich rather than East Dulwich?

M&S is opening in July based on the most recent update provided by James Barber

Louisa-- here is the scientific research I mentioned before: http://www.nature.com/ncomms/journal/v1/n2/full/ncomms1013.html Due to bottom trawl catching, the fish stocks went into terminal decline after World War II.

Is he particularly vulnerable in someway? I don't mean to be insensitive but why is an adult travelling to the Isle of Wight a police matter. I hope he is safe and his family can get in touch with him soon.

He means the burden they a placing on their host EU countries. At least the immigrants the UK get come here to work and pay taxes. DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Loz Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > DulwichFox Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > Well poor UK. citizens do not go and live in > > Europe.. France. Belgium. Italy. Germany.. > > > > Maybe, but I reckon we export more unproductive > > people - how many retired people head to Europe? > > > Apparently there are over half a million in > Spain > > alone. > > Well .. I would of thought they have done their > bit for this country in their time.. > Let them enjoy the Sun in their final years.. > > Foxy

Yep, the immigrants (rich or poor) who come here come here to work. They are young, of working age and with very high levels of employment and pay lots of tax. If the population drops following Brexit who on earth do you think is going to fund the massive welfare state costs of the NHS and retirees? Without immigration of young people to Britain, the UK would be in a demographic downward spiral with significantly larger funding gaps for public services and the state pension. Anyhow, that is why immigration won't be curtailed even after Brexit. The immigration the UK can control (i.e. non-EU) is higher than EU immigration anyhow. The country obviously needs to let in the people who are coming.

Oh, thanks for the clarification. He is right of course. Various EU leaders have publicly come out and said as much which is why the Leave Campaign has shifted to talking about trading with the EU under WTO rules. Of course that would be a much worse trading position for the UK but as least that's realistic. The UK would need to establish its own membership terms in the WTO but that's possible within the 2 year time frame for finalizing Brexit.