RayC

That's because "They need us more than we need them" .... Oh, hold on a sec .....

I'm sure that it was unintentional but thank you for providing further evidence to support the idea that "It is always someone else's fault". The Tory Party which I refer to in discussion is the one which was purged of its' pro-EU MPs prior to the 2019 election, has been led by 3 pro-Brexit PMs and has had the likes of Bill Cash(!!!) and Jacob Rees-Moog in the cabinet. Is that the same 'Remain' Conservative Party which you are thinking of?

As @Chomper points out, nobody on the Leave side of the argument ever presented any plan for life post-Brexit. Always someone else's fault, which appears to be the default position for Brexiters. No accountability and no responsibility as usual.

That didn't take long. Five minutes ago you were the reincarnation of Marx, now you're a 19th century American slave owner!

Glad to have you on board, comrade✊ EU Employment legislation largely ensures that workers aren't exploited by unscrupulous employers, but a sizeable proportion of our governing party seem keen on repealing these laws. I'm all in favour of people getting a liveable wage. Maybe the UK government could fix minimum wages at a suitable level!

Somewhere in an EU state in Eastern Europe: - "Right, so that's me off to the UK to work" - "Got your visa?" - "No. Don't need one.....There's a shortage of fruit pickers and bar staff, so I should be able to pick up work easily enough. I can move from job-to-job if necessary. I'll give it a month. If it doesn't work out, I'll be back" - "Err ... The UK left the EU. You need a visa now, mate. You need to find a sponsor in the UK; fill out an application form, have £1200 in savings. The application will cost you £259 (non refundable). You may need to go to an application centre to have an interview and have your fingerprints taken (closest one to here is 100km away). Best allow yourself a couple of months for the process. No guarantee that your application will be approved. - Do what? I want to work in a bar or the fields, not try to become an astronaut! Sod that, I'll try France instead.

Once again, I agree. But that's not really the point. We are talking about the situation today. As I said in another post, it is now more complicated, time consuming and expensive for EU nationals - who don't have residency - to work in the UK.

You're right, they weren't. However, the Agricultural and Hospitality sectors are where there are major shortages of labour so it seems natural to focus on these sectors. These shortages are at least partially, due to the elimination of freedom of movement for EU workers In certain industries that is almost certainly true. However, that begs the question is wage inflation a good thing? In any event, if the government felt that wages were too low in certain industries, it could have introduced minimum wage regulation. They could but the paperwork and costs involved, plus the fact that most of these jobs are short fixed-term contracts with the visa limited to this timeframe, means that relatively low paid jobs such as fruit picking and hospitality type work are now pretty unattractive, especially when there are +/-30 countries (EU + EEA countries) where they can work hassle-free.

And people voted for that in the knowledge that fruit would be rotting in the fields because there aren't enough workers to pick the stuff? Seems a bit counter productive to me. What exactly is wrong with unskilled Europeans apart from the fact that they are unskilled and European?

And to think that you have previously accused me of twisting the narrative!!! I did not say - or even imply or infer - anywhere that "only high end migrants (were) being sought". What I actually said was ".. the new rules governing UK immigration favour more highly skilled applicants .." I added that the government had tried (unsuccessfully) to solve the problem of labour shortages in the Agricultural and Hospitality sectors by introducing a Seasonal Worker visa. Therefore - as I said previously - in the circumstances, imo there is nothing strange in a record level of net migration occuring simultaneously with labour shortages in certain sectors: However, it might be argued that this points to a failure of government policy.

Strange? Not really. The abolition of freedom of movement since the UK left the EU has made it more difficult and expensive for EU nationals to live and work in the UK. This has resulted in there being negative net migration from EU member states (actually this has been the case since the referendum result was announced). Many of the EU workers were employed in low-paid sectors such as Agriculture and Hospitality. As the new rules governing UK immigration favour more highly skilled applicants, there has been a large increase in this type of worker, most of whom come from non-EU countries. Whatever the merits of trying to attract more highly skilled immigrants, it does nothing to solve the shortage of labour in the aforementioned sectors. The government's attempts to attract overseas workers into the UK Agricultural and Hospitality sectors e.g. through the use of Seasonal Worker visa, have been unsuccessful. Hence, the UK is simultaneously suffering from labour shortages in certain sectors whilst overall net migration is at an all-time high. Good summary of the UK points based immigration system here: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-48785695

Farage was leader of UKIP and their successor, the Brexit Party. Both parties had one policy re Brexit: Leave with 'No deal' and trade on WTO terms. How they proposed to deal with the UK's ongoing commitments to the EU post-Brexit was never made clear. However, tbf I guess that they would have argued that this would have been subject to negotiation, and that they did not want to reveal their hand.

What I saw from the link before I was rudely interrupted by an advert is that the baht is best performing Asian currency (over the past year?) Over the past year, it has underperformed slightly against the Euro. https://www.ecb.europa.eu/stats/policy_and_exchange_rates/euro_reference_exchange_rates/html/eurofxref-graph-thb.en.html

Some countries have recovered more than others. And your point is?

We would, most likely, have to commit to joining the Euro. It is possible that this commitment would be "ongoing" (an overworked word in this thread).

I would imagine that all Brits in Thailand, regardless of whether they are 'Leaver' or 'Remainer' wouldn't object to having a few extra baht. However, you know for a fact that Thai 'Remainers' "have no concerns about the UK". I don't suppose you have any evidence to back this claim?

No but leaving the EU was the reason why the pound fell +/-10% and has yet to fully recover The bath might have been strong against the pound due to the latter's relative weakness Any evidence to suggest that the baht has been one of the world's best performing currencies against a basket of other currencies (over 1, 5 and/or 10 years)?

It's what you accepted +/-9 hours ago! Fine. Agreed. But - repeating myself yet again - according to your proposition, we can never be in a position to say categorically whether Brexit has failed. I am not in favour of using anecdotal evidence but since you use it, I'll reply in kind. I distinctly remember a woman being interviewed the day after the referendum, who was full of joy ("We've got our country back" was her memorable comment). When the interviewer pointed out that we would not officially leave the EU for some time, she was shocked and couldn't understand why we couldn't leave immediately (24/6/16)? I doubt that she was the only Leave voter who held that view (although, of course, that is my opinion not a fact). Imo very few remainders would deny that Covid had a major impact on the UK government's ability to implement it's post-Brexit "strategy" (I'm being overly generous in using the word) Nevertheless, it is now two years since the pandemic and there is little, if any, sign of promised benefits coming into view, let alone being realised.

You are backtracking and being semantic

1. It's a false premise. If this board is anything to go by, there is no shortage of Brits living in Asia who are Brexit supporters. 2. 'Remainer' Brits in Asia probably lean that way for any number of reasons. The 'safety net' you suggest might be one reason, but it is by no means the only one e.g. the belief that the EU is economically benefital to themselves and/or their family is another.

So the sum total of your proposition amounts to, "It is - and will remain - impossible to judge whether Brexit is - or has been - a success because in order to do so we would find ourselves in a logically impossible situation". That's it!? It's what I thought all along but I kept telling myself that I must be overlooking something. And to think that I have spent time discussing such a vacuous proposition????

You're right. The example I gave is a logical fallacy. Now apply it to your own suggestion. See any difference? No, me neither. Again I agree, and again it is no different to the argument that you employ: You contend that Brexit is on-going, therefore the only logical conclusion is that we must look into the future to judge it. Ignoring the rather important fact that the success criteria for Brexit remain (no pun intended) undefined, your argument amounts to 1. Brexit is on-going 2. We shouldn't rejoin the EU unless Brexit is judged a failure 3. We can only judge Brexit a success or failure if we rejoin the EU Therefore, a) we will never rejoin the EU (because we can't know if Brexit is a failure) b) it is - and always will be - impossible to judge whether Brexit is a success or failure (because we can't rejoin the EU) c) Brexit will continue to be on-going ad infinitum (Note: #2 is my insertion. I accept that you did not state or imply this. However, surely it is uncontroversial? Why would we rejoin the EU if Brexit is a success? < although we can't actually confirm whether Brexit is a success as we are not in the EU; all these circular arguments can tie you up in knots if you are not careful!>: The conclusions are mine, not yours). No doubt you will say that I am twisting your words. If so, please point out where and how I have done so.

Then using your line of argument/ reasoning, the EU cannot be judged a success or failure as it is ongoing. Why then did we leave - or even hold a referendum - if we weren't in a position to make an informed choice about whether it is a success or a failure?

I'm pleased to have contributed????

It's just as well your comments in this thread aren't being marked. Your grade average would take a massive hit.