New Brexit polls suggest shift in favour of leaving the EU

[SgtRock]

Accusations of racism, xenophobia, bullying and substandard levels of education have been aimed at those who wish to leave the EU have been thrown about wildly on this thread and others.

Just thought I would share this little gem that I came across from a remainiac.

• I know an old couple who have two cars and live in a lovely house, etc but they endlessly go on about the evils of the EU. They swallow hook line and sinker the popular press. But It's like we can mess things up for everyone else but we're OK, being a Brexiter for them is just an indulgence. I say hit the buggers as hard as we can after Brexit. Wipe the smiles off their smug Daily Mail faces - can't stand them.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/11/brexit-axe-state-pensions-david-cameron-nhs-cold-reality

I think that fits the bill nicely of the various insults that have been thrown around.

[nontabury]

So if Britain is clever, it will realise that it is not a world power on its own, that it will lose much with a yes to Brexit on June 23, and gain nothing but a brief moment of pride.

For me this is the b

est statement I´ve read since Cam announced the referendum. Sums the whole discussion up nicely!

Well that's great,we have a Irish nationalist,who always takes the opportunity on many different threads on THivisa to criticized the UK, joined by yet another German citizen giving Unbiased advice to the Brits. This I could accept if they were upfront on their origins.

[nontabury]

So if Britain is clever, it will realise that it is not a world power on its own, that it will lose much with a yes to Brexit on June 23, and gain nothing but a brief moment of pride.

For me this is the best statement I´ve read since Cam announced the referendum. Sums the whole discussion up nicely!

So we have the Irish nationalist who never misses an opportunity to have a bash here on ThaiVisa against the Brits joined by his German friend.This I have no objection to,as long as they are upfront on their origins and reasons.

So if Britain is clever, it will realise that it is not a world power on its own, that it will lose much with a yes to Brexit on June 23, and gain nothing but a brief moment of pride.

For me this is the best statement I´ve read since Cam announced the referendum. Sums the whole discussion up nicely!

So we have the Irish nationalist who never misses an opportunity to have a bash here on ThaiVisa against the Brits joined by his German friend.This I have no objection to,as long as they are upfront on their origins and reasons.

[Caps]

So if Britain is clever, it will realise that it is not a world power on its own, that it will lose much with a yes to Brexit on June 23, and gain nothing but a brief moment of pride.

For me this is the b

est statement I´ve read since Cam announced the referendum. Sums the whole discussion up nicely!

Well that's great,we have a Irish nationalist,who always takes the opportunity on many different threads on THivisa to criticized the UK, joined by yet another German citizen giving Unbiased advice to the Brits. This I could accept if they were upfront on their origins.

Don't you just love foreigners giving pearls of Wisdom

On another note

BBC Question Time from the 9th June

Izzard is a right plonker

[nontabury]

The out Vote is way way out in front now.

At the moment,still best not to count our chickens,as there's still 10days to go,and in that period who knows what scare stories or threats will be aimed at the electorate.

[nontabury]

Football hooliganism has got nothing to do with anything but football.

Let someone mad enough in the political sphere even bother mention it. They'll only further increase the desire for Brexit.

Read what was being chanted again, these so called football fans think otherwise.

Between clashes with the police, fans sang: <deleted> off Europe, were all voting out. They also sang anti-IRA and anti-German songs before singing: Sit down if you hate the French.

One of the most disturbing aspects of the Brexit campaign is the thinly veiled undercurrent of racism and xenophobia. At least the football hooligans are being honest about it.

Along with Bigot,these are the words often used by those who are loosing the argument.

[chiang mai]

It's worth listening to Hillary Benn at 5:37 for a few minutes when he talks about the price of leaving, the fact that immigration will remain if we do leave and the cost of leaving making the population poorer.

https://youtu.be/G0oVe7MCfRs

[SgtRock]

The out Vote is way way out in front now.

At the moment,still best not to count our chickens,as there's still 10days to go,and in that period who knows what scare stories or threats will be aimed at the electorate.

Today's scare stories Part 1

David Cameron has warned that pledges to raise state pensions every year and ringfence spending for the NHS may have to be ditched in a brutal new phase of austerity if the country votes for Brexit.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/11/brexit-axe-state-pensions-david-cameron-nhs-cold-reality

Is Cameron really for a Brexit ?

He does not need to worry about the NHS or pensions. He will be out of a job by the end of the month.

[nontabury]

Football hooliganism has got nothing to do with anything but football.

Let someone mad enough in the political sphere even bother mention it. They'll only further increase the desire for Brexit.

Read what was being chanted again, these so called football fans think otherwise.

Between clashes with the police, fans sang: <deleted> off Europe, were all voting out. They also sang anti-IRA and anti-German songs before singing: Sit down if you hate the French.

One of the most disturbing aspects of the Brexit campaign is the thinly veiled undercurrent of racism and xenophobia. At least the football hooligans are being honest about it.

Yes indeed! It's sometimes embarrassing to be British!

On occasion, I have resorted to speaking German just in case some people thought I might be British!

Why are some of our brethren like that?

Is it education do you think?

I blame it on those who allowed the great unwashed to have education.Then to compound that mistake they even allowed the masses to have the vote. This one man one vote is so unfair.

[SgtRock]

It's worth listening to Hillary Benn at 5:37 for a few minutes when he talks about the price of leaving, the fact that immigration will remain if we do leave and the cost of leaving making the population poorer.

https://youtu.be/G0oVe7MCfRs

Of course immigration will remain, but it will be controlled immigration, for people with the skills, qualifications and experience the UK requires, not an army of Big Issue sellers.

Hillary Benn talks about the price of leaving, he is very quiet on the cost of staying.

Where is Lord Rose, the official remain leader ? Was he locked in a cellar somewhere when he said that leaving would increase wages and decrease housing costs.

[Grouse]

One of the most disturbing aspects of the Brexit campaign is the thinly veiled undercurrent of racism and xenophobia. At least the football hooligans are being honest about it.

Racism and xenophobia are so last decade. It no longer washes.

People are judged on their actions. These have been in the UK less than a year.

A Syrian refugee who recently arrived in Britain under David Camerons high-profile resettlement programme has been charged with sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/refugee-accused-of-sex-attack-on-girl-14-96tkx06vz

Farage's UKIP people are largely racist and xenophobic.

What has this albeit appalling attack in Newcastle got to do with the Brexit debate. Off topic at best and should be deleted. Metioning the matter on this thread is indicative of racism

[chiang mai]

It's worth listening to Hillary Benn at 5:37 for a few minutes when he talks about the price of leaving, the fact that immigration will remain if we do leave and the cost of leaving making the population poorer.

https://youtu.be/G0oVe7MCfRs

Of course immigration will remain, but it will be controlled immigration, for people with the skills, qualifications and experience the UK requires, not an army of Big Issue sellers.

Hillary Benn talks about the price of leaving, he is very quiet on the cost of staying.

Where is Lord Rose, the official remain leader ? Was he locked in a cellar somewhere when he said that leaving would increase wages and decrease housing costs.

The cost of staying is today's cost, it's a known entity hence it doesn't need to be restated. What's he's saying is that the leave cost is far greater than the today cost, that's the numbers you guys should be trying to defend but aren't, perhaps because they're indefensible!

But I can agree with you on your first point, controlled immigration would be good. But given the already very large immigrant base in the UK and given the extent of their families overseas who may wish to join them in the UK, wives, husbands, near relatives etc, what is the thinking, is it that the law would be changed under controlled immigration rules whereby near relatives aren't allowed to join family members? If that is the case, what are those rules likely to look like do you think as far as the foreign husbands/wives/partners of UK expats overseas is concerned, I mean, we can't have two sets of rules for the same thing, can we? Seems to me that very little will change under controlled immigration rules, either that or UK citizens will be disallowed from living in the UK with their foreign partner which seems highly unlikely!

[chiang mai]

"Investors are bracing for more choppy trading on financial markets in the final run-up to the EU referendum after Brexit jitters knocked the pound to a seven-week low, dented share prices and fuelled demand for safer assets such as bonds and gold".

“A UK vote to leave the EU ... would presumably have a negative impact on global business and investor confidence and hence undermine the prices of industrial commodities. On the other hand, it should boost demand for safe havens, including gold whose price could easily jump to $1,400 per ounce in the event of a Brexit vote,” they wrote in a research note".

"For stock markets, worries about the 23 June referendum compounded fears of a global economic slowdown, falling oil prices and next week’s Federal Reserve meeting on US interest rates. The FTSE 100 index of blue-chip stocks suffered its biggest one-day drop since mid-February and closed down 1.9% at 6,115.8".

"James Knightly, economist at ING Bank, said: “The Fed will probably want to see at least two decent jobs figures before pulling the trigger on higher rates. This means we continue to favour the September ... meeting for the next rate rise.” - at the earliest!

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/jun/10/sterling-and-ftse-100-floored-by-brexit-worries-gold-bonds

[Grouse]

Football hooliganism has got nothing to do with anything but football.

Let someone mad enough in the political sphere even bother mention it. They'll only further increase the desire for Brexit.

Read what was being chanted again, these so called football fans think otherwise.

Between clashes with the police, fans sang: <deleted> off Europe, were all voting out. They also sang anti-IRA and anti-German songs before singing: Sit down if you hate the French.

One of the most disturbing aspects of the Brexit campaign is the thinly veiled undercurrent of racism and xenophobia. At least the football hooligans are being honest about it.

Yes indeed! It's sometimes embarrassing to be British!

On occasion, I have resorted to speaking German just in case some people thought I might be British!

Why are some of our brethren like that?

Is it education do you think?

I blame it on those who allowed the great unwashed to have education.Then to compound that mistake they even allowed the masses to have the vote. This one man one vote is so unfair.

One of David Cameron's principal shortcomings, and that of the many politicians who default to plebiscites when they lack the courage to decide, is the failure to educate.

[exbikey]

I've been out of the UK for too long so therefore do not have say either way, but, could someone with more knowledge than me please advise as to whether, should The UK vote in favour of exit, all the worldwide institutions, the various countries, the big global businesses plus all others that would appear to control whatever happens financially around the world and have thrown their massive weight behind trying to convince the UK into staying in the EU, would (or even could) they collectively penalise or generally make life difficult for the UK simply because the UK public chose to pull out?

I ask this question because if Brexit does happen and if the UK shows that they can make it outside of the EU then the institutions et al that came up with the dire predictions could start to look silly and their combined expertise means nothing. They would simply take their collective revenge out on the UK.

Yes, I know it's a big if, but there is still the possibility that this scenario could happen (stranger things have happened)

[chiang mai]

I've been out of the UK for too long so therefore do not have say either way, but, could someone with more knowledge than me please advise as to whether, should The UK vote in favour of exit, all the worldwide institutions, the various countries, the big global businesses plus all others that would appear to control whatever happens financially around the world and have thrown their massive weight behind trying to convince the UK into staying in the EU, would (or even could) they collectively penalise or generally make life difficult for the UK simply because the UK public chose to pull out?

I ask this question because if Brexit does happen and if the UK shows that they can make it outside of the EU then the institutions et al that came up with the dire predictions could start to look silly and their combined expertise means nothing. They would simply take their collective revenge out on the UK.

Yes, I know it's a big if, but there is still the possibility that this scenario could happen (stranger things have happened)

It could be as long as ten years or more after voting to Leave before everything settled down, the past predictions and who made them will be long forgotten by then.

[SgtRock]

Of course immigration will remain, but it will be controlled immigration, for people with the skills, qualifications and experience the UK requires, not an army of Big Issue sellers.

Hillary Benn talks about the price of leaving, he is very quiet on the cost of staying.

Where is Lord Rose, the official remain leader ? Was he locked in a cellar somewhere when he said that leaving would increase wages and decrease housing costs.

The cost of staying is today's cost, it's a known entity hence it doesn't need to be restated. What's he's saying is that the leave cost is far greater than the today cost, that's the numbers you guys should be trying to defend but aren't, perhaps because they're indefensible!

But I can agree with you on your first point, controlled immigration would be good. But given the already very large immigrant base in the UK and given the extent of their families overseas who may wish to join them in the UK, wives, husbands, near relatives etc, what is the thinking, is it that the law would be changed under controlled immigration rules whereby near relatives aren't allowed to join family members? If that is the case, what are those rules likely to look like do you think as far as the foreign husbands/wives/partners of UK expats overseas is concerned, I mean, we can't have two sets of rules for the same thing, can we? Seems to me that very little will change under controlled immigration rules, either that or UK citizens will be disallowed from living in the UK with their foreign partner which seems highly unlikely!

1. The cost today is approx £ 8.5 Billion net. What is the cost going to be in 2020 when all the UK's opt outs, with the exception of joining the euro come to an end ?

The cost of leaving is simply not known. Speculation and guesses do not give a cost, so there is actually nothing to defend.

2. I do not make immigration Policies, it certainly should be fairly simple. There is nothing difficult about producing criteria that people have to meet to be able to immigrate to the UK. Applied to all equally. That includes those who wish to join other relatives or family members who might already be in the UK.

either that or UK citizens will be disallowed from living in the UK with their foreign partner which seems highly unlikely!

Are you unaware that this currently happens ? There are many UK Citizens that cannot return to the UK with their legal spouse as they do not meet the financial requirements. Frankly, I am astounded that a highly educated remainer like yourself would not be aware of this fact.

[Thaiwine]

It's worth listening to Hillary Benn at 5:37 for a few minutes when he talks about the price of leaving, the fact that immigration will remain if we do leave and the cost of leaving making the population poorer.

https://youtu.be/G0oVe7MCfRs

Of course immigration will remain, but it will be controlled immigration, for people with the skills, qualifications and experience the UK requires, not an army of Big Issue sellers.

Hillary Benn talks about the price of leaving, he is very quiet on the cost of staying.

Where is Lord Rose, the official remain leader ? Was he locked in a cellar somewhere when he said that leaving would increase wages and decrease housing costs.

The cost of staying is today's cost, it's a known entity hence it doesn't need to be restated. What's he's saying is that the leave cost is far greater than the today cost, that's the numbers you guys should be trying to defend but aren't, perhaps because they're indefensible!

But I can agree with you on your first point, controlled immigration would be good. But given the already very large immigrant base in the UK and given the extent of their families overseas who may wish to join them in the UK, wives, husbands, near relatives etc, what is the thinking, is it that the law would be changed under controlled immigration rules whereby near relatives aren't allowed to join family members? If that is the case, what are those rules likely to look like do you think as far as the foreign husbands/wives/partners of UK expats overseas is concerned, I mean, we can't have two sets of rules for the same thing, can we? Seems to me that very little will change under controlled immigration rules, either that or UK citizens will be disallowed from living in the UK with their foreign partner which seems highly unlikely!

One of the things that pees me off about uncontrolled migration is that my Thai partner who I can support cannot come to the UK to live with me without jumping through a million hoops, tests I would struggle with without preparation, and anyone from twenty seven other countries soon to be more can just show an EU passport and walk in and live here, Immigration rules should be the same for all not some,

[Dagnabbit]

The UK imports 10x more from the EU than it exports.

After Brexit, that puts us in a very strong position when it comed to negotiating trade deals.

We are not like Norway or Switzerland as has been pointed out. We are the worlds 5th largest economy and they aren't.

Britain will be just fine after a Brexit but the EU know that once we leave, so will others and the whole thing will fall apart.

David Cameron has his eye on the sort of deal the Kinnocks got. We got rid of Kinnock, he failed to win 2 general elections and got the boot. Then this failed politician that the UK rejected, went to represent us in the EU and with his wife made millions off our tax money.

That us what Cameron stands to lose. When the UK finally reject him, he'll want to represent us in Europe.

[chiang mai]

The cost of staying is today's cost, it's a known entity hence it doesn't need to be restated. What's he's saying is that the leave cost is far greater than the today cost, that's the numbers you guys should be trying to defend but aren't, perhaps because they're indefensible!

But I can agree with you on your first point, controlled immigration would be good. But given the already very large immigrant base in the UK and given the extent of their families overseas who may wish to join them in the UK, wives, husbands, near relatives etc, what is the thinking, is it that the law would be changed under controlled immigration rules whereby near relatives aren't allowed to join family members? If that is the case, what are those rules likely to look like do you think as far as the foreign husbands/wives/partners of UK expats overseas is concerned, I mean, we can't have two sets of rules for the same thing, can we? Seems to me that very little will change under controlled immigration rules, either that or UK citizens will be disallowed from living in the UK with their foreign partner which seems highly unlikely!

1. The cost today is approx £ 8.5 Billion net. What is the cost going to be in 2020 when all the UK's opt outs, with the exception of joining the euro come to an end ?

The cost of leaving is simply not known. Speculation and guesses do not give a cost, so there is actually nothing to defend.

2. I do not make immigration Policies, it certainly should be fairly simple. There is nothing difficult about producing criteria that people have to meet to be able to immigrate to the UK. Applied to all equally. That includes those who wish to join other relatives or family members who might already be in the UK.

either that or UK citizens will be disallowed from living in the UK with their foreign partner which seems highly unlikely!

Are you unaware that this currently happens ? There are many UK Citizens that cannot return to the UK with their legal spouse as they do not meet the financial requirements. Frankly, I am astounded that a highly educated remainer like yourself would not be aware of this fact.

I am aware that some UK expats do not meet the financial requirements allowing them to take their foreign spouse to the UK to live, that was not my point. My point was: if immigration is everyone's hot button and needs to be controlled better, such controls are unlikely to have much impact because of the existing large resident immigrant base. There is no practical way to limit residency rights to immigrant relatives without further limiting residency rights of citizens, effective controls would almost mean an embargo on ALL foreign relatives coming to the UK or allowed to under a very tight quota system, to do it any other way means there would be no change to the number of inbound immigrants. And whilst you do not make Immigration policy you are being asked to imagine and set out a scenario whereby controlled immigration would reduce the number of immigrants coming to the UK, the above being a part of that scenario.

Costs: you wrote, "The cost of leaving is simply not known. Speculation and guesses do not give a cost, so there is actually nothing to defend".

But the Brexit economists published the attached which is a comparison of costs under Brexit and under Remain, I would have thought that anyone voting or supporting Brexit would have known this and read and clearly understood the cost implications of their preferred choice, no? As already discussed earlier the establishments view of the numbers provided to support Brexit are "absurdly optimistic" but they are nevertheless the Brexit numbers and it's these that I said you should be trying to defend but can't, in fact, nobody in this thread has even made mention of them which is distinctly odd!

http://www.economistsforbrexit.co.uk/

[chiang mai]

The cost of staying is today's cost, it's a known entity hence it doesn't need to be restated. What's he's saying is that the leave cost is far greater than the today cost, that's the numbers you guys should be trying to defend but aren't, perhaps because they're indefensible!

But I can agree with you on your first point, controlled immigration would be good. But given the already very large immigrant base in the UK and given the extent of their families overseas who may wish to join them in the UK, wives, husbands, near relatives etc, what is the thinking, is it that the law would be changed under controlled immigration rules whereby near relatives aren't allowed to join family members? If that is the case, what are those rules likely to look like do you think as far as the foreign husbands/wives/partners of UK expats overseas is concerned, I mean, we can't have two sets of rules for the same thing, can we? Seems to me that very little will change under controlled immigration rules, either that or UK citizens will be disallowed from living in the UK with their foreign partner which seems highly unlikely!

One of the things that pees me off about uncontrolled migration is that my Thai partner who I can support cannot come to the UK to live with me without jumping through a million hoops, tests I would struggle with without preparation, and anyone from twenty seven other countries soon to be more can just show an EU passport and walk in and live here, Immigration rules should be the same for all not some,

My wife applied for and was granted a UK Settlement Visa which we subsequently chose not to initiate so we've been through the process of application, it's not difficult in fact it's fairly straight forward. So no, there aren't a million hoops and the only test is the English Language test which I doubt you would struggle with! Now I can agree with you that the Life in the UK test is onerous but it is capable of being passed with study beforehand and there's a few years lead time to do that.

[SgtRock]

The cost of staying is today's cost, it's a known entity hence it doesn't need to be restated. What's he's saying is that the leave cost is far greater than the today cost, that's the numbers you guys should be trying to defend but aren't, perhaps because they're indefensible!

But I can agree with you on your first point, controlled immigration would be good. But given the already very large immigrant base in the UK and given the extent of their families overseas who may wish to join them in the UK, wives, husbands, near relatives etc, what is the thinking, is it that the law would be changed under controlled immigration rules whereby near relatives aren't allowed to join family members? If that is the case, what are those rules likely to look like do you think as far as the foreign husbands/wives/partners of UK expats overseas is concerned, I mean, we can't have two sets of rules for the same thing, can we? Seems to me that very little will change under controlled immigration rules, either that or UK citizens will be disallowed from living in the UK with their foreign partner which seems highly unlikely!

1. The cost today is approx £ 8.5 Billion net. What is the cost going to be in 2020 when all the UK's opt outs, with the exception of joining the euro come to an end ?

The cost of leaving is simply not known. Speculation and guesses do not give a cost, so there is actually nothing to defend.

2. I do not make immigration Policies, it certainly should be fairly simple. There is nothing difficult about producing criteria that people have to meet to be able to immigrate to the UK. Applied to all equally. That includes those who wish to join other relatives or family members who might already be in the UK.

either that or UK citizens will be disallowed from living in the UK with their foreign partner which seems highly unlikely!

Are you unaware that this currently happens ? There are many UK Citizens that cannot return to the UK with their legal spouse as they do not meet the financial requirements. Frankly, I am astounded that a highly educated remainer like yourself would not be aware of this fact.

I am aware that some UK expats do not meet the financial requirements allowing them to take their foreign spouse to the UK to live, that was not my point. My point was: if immigration is everyone's hot button and needs to be controlled better, such controls are unlikely to have much impact because of the existing large resident immigrant base. There is no practical way to limit residency rights to immigrant relatives without further limiting residency rights of citizens, effective controls would almost mean an embargo on ALL foreign relatives coming to the UK or allowed to under a very tight quota system, to do it any other way means there would be no change to the number of inbound immigrants. And whilst you do not make Immigration policy you are being asked to imagine and set out a scenario whereby controlled immigration would reduce the number of immigrants coming to the UK, the above being a part of that scenario.

Costs: you wrote, "The cost of leaving is simply not known. Speculation and guesses do not give a cost, so there is actually nothing to defend".

But the Brexit economists published the attached which is a comparison of costs under Brexit and under Remain, I would have thought that anyone voting or supporting Brexit would have known this and read and clearly understood the cost implications of their preferred choice, no? As already discussed earlier the establishments view of the numbers provided to support Brexit are "absurdly optimistic" but they are nevertheless the Brexit numbers and it's these that I said you should be trying to defend but can't, in fact, nobody in this thread has even made mention of them which is distinctly odd!

http://www.economistsforbrexit.co.uk/

The practical way of limiting and controlling immigration is to have clearly defined immigration criteria that applies to all. Do not meet the criteria then you cannot come to the UK. That criteria applies to every single individual that is not a UK Citizen, irrespective of whether you have family in the UK or not. Part of that criteria would be a job offer.

That is correct. I said that the costs are not known. I have read and digested many different reports on the costs of Brexit. I will say it again, the costs are not known. A myriad of of economic forecasts are just that, economic forecasts, none of them are definitive or set in concrete, therefore nothing to defend.

There is nothing distinctly odd about not mentioning this. For the simple reason, for some, myself included, the financial costs are not as important as they are to others. The worlds 5th biggest economy will handle whatever financial losses may be suffered due to a Brexit.

There are far more important issues that are being swept under the carpet. Like 2020 for a start. Which oddly enough, some people are scared to mention.

Now I am for Brexit, because I believe that the EU is actually stifling the UK and would much rather be free of the EU shackles and see the UK deal with the rest of the world and a population of some 7.5 Billion than tied to the EU and its population of 500 million.

How about you, instead of focusing on the possible negatives of leaving the EU, how about giving us all a positive for remaining in the EU.

[Thaiwine]

You are quite right I was refering to the life in the UK test, do you know if EU migrants have to undergo the same tests to remain here? while I don't know I very much doubt it.

[chiang mai]

You are quite right I was refering to the life in the UK test, do you know if EU migrants have to undergo the same tests to remain here? while I don't know I very much doubt it.

Here! You mean there!

I don't know is the answer, I guess almost certainly not since UK migrants to other EU countries aren't required to take similar tests.

[brewsterbudgen]

Football hooliganism has got nothing to do with anything but football.

Let someone mad enough in the political sphere even bother mention it. They'll only further increase the desire for Brexit.

Read what was being chanted again, these so called football fans think otherwise.

Between clashes with the police, fans sang: <deleted> off Europe, were all voting out. They also sang anti-IRA and anti-German songs before singing: Sit down if you hate the French.

One of the most disturbing aspects of the Brexit campaign is the thinly veiled undercurrent of racism and xenophobia. At least the football hooligans are being honest about it.

Along with Bigot,these are the words often used by those who are loosing the argument.

If the cap fits! Are you claiming that Brexit is not xenophobic and the football hooligans are not racist?

[Thaiwine]

You are quite right I was refering to the life in the UK test, do you know if EU migrants have to undergo the same tests to remain here? while I don't know I very much doubt it.

Here! You mean there!

I don't know is the answer, I guess almost certainly not since UK migrants to other EU countries aren't required to take similar tests.

I said here as I am in the UK

I have looked and so far have not found a direct answer, what seems to be the case is that if EU citizens wish to come and work in the UK, they can do so by just showing an EU passport, and you only need to undergo the life in the UK tests if you wish to apply for citizenship of the UK, so EU citizens can live and work here without following the rules that apply to anyone else, which was my point the current system is unfair and biased to the point it disadvantages UK citizens.

[chiang mai]

You are quite right I was refering to the life in the UK test, do you know if EU migrants have to undergo the same tests to remain here? while I don't know I very much doubt it.

Here! You mean there!

I don't know is the answer, I guess almost certainly not since UK migrants to other EU countries aren't required to take similar tests.

I said here as I am in the UK

I have looked and so far have not found a direct answer, what seems to be the case is that if EU citizens wish to come and work in the UK, they can do so by just showing an EU passport, and you only need to undergo the life in the UK tests if you wish to apply for citizenship of the UK, so EU citizens can live and work here without following the rules that apply to anyone else, which was my point the current system is unfair and biased to the point it disadvantages UK citizens.

UK citizens, expat citizens that is, are disadvantaged in a range of different ways: charged 150% of the actual cost of NHS services; frozen pension; disallowed from using onshore IFA services; inability open onshore bank accounts; inability to buy onshore financial instruments; and more. BUT, we are allowed to vote!

[chiang mai]

Gibraltar wants the UK to stay in the EU, if it doesn't life could get difficult:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/11/gibraltar-back-the-eu-to-help-us-see-off-predatory-spain/

[Caps]

Gibraltar wants the UK to stay in the EU, if it doesn't life could get difficult:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/11/gibraltar-back-the-eu-to-help-us-see-off-predatory-spain/

Can't really see Spain getting that anti, they may block the border, insist on visa's etc but not a lot of anything else.

Because we have the means to deal with it

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk whilst drinking a cold beer

[Grouse]

The UK imports 10x more from the EU than it exports.

After Brexit, that puts us in a very strong position when it comed to negotiating trade deals.

We are not like Norway or Switzerland as has been pointed out. We are the worlds 5th largest economy and they aren't.

Britain will be just fine after a Brexit but the EU know that once we leave, so will others and the whole thing will fall apart.

David Cameron has his eye on the sort of deal the Kinnocks got. We got rid of Kinnock, he failed to win 2 general elections and got the boot. Then this failed politician that the UK rejected, went to represent us in the EU and with his wife made millions off our tax money.

That us what Cameron stands to lose. When the UK finally reject him, he'll want to represent us in Europe.

10x? I'm no expert in this area but a quick look at UK/EU imports and exports for April 2016 shows 19B against 12B but that excludes services. Please clarify?