RayC

The final +/-45 seconds when she offered thanks to various people was fine. As for the rest of it .....

I am the bringer of good news: Apparently Rees-Moog has resigned from the government.

Interesting article in the BBC 6 o'clock news tonight about the effects of Brexit on the UK labour market. Imagine that it will be in the 10pm version as well. Spoiler alert: They imply the effects have been negative.

Indeed. There was a referendum where the majority voted for economic self-harm which is now being shown to be a completely irrational decision. That's how a market economy works. I haven't suggested it isn't. I agree that there should be laws to protect worker's rights, working conditions, etc. I'm not a Truss free-market ideologue. I still don't understand your point. Should some of the Labour laws in the EU (and UK) be tightened up? Probably. Wrt to the events outlined in the article, I don't know anything about French or Spanish law but, given that they are both civilised countries, I imagine most (all?) of the outlined practices are illegal? Once again, we are broadly in agreement. However, yet again, nothing you have posted negates my contention that stopping freedom of movement has damaged the UK labour market in some industries.

Not a justification for leaving the single market Debatable. At a basic level it is simply a matter of demand and supply. If they are in equilibrium, you will - in theory - get a fair market price (wage).

Unfortunately true. Let's hope that you are right. I doubt that he will be as much of an ideologue as Truss or as big a chancer as Johnson, so that's a start.

All well and good and I'd agree with most of what you say BUT whatever way you dress it up, the fact remains that EU citizens now need a visa to work in the UK and this is a barrier to labour mobility.

A serious of statements without a discernable point. The purpose of a school is to impart knowledge. Kids start at different levels and develop at different rates. Some kids need more help than others. Schools are there to teach and to aid the kids' development. What are you suggesting? Ignore those kids who can't keep up? Maybe those jobs wouldn't exist if there wasn't a Polish community. Maybe there wouldn't be a Polish community if there weren't job vacancies that needed filling.

I've not suggested that there aren't labour shortages in some sectors and some member states in the EU. However both intuitively - and empirically - the labour market operates more efficiently if any barriers to labour mobility are removed.

So your argument is now reduced to "You can't tell us what to do. I'm going to self-harm because I can"' BTW: I'm British and YOU Brexiters don't own patriotism. Which is labourious and time-consuming and would be unnecessary if freedom of movement still existed. You just can't bring yourself to admit - despite all the evidence that is presented - that Brexit has had a negative effect on the labour market in certain sectors in the UK.

Nice theory but the practical outcome is different: There are still labour shortages in certain industries such as aviation and hospitality, which suggests that either there are not enough Brits - young or otherwise - and/or that Brits are unwilling/ unable to work in these industries. There needs to be flexibility in the labour market and the withdrawal of freedom of movement for EU citizens reduces it.

There are economic and political problems in the EU just as there are in the UK. However, there is nothing to suggest that the EU is about to collapse.

Why is this a problem? (Btw the population of the UK is closer to 70 million) 500 million people were not simply going to turn up in the UK. There is no way of knowing but I suspect that the number of EU nationals in the UK would have remained between 5 -8 million given normal churn. How big a problem was this in reality? Any figures to support your argument? My kids couldn't speak French when they arrived in Belgium. They learnt. That's what schools are for. Imo individuals should speak the local language and attempt to integrate themselves into their local communities/ environment. However, what's the problem in making Polish a requirement of the job if it involves dealing with the Polish community and makes life easier for them? Anyway, I would be surprised if the overwhelming majority of immigrants from the EU did not speak and understand, at least, basic English when they arrived (although I don't have any data to support this assertion).

You stated: "if the U.K wanted to make a new legislation , we would need rest of the E.Us agreement before we could proceed , we couldn't make our own legislations." This is completely untrue. The link confirms this. Where and how am I contradicting myself?

Eastern Europe may be more prosperous but the problems in certain sectors of the UK labour market have been increased by the withdrawal of freedom of movement.

Completely untrue. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/how-much-legislation-comes-from-europe/

A whole lot more? The only two other factors that I can think of are 1) sovereignty and 2) immigration/ freedom of movement. If I have missed any other factors then please list them. Imo the concept of sovereignty is basically a myth unless you wish to live in a closed society, such as North Korea, or a dictatorship such as China. Leaving the EU has given the UK little in the way of increased sovereignty (see my reply to @Kwasaki). Moreover, how 'sovereign' can a medium-sized economy, such as the UK, be in a globalised world? As we have just witnessed, the UK government and BoE was forced to reverse recent policy decisions by the markets. Wrt to immigration/ freedom of movement. Well, I guess that this simply comes down to one's attitude to individuals of other nationalities/ races. Having grown up in Brixton, and spent most of my life either living and working as an immigrant myself and/or living and working along side immigrants/ individuals of a different race, it doesn't make a blind bit of difference to me where they might come from or what is their skin colour; we either get along or we don't. If someone feels superior to/ threatened by individuals from another nation/ race, then I think that they are wrong. Moreover, I certainly don't think governments should be making policy to appease such individuals. So for me, Brexit is all about the economy. As I repeat ad nauseum, there is little, if any, evidence to suggest that Brexit has had - or will have - a positive economic impact and a wealth of evidence to suggest that the opposite is true.

In what ways are Brits freer now than they were in 2015? The idea that the UK was controlled from Brussels was a myth. The vast majority of legislation originating from the EU was unanimously agreed by all member states. Between 1997 - 2016, the UK was 'forced' to implement 3% of EU legislation against its' will. Imo a small compromise to have to make and not significantly different to any other member state.

If these people were that keen on maximising their welfare payments, they'd be better off starting in France https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_social_welfare_spending Maybe that's the answer to the refugee issue. Hand out flyers in Calais informing refugees that France has a more generous welfare system. Problem solved. No more demand for the illegal channel crossings. Can't understand why the UK government hasn't thought of this?

What was it in the FT video that you thought was factually incorrect?

Excellent. We are in agreement ????

The weight of evidence suggests that Brexit has had a negative effect on the UK. Covid and the Ukraine war have had a negative effect on the world's economy, but there is nothing to suggest that there would have been any economic benefits to the UK in their absence as a result of Brexit, or that there will be any benefits in the short/ medium term.

And it is an undeniable fact that Brexit has had an effect on the UK's economy.

It's a bit rich for Chope to complain about chaos in government given his record in parliament https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Chope

I accept that it's not what you meant to say but the fact is you did: "Just stop benefits for those with no excuse, ie disability ..."