The result of the EU referendum:

[jakswan]

Immigration is good. There may be issues surrounding the integration of immigrants into British society, but these are better solved by tackling them directly rather than trying to keep immigrants out. We spend a fortune trying to make our borders impenetrable but I think the money would be better spent on infrastructure to cope with the influx.

So you concede it can cause a problem?

[jakswan]

No it isn't.
Because you are xenophobic small minded little Englanders.

You sound like a bigot.

[jeremyp]

So you concede it can cause a problem?

Not any problem that should be solved by trying to shut our borders.

[jeremyp]

You sound like a bigot.

It's not bigoted to accurately describe somebody.

[jakswan]

Not any problem that should be solved by trying to shut our borders.

So you want open borders for everyone everywhere all the time?

[jakswan]

It's not bigoted to accurately describe somebody.

Well by claiming that anyone is who sees a problem with immigration are 'xenophobic small minded little Englanders' is demonstrably false, not least because not everyone in the world is English.

[ProfessorDavey]

So you want open borders for everyone everywhere all the time?

Strange but last time I entered the UK - just 8 days ago I needed to pass through a very obvious border control post and needed to show my passport to be allowed in, and so did everyone else. And I'm a UK citizen. In what way are our borders 'open' Jaks - they seemed pretty controlled to me.

Don't forget we aren't in Schengen.

[ProfessorDavey]

I'm not sure of the history but this is from Wiki:-
The "Nordic Tiger" period ended in a national financial crisis in 2008, when the country's major banks failed and were taken over by the government.

The Icelandic Central Bank approached the Bank of England in March 2008 for assistance to support its currency as confidence in its heavily indebted banking system began to ebb away.[3]

Following sharp inflation in the Icelandic króna during 2008, the three major banks in Iceland, Glitnir, Landsbanki and Kaupthing were placed under government control. A subsidiary of Landsbanki, Icesave, which operated in the UK and the Netherlands, was declared insolvent, putting the savings of thousands of UK and Dutch customers at risk.[4] It also transpired that over 70 local authorities in the UK held more than £550 million of cash in Icelandic banks.[5][6] In response to statements that the accounts of UK depositors would not be guaranteed, the British governments seized assets of the banks and of the Icelandic government.[7]

On 28 October 2008, Iceland's central bank raised its interest rate to 18 per cent to fight inflation.[8]

Following negotiations with the IMF,[9] a package of $4.6 billion was agreed on 19 November, with the IMF loaning $2.1 billion and another $2.5 billion in loans and currency swaps from Norway, Sweden, Finland and Denmark. In addition, Poland has offered to lend $200 million and the Faroe Islands have offered 300 million Danish kroner ($50 million, about 3 per cent of Faroese GDP).[10] The Icelandic government also reported that Russia has offered $300 million.[11] The next day, Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom announced a joint loan of $6.3 billion (€5 billion), related to the deposit insurance dispute.[12][13] (Dollar values are US dollars.)

Which completely backs up my earlier post.

Source?

Same as yours, indeed just a few paragraphs later on.

No really sure its relevant of it helps your case since Iceland have withdrawn their application now.

They only withdrew last year. Their decision to apply in 2009 gave the markets confidence of greater back up if the looked like tipping back into crisis and therefore allowed lending at more preferential rates, improvement in their credit rating and was therefore important in their being able to recover.

[jeremyp]

So you want open borders for everyone everywhere all the time?

Why are you suddenly obsessed with my opinion on immigration?

I support free trade everywhere and that includes free movement of labour.

[jeremyp]

Well by claiming that anyone is who sees a problem with immigration are 'xenophobic small minded little Englanders' is demonstrably false, not least because not everyone in the world is English.

I directed that remark at TW, not everybody.

[jakswan]

Strange but last time I entered the UK - just 8 days ago I needed to pass through a very obvious border control post and needed to show my passport to be allowed in, and so did everyone else. And I'm a UK citizen. In what way are our borders 'open' Jaks - they seemed pretty controlled to me.

Don't forget we aren't in Schengen.

Semantics, by open I meant able to come to the at any time, regardless of any passport control. I never claimed UK had open borders, it is open to anyone from EU to come here.

[jakswan]

Which completely backs up my earlier post.

It doesn't actually.

Same as yours, indeed just a few paragraphs later on.

You pasted a quote I can't see that quote on Wiki, can you post the URL.

They only withdrew last year. Their decision to apply in 2009 gave the markets confidence of greater back up if the looked like tipping back into crisis and therefore allowed lending at more preferential rates, improvement in their credit rating and was therefore important in their being able to recover.

Iceland's credit rating was at its lowest in 2009.
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/iceland/rating

You have a source for this data please?

[ProfessorDavey]

It doesn't actually.

It does - a $4.6billion dollar bailout brokered by the IMF and an addition $6billion in loans from Germany, the UK and the Netherlands all of whom are EU countries.

You pasted a quote I can't see that quote on Wiki, can you post the URL.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008–11_Icelandic_financial_crisis

Iceland's credit rating was at its lowest in 2009.
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/iceland/rating

You have a source for this data please?

And began, slowly to improve thereafter in part due to its announcement of an application to join the EU. In fact although it applied in 2009 the formal negotiations only started in 2010. And one of the major factors that is widely believed to be instrumental in Iceland pulling out of the crisis was the ability to successfully raise a bond issue in $1billion, where confidence in the economic situation is key to the likelihood of investors being willing to risk their money.

A key factor in that investor confidence was the fact that (at that point) Iceland was in full scale negotiation to join the EU and therefore investors had confidence that the EU economic structures would be in place to support Iceland and, by inference, to protect their investment. Remember that Iceland at that point, and outside of the EU, had an extremely poor record on guaranteeing investments.

[ProfessorDavey]

I see yet another highly respected independent and international economic organisation - this time the OECD has produced a report indicating that ordinary people in the UK would be significantly worse off after Brexit - just like all the others.

In their modelling we'd lose the equivalent of one month's pay.

[jakswan]

Why are you suddenly obsessed with my opinion on immigration?

I think calling people names doesn't much help understand another POV so like to have a bit of genuine discussion, if that makes you uncomfortable happy to move on.

I support free trade everywhere and that includes free movement of labour.

You have some very clear views just checking what these are.

Let me paraphrase and you can correct me if I'm wrong:-
You accept that immigration can cause infrastructure problems (housing, school and hospital places) but immigration in itself isn't a problem. To solve these infrastructure problems more infrastructure should be built.

So how would JeremyP country work then, start with a Merkel style 'we are open to the entire world' and ten million arrive in year one, we all just put up with it for a few years until infrastructure catches up?

Free trade everywhere? So no protection for UK workers being undercut by any other country? Why are for the EU, its a barrier to free trade everywhere, e.g. India got no chance of getting a deal with the EU, they have a great chance of getting one with U. Are you for TTIP?

[jeremyp]

So how would JeremyP country work then, start with a Merkel style 'we are open to the entire world' and ten million arrive in year one, we all just put up with it for a few years until infrastructure catches up?

That's a hypothetical that isn't going to happen. Certainly, with immigration at current levels, I see no reason to stop anybody who wants to from coming in.

Free trade everywhere? So no protection for UK workers being undercut by any other country?

Why are people from other countries less deserving of paid work than people from the UK?

[jakswan]

That's a hypothetical that isn't going to happen. Certainly, with immigration at current levels, I see no reason to stop anybody who wants to from coming in.

Right good, even though its hypothetical you could imagine it being a problem, doesn't that by your own measure make you hypothetically xenophobic. Or isn't that bollocks, if someone sees a problem with immigration at current levels, some at 1million at some at 300,00 its just a disagreement over numbers.

Why are people from other countries less deserving of paid work than people from the UK?

Well because the governments of other countries think British workers are less deserving that those from their own country, because governments tend to put the interests of the populations they serve above others. So following your ideology the British Steel workers just have to suck it up maybe? TTIP might mean the US companies are able to outbid the NHS but hey ho the NHS staff just have to face reality and lose their jobs?

[Jack Knave]

Project fear.

Most of the key EU decisions require unanimity of member states - if there is something that the UK doesn't like it can veto it. Oh unless we aren't in the EU anymore in which case we can't stop things that we don't like but are likely to be required to enact then, as per Norway (and indeed Iceland).

Are you aware that the oft cited by Brexiters (for reasons that are beyond me) with Canada has failed to come into effect because Bulgaria and Romania refused to accept visa requirements that didn't apply to other EU member states, so they have vetoed it. I'm sure Germany are livid because the want it to happen, but there is nothing they can do - it requires all 28 member states to agree. 27 in favour 1 against means no deal - the UK can be that one if they don't like a deal while they remain in the EU.

It is only project fear if it isn't true.

And you are wrong some, a good proportion, of the voting is majority based, with no veto's.

[Jack Knave]

Bulgaria saw the visa requirements that Canada wanted to impose on them as more important than ratifying a trade deal - so they blocked it ensuring tariffs are maintained. It isn't a problem to them because trade with Canada is tiny for Bulgaria so to flex their muscles, block the deal and hold out for a better deal on migration.

Bad news for you Brexiters is that Bulgaria's trade with the UK is also tiny, so no skin off their nose if they block a trade deal. But of course migration to the UK is far more significant to the Bulgarians than migration with Canada, so if they were happy to veto a Canada deal ...

Go figure.

Wrong again!!!

The situation with the UK is different because we buy a lot more from the EU than they from us - unlike Canada. So Bulgaria will be put under pressure to comply as I have said in an earlier post.

[Jack Knave]

But we aren't in the Eurozone.

What migration problem? Migration is only a problem to xenophobes.

No they won't.
Paranoid Jack, or what. Europe is really nothing to be frightened of.

Instead of sunning yourself, watching all the young boys go buy; and sitting on your cold toilet seat, you should try doing some homework on how the EU is run instead of coming out with these unfounded assertions.

[Jack Knave]

Because you are xenophobic small minded little Englanders.

You're argument skills have gone way down to rock bottom there, what are you scared of? Got no plausible facts to back you up anymore. Defending the indefensible!!!

[jeremyp]

Well because the governments of other countries think British workers are less deserving that those from their own country, because governments tend to put the interests of the populations they serve above others.

It's in the interests of everybody to spread the wealth. Economics is not a zero sum game.

So following your ideology the British Steel workers just have to suck it up maybe?

Well the alternative is for all British people to subsidise the steel workers to make steel that nobody wants. Wouldn't it be better for those workers to produce things that people do want without needing a subsidy?

TTIP might mean the US companies are able to outbid the NHS

Outbid the NHS on what?

[L.A.]

TTIP might mean the US companies are able to outbid the NHS

If it turned out that US companies could provide health services at a lower cost than the NHS - why would this be a bad thing?

The important thing is that services are free at the point of delivery.

[jeremyp]

If it turned out that US companies could provide health services at a lower cost than the NHS - why would this be a bad thing?

The important thing is that services are free at the point of delivery.

Why is it that the Brexiters keep banging on about TTIP? I just went to the official EU web site where it tells me that TTIP is still in negotiation with the USA.

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=1488

So they are fear mongering about a trade agreement that has not been finalised. They are selectively forgetting that the TTIP will have to be ratified by all the member states, including the UK, if we are still a member. They are selectively forgetting that, if we are not in the EU, we will need our own version of TTIP and it's unlikely to be substantially different.

[L.A.]

. . . .  They are selectively forgetting that, if we are not in the EU, we will need our own version of TTIP and it's unlikely to be substantially different.

And which the President pointed out, would not be very high on the agenda of a future US administration.