RayC

Most of you are being beastly to Prince Andrew. He worked very hard on behalf of the UK. More importantly in this context, he much prefers nights out at Woking's Pizza Hut to sordid sex parties. He said so and he was nearly King, so it must be true.

Unfortunately, there is currently no mechanism to expel Hungary. Introducing a mechanism would require Treaty change and unanimous support from member states. Hungary would not, of course, support any such measure.

Singapore has a "strongman" government but imo it is not authoritarian. Opposition is allowed and there are relatively free elections. A mixed economy is, of course, entirely possible but I'm not sure how you can have "selective fascism", and I'm even less sure that it would be desirable even if it were.

"Fascism isn't all bad". I guess that is true. Apparently Hitler was a vegetarian and an animal lover, and some of those Nazi uniforms did look very smart, so "all bad", no. The big "But ....." is when you look at Fascism as a political ideology and/or system of government. Then it is all bad and I cannot even try to understand how anyone could think otherwise.

Those in search of a desolate moral vacuum look no further.

That'll be why 75% of asylum applications are approved at the initial stage🙄

MSM, X. You seem to question the validity of any source which doesn't fit your narrative. Presumably Pravda and 'Russia Today' are to be believed?

And that makes it ok?

The easiest way to refute an accusation of racism is to tackle it head on. So when I suggest that a statement has racist undertones, show me where I am wrong and/or how the statement might be interpreted differently. Pointing out that tourists in Thailand are st to discriminatory pricing does not do that.

Absolute tosh. In this particular instance, you suggested that migrant workers in the UK should not be treated the same as native-born workers until they became permanent residents i.e. until at least 5 years had elapsed. I asked you directly if you would then withhold access to the NHS/ education for those migrant workers and their families who did not meet your threshold, and explained why I thought this could be racist/ xenophobic. You (still) have the opportunity to refute that view by addressing the questions which I posed directly, and/or pointing out flaws in my argument. You have chosen not to do so but, now instead attempt to play the 'victim' card.

I'm never usually in favour of suicide or murder but, in this instance, it would almost certainly* prove greatly beneficial. * "almost certainly" because, unfortunately, there is the slim possibility that his replacement could be worse

Adding a laughing emoji would be inappropriate but what absolute nonsense as usual. Did you read the article? Did you miss the bit about your hero Putin's seemingly casual attitude towards the death of Russian troops?

Whether Ukraine joins the EU whilst at war, at peace or not at all is irrelevant. One thing remains true: It ,in no way, helps explain - let alone justify - Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

Replacing 'money' with 'land' rings true as well, don't you think?

And the reason for your conclusion? I would hazard a guess that it has something to do with it being a slap in the face for Putin.

I agree but opinion doesn't lend itself to meaningful debate. What is required is "informed opinion".

It was an opportunity to explain your position and explain to me what I had overlooked. You have a good day too.

Rather childish, Jonny.

Unfortunately, you are probably correct, given that there is no mechanism for ejecting Hungary. Maybe the other 26 EU members should form another organisation? They could also invite the UK to join.

Straw clutching. We are talking about worker's rights. The fact that an overseas tourist pays more to feed Jumbo bananas in Thailand than a local is discrimination, but is relatively unimportant. I pointed out that Australia treats (legal) migrant workers and native-born workers equally when it comes to their rights. How you can conclude that I therefore hate the UK is yet another example of your failed logic. So it's all about the absolute amount that a worker has (financially) contributed to the system? Should the individuals' entitlement to services, such as the NHS therefore be proportionate to the amount of NI/tax contributions which they have made? Where does that leave the school leaver, new graduate? Presumably, you'd withhold access to NHS services for them until they had built up a big enough pot? Ex-servicemen sleeping on the streets or OAPs freezing to death on their homes has nothing to do with illegal immigrants posting on social media, and everything to do with the failure of the authorities to safeguard those individuals. It's not race baiting, Jonny. I'll repeat what I posted previously: The government estimates that this piece of legislation will cut immigration by 300,000, of which 70,000 are 'family visas' which suggests there will be 230,000 fewer 'worker' visas. This, in turn, suggests that there will be 230,000 unfilled job vacancies (unless the need for these jobs has disappeared overnight): I can't see the economic rationale for this, so a cut in immigration must be 'good' in its' own right. My question is simply: 'Why?'. Racism/ Xenophobia is a possible explanation. In fact, I struggle to see what other explanation there can be. You have stated that you would go further than the bill proposes, "Migrant workers should not have the same benefits as UK nationals until they become UK nationals". I asked you if this meant that you would withhold access to the NHS and schooling for their kids until this threshold had been reached? (You avoid answering these questions directly). In this case, there probably would be cost savings but imo it is a morally bankrupt proposal and, again, imo smacks of racism/ xenophobia. I'd be interested to know what the other explanations might be.

There are problems in making an organisation representing 27 member states comprising 450 million people more accountable to the electorate. There will never be a perfect system. Imo the transfer of some of the responsibilities of the Commission e.g. the ability to propose legislation would be a start. I would prefer that the Commissioners or, at least, the PEC were directly elected. The problem then is a lack of knowledge of the individuals concerned. For example, very few people outside of Germany had any idea who v.d Leyden was. That said, the majority of the UK electorate couldn't tell you who their local MP was but they still vote.

'Reform of the Lords' next on the agenda? I don't suppose you have any evidence to support that claim? The only other European countries outside the ECHR are Belarus and Russia. Sometimes you can tell a lot about someone by the company that they keep.

It takes 5+ years to become a UK national. So before that happens, would you withhold access to the NHS for a migrant and his/her family? Deny the kids access to education? Etc. Fortunately, that is not how it works in the UK and I don't believe that even the most right-wing member of the Flat Earth Brigade is proposing it. Youravingalaff has already corrected you regarding the Thai system - which I would have thought you might have known given that you work here - so I'll just concentrate on correcting you re Australia. You don't say when, or what type of migrant worker, you were in Australia, but if you are migrant worker in Australia today, you enjoy the same rights as a native-born worker. The exception is if you are on one of the short-stay working visas, which are usually granted for stays of up to 3 months (and no more than 12 months). Here, the individual has to arrange his/her own medical insurance. Not the most outrageous example of discrimination imo. (It is extremely unlikely that individuals under these types of visa would want to bring their families with them so, again, not really a problem worth worrying about). If the world worked as you suggest then nothing would ever get started. I find your 'philosophy of life' outlined above sad. Of course, that is just my opinion. I have not lived in Thailand since the '90s. We live in the UK - at least for the time being - and spend European winters in Thailand. No country is perfect. I have no intention of going to live on a deserted island, so some compromise on some things is necessary. You are very open about your prejudice and discrimination towards migrants. I am curious why this is? Is it due to racism and/or xenophobia? A superiority complex (based on nationality?)? Something else?

Try removing the 783 sitting members of the House of Lords! You are obviously ignorant of the way in which the president of the European Commission (PEC) is elected, therefore I'll lay out the process so that you can refer to it in the future: The PEC serves a 5-year term. S/he is nominated by the European Council, which is the group comprising of the Heads of government of the member states (all of whom have been elected democratically). This nominee is then either endorsed or rejected by the European Parliament, whose members are directly elected by the public in the member states. It is untrue that the PEC cannot be removed as you infer. The European Parliament has this power and would have used it in 1999 if Jacques Santner had not pre-empted them and resigned. The UK had democracy when we were a member of the EU. Imo it's no coincidence that since Brexit the Tory party has, on a number of occasions, attempted to circumvent our democratic institutions. Fortunately, these attempts have been unsuccessful up to now.

You know that Brexit is a 'red rag to a bull' for me, so I'll get that out of the way quickly: Just how have things improved wrt controlling immigration since we left the EU? The UK jobs market seemed to work pretty efficiently when the free movement of EU nationals into the UK was permitted. Your original post to which I replied: " ... it seems some people feel that non British nationals are entitled to the same treatment as British nationals while in Britain." So you are in favour of treating migrant workers in the UK as effectively 2nd class residents? You would withhold NHS care, other benefits and future pension entitlements from them despite the fact that they will be paying tax and NI contributions in exactly the same way as a UK national? (I was so astonished that anyone could seriously suggest this that I had to check that migrants were not st a separate tax regime!). I imagine that you would also not permit a migrant's kids to attend school? I doubt that any G20 country discriminates against it's residents in this way; certainly no EU country does and none are bankrupt. The only thing that is bankrupt is the morality of your ideas.