How about net immigration to turn negative before the end of 2020? (For a full year.)
Mr. Robert, I would be glad to take you up on your bet, but I doubt if I shall be around to collect (or pay out), which rather ruins the point.
I think I see where you are coming from but I think you are wrong. The hangover from family reunions, the disparity between the minimum wages and the quality of English universities are quite enough to keep the number of people seeking entrance higher than the number of people off to seek their fortune abroad for many years yet.
Of course if Students were reclassified from the immigration statistics, and the UK actually regained the power to kick people out then the terms of the bet would change in your favour.
Students need to stay in the figures. Of the 250 000 who come in each year 20% are still here 5 years later and permenantly settled.
If equal numbers came and went, by definition there would be no net effect on migration (assuming no major change in student population).
That can't be right. If out of 250,000 each year 50,000 are still here happily settled and presumably welcome after five years then the immigration figures should show that 50k not the 200k who went away again; taking with them, hopefully, happy memories, knowledge and a love of the UK and leaving behind huge wodges of cash..
Those are the figures from Migrationwatch, so 50 000 net migrants per year came initially on student visas.
Some countries are much more likely to return than others. No surprises that it is MENA and South Asian students most likely not to return (and also often bring family on accompanying visas), while others such as Chinese have a re-migration rate over 95%.
Yes, but why should all overseas students be classed as immigrants?
How about net immigration to turn negative before the end of 2020? (For a full year.)
Mr. Robert, I would be glad to take you up on your bet, but I doubt if I shall be around to collect (or pay out), which rather ruins the point.
I think I see where you are coming from but I think you are wrong. The hangover from family reunions, the disparity between the minimum wages and the quality of English universities are quite enough to keep the number of people seeking entrance higher than the number of people off to seek their fortune abroad for many years yet.
Of course if Students were reclassified from the immigration statistics, and the UK actually regained the power to kick people out then the terms of the bet would change in your favour.
Students need to stay in the figures. Of the 250 000 who come in each year 20% are still here 5 years later and permenantly settled.
If equal numbers came and went, by definition there would be no net effect on migration (assuming no major change in student population).
That can't be right. If out of 250,000 each year 50,000 are still here happily settled and presumably welcome after five years then the immigration figures should show that 50k not the 200k who went away again; taking with them, hopefully, happy memories, knowledge and a love of the UK and leaving behind huge wodges of cash..
Those are the figures from Migrationwatch, so 50 000 net migrants per year came initially on student visas.
Some countries are much more likely to return than others. No surprises that it is MENA and South Asian students most likely not to return (and also often bring family on accompanying visas), while others such as Chinese have a re-migration rate over 95%.
Surely it's time to remove dependency rights from student visas and anyone who stays is subject to the same rules on minimum pay to bring overseas spouses to the UK.
@FF43 Sadly I think you are right. The number of homeless Romanians who end up on Channel 5 programmes is far too small to even scratch the net migration targets. When push comes to shove the appetite to tell employers to take their low wage work overseas ( as it will be like will and significant socio economic dislocation to get it under 100K pa. I just don't see it myself.
Pure nonsense
We cut net migration from last year's 390k to under 100K but stoping 290K pa coming in. The ' pure nonsense ' brigade like you are obsessed with it being easy. Yet I'm not reading the sweeping categories of folk currently coming to work or study who are going to be eliminated.
No the pure nonsense bit is the endless scaremongering and sour grapes re Brexit.
We'll have immigration, there wont be a stop, lots of peoiple wont get what they want, but lots of others will accept the compromises. The UK wont come to a stop nor will the EU. Life will just be a bit different but not the disaster you hope for.
Oh I see. You weren't referring to anything I was actually arguing in that post. It was just a general unfocused dismal. Dismiss away.
were you arguing anything in the post ?
it looked like just the standard remainer rant. Maybe brush up your posting Mr Submarine
No. It was an argument made in response to a specific exchange I was having with several people. It's a free forum so you can respond with ' pure nonsense ' if you wish but I will call you out for your lack of 6th form debating skills.
Ah, so youre aspiring to the 6th form?
well that explains it.
I just know " Pure Nonsense " followed by changing the subject when challenged wouldn't have got you very far at the Durham Union Society. So I lowered the bar for you to the 6th Form debating society at my bog standard comp.
Oh gawd - Durham
for the people who couldnt make Oxbridge but still think they did
Oi - please separate out Durham Union Society tossers from the greater pool of stout yeomen and hearty good fellows who were up in the basted North....
Indeed. Three years in the finest city in England.
I just know " Pure Nonsense " followed by changing the subject when challenged wouldn't have got you very far at the Durham Union Society. So I lowered the bar for you to the 6th Form debating society at my bog standard comp.
Oh gawd - Durham
for the people who couldnt make Oxbridge but still think they did
I've never heard anyone refer to "Oxbridge" at either Oxford or Cambridge.
Yes, the students dont actually mix that much with the population
sad really
Being involved in politics is by far the most common way to be an exception.
Hmm
I dont really recall that much involvement by Eton Dave round the estates of Blackbird leys.
Maybe Im getting old
I guess so. Maybe being a LibDem is different. I spent tons of time delivering leaflets and knocking on doors all over town.
So do Dominos Pizzas
Are you saying theyre more engaged than the LDs ?
Dominos Pizzas have a greater chance of seeing the inside of 10 Downing Street.
When the all night Brexit negotiations are in full swing....
Dave did have me round for drinks one evening, which is a bit better than delivering a pizza!
The EEA/EFTA brigade have utterly miscalculated in thinking they would be in control of events after a vote to Leave.
Not really. Any Leave is better than a Remain vote that would have been seen as endorsing the Project.
That referendum was probably the one and only chance to run away screaming: an important consideration for all voters suspicious of where the EU was heading.
Quite. If I'd thought we'd have a vote in say ten years I'd have swallowed my doubts probably and voted remain with a held nose, but I knew this was the sole chance in my lifetime. Having been denied any vote for decades and specifically reneged on in the case of the Constitution/Lisbon I was painted into a corner. Cameron's crap attempt at renegotiation and his treating us like fools that it was great was the final straw.
I was lost to Remain because those in power have been pig headed about my assumed consent to giving more power to the Project.
I think the referendum was a moment of realisation for many voters: it was clear there was no serious reform of our EU relationship on offer, nor would there be in future, and the immigration target would be (if retained at all) for symbolism only. The vote was merely a tool to close both issues down for a generation by referencing back to the economy.
How about net immigration to turn negative before the end of 2020? (For a full year.)
Mr. Robert, I would be glad to take you up on your bet, but I doubt if I shall be around to collect (or pay out), which rather ruins the point.
I think I see where you are coming from but I think you are wrong. The hangover from family reunions, the disparity between the minimum wages and the quality of English universities are quite enough to keep the number of people seeking entrance higher than the number of people off to seek their fortune abroad for many years yet.
Of course if Students were reclassified from the immigration statistics, and the UK actually regained the power to kick people out then the terms of the bet would change in your favour.
Students need to stay in the figures. Of the 250 000 who come in each year 20% are still here 5 years later and permenantly settled.
If equal numbers came and went, by definition there would be no net effect on migration (assuming no major change in student population).
That can't be right. If out of 250,000 each year 50,000 are still here happily settled and presumably welcome after five years then the immigration figures should show that 50k not the 200k who went away again; taking with them, hopefully, happy memories, knowledge and a love of the UK and leaving behind huge wodges of cash..
Those are the figures from Migrationwatch, so 50 000 net migrants per year came initially on student visas.
Some countries are much more likely to return than others. No surprises that it is MENA and South Asian students most likely not to return (and also often bring family on accompanying visas), while others such as Chinese have a re-migration rate over 95%.
Yes, but why should all overseas students be classed as immigrants?
They are if they stay over 1 year.
All migrants are counted on that basis. It is the international definition and why net figures are quoted.
So I emigrated in 1975 (to the USA) then to the UK in 1979 and then emigrated again in 1989 (to NZ) then emigrated back in 1991 according to govt figures.
So despite being born in Lancs, I have migrated to England twice.
Is Dave's infamous "Nudge Unit" still active now that Theresa has taken over?
I now have an image of David Cameron spending his days in a windswept out-of-season seaside town in the southwest, shoving 2p pieces into one of those arcade nudge machines.
"Another 2p in the right spot - and they will all just fall...."
Teignmouth in November, I can almost smell the chippies.
How about net immigration to turn negative before the end of 2020? (For a full year.)
Mr. Robert, I would be glad to take you up on your bet, but I doubt if I shall be around to collect (or pay out), which rather ruins the point.
I think I see where you are coming from but I think you are wrong. The hangover from family reunions, the disparity between the minimum wages and the quality of English universities are quite enough to keep the number of people seeking entrance higher than the number of people off to seek their fortune abroad for many years yet.
Of course if Students were reclassified from the immigration statistics, and the UK actually regained the power to kick people out then the terms of the bet would change in your favour.
Students need to stay in the figures. Of the 250 000 who come in each year 20% are still here 5 years later and permenantly settled.
If equal numbers came and went, by definition there would be no net effect on migration (assuming no major change in student population).
That can't be right. If out of 250,000 each year 50,000 are still here happily settled and presumably welcome after five years then the immigration figures should show that 50k not the 200k who went away again; taking with them, hopefully, happy memories, knowledge and a love of the UK and leaving behind huge wodges of cash..
Those are the figures from Migrationwatch, so 50 000 net migrants per year came initially on student visas.
Some countries are much more likely to return than others. No surprises that it is MENA and South Asian students most likely not to return (and also often bring family on accompanying visas), while others such as Chinese have a re-migration rate over 95%.
Surely it's time to remove dependency rights from student visas and anyone who stays is subject to the same rules on minimum pay to bring overseas spouses to the UK.
Correct. There should be no dependency rights for student visas.
How about net immigration to turn negative before the end of 2020? (For a full year.)
Mr. Robert, I would be glad to take you up on your bet, but I doubt if I shall be around to collect (or pay out), which rather ruins the point.
I think I see where you are coming from but I think you are wrong. The hangover from family reunions, the disparity between the minimum wages and the quality of English universities are quite enough to keep the number of people seeking entrance higher than the number of people off to seek their fortune abroad for many years yet.
Of course if Students were reclassified from the immigration statistics, and the UK actually regained the power to kick people out then the terms of the bet would change in your favour.
Students need to stay in the figures. Of the 250 000 who come in each year 20% are still here 5 years later and permenantly settled.
If equal numbers came and went, by definition there would be no net effect on migration (assuming no major change in student population).
That can't be right. If out of 250,000 each year 50,000 are still here happily settled and presumably welcome after five years then the immigration figures should show that 50k not the 200k who went away again; taking with them, hopefully, happy memories, knowledge and a love of the UK and leaving behind huge wodges of cash..
Those are the figures from Migrationwatch, so 50 000 net migrants per year came initially on student visas.
Some countries are much more likely to return than others. No surprises that it is MENA and South Asian students most likely not to return (and also often bring family on accompanying visas), while others such as Chinese have a re-migration rate over 95%.
Yes, but why should all overseas students be classed as immigrants?
Quire right. They are students. Only if they stay on can they be considered as immigrants. Until then, they are contributing to the UK economy @ almost £30k per year.
As a matter of interest, what odds will people give me on net migration going negative (i.e. more people leaving the country than arriving) in one year between now and 2025?
I'm happy to pay now, so whoever's on the other side of the trade gets the time value of money benefit
Hi, I'll go Evens for £100 on that one if you like.
How about net immigration to turn negative before the end of 2020? (For a full year.)
Mr. Robert, I would be glad to take you up on your bet, but I doubt if I shall be around to collect (or pay out), which rather ruins the point.
I think I see where you are coming from but I think you are wrong. The hangover from family reunions, the disparity between the minimum wages and the quality of English universities are quite enough to keep the number of people seeking entrance higher than the number of people off to seek their fortune abroad for many years yet.
Of course if Students were reclassified from the immigration statistics, and the UK actually regained the power to kick people out then the terms of the bet would change in your favour.
Students need to stay in the figures. Of the 250 000 who come in each year 20% are still here 5 years later and permenantly settled.
If equal numbers came and went, by definition there would be no net effect on migration (assuming no major change in student population).
That can't be right. If out of 250,000 each year 50,000 are still here happily settled and presumably welcome after five years then the immigration figures should show that 50k not the 200k who went away again; taking with them, hopefully, happy memories, knowledge and a love of the UK and leaving behind huge wodges of cash..
Those are the figures from Migrationwatch, so 50 000 net migrants per year came initially on student visas.
Some countries are much more likely to return than others. No surprises that it is MENA and South Asian students most likely not to return (and also often bring family on accompanying visas), while others such as Chinese have a re-migration rate over 95%.
Surely it's time to remove dependency rights from student visas and anyone who stays is subject to the same rules on minimum pay to bring overseas spouses to the UK.
Correct. There should be no dependency rights for student visas.
I have been saying that for years, particularly as spouses of students are allowed to work (as indeed are students themselves).
How about net immigration to turn negative before the end of 2020? (For a full year.)
Mr. Robert, I would be glad to take you up on your bet, but I doubt if I shall be around to collect (or pay out), which rather ruins the point.
I think I see where you are coming from but I think you are wrong. The hangover from family reunions, the disparity between the minimum wages and the quality of English universities are quite enough to keep the number of people seeking entrance higher than the number of people off to seek their fortune abroad for many years yet.
Of course if Students were reclassified from the immigration statistics, and the UK actually regained the power to kick people out then the terms of the bet would change in your favour.
Students need to stay in the figures. Of the 250 000 who come in each year 20% are still here 5 years later and permenantly settled.
If equal numbers came and went, by definition there would be no net effect on migration (assuming no major change in student population).
That can't be right. If out of 250,000 each year 50,000 are still here happily settled and presumably welcome after five years then the immigration figures should show that 50k not the 200k who went away again; taking with them, hopefully, happy memories, knowledge and a love of the UK and leaving behind huge wodges of cash..
Those are the figures from Migrationwatch, so 50 000 net migrants per year came initially on student visas.
Some countries are much more likely to return than others. No surprises that it is MENA and South Asian students most likely not to return (and also often bring family on accompanying visas), while others such as Chinese have a re-migration rate over 95%.
Surely it's time to remove dependency rights from student visas and anyone who stays is subject to the same rules on minimum pay to bring overseas spouses to the UK.
Remove dependency rights full stop, Mr. Max. That is probably the fastest way to clear the Calais camps and put the people traffickers out of business.
How about net immigration to turn negative before the end of 2020? (For a full year.)
Mr. Robert, I would be glad to take you up on your bet, but I doubt if I shall be around to collect (or pay out), which rather ruins the point.
I think I see where you are coming from but I think you are wrong. The hangover from family reunions, the disparity between the minimum wages and the quality of English universities are quite enough to keep the number of people seeking entrance higher than the number of people off to seek their fortune abroad for many years yet.
Of course if Students were reclassified from the immigration statistics, and the UK actually regained the power to kick people out then the terms of the bet would change in your favour.
Students need to stay in the figures. Of the 250 000 who come in each year 20% are still here 5 years later and permenantly settled.
If equal numbers came and went, by definition there would be no net effect on migration (assuming no major change in student population).
That can't be right. If out of 250,000 each year 50,000 are still here happily settled and presumably welcome after five years then the immigration figures should show that 50k not the 200k who went away again; taking with them, hopefully, happy memories, knowledge and a love of the UK and leaving behind huge wodges of cash..
Those are the figures from Migrationwatch, so 50 000 net migrants per year came initially on student visas.
Some countries are much more likely to return than others. No surprises that it is MENA and South Asian students most likely not to return (and also often bring family on accompanying visas), while others such as Chinese have a re-migration rate over 95%.
Surely it's time to remove dependency rights from student visas and anyone who stays is subject to the same rules on minimum pay to bring overseas spouses to the UK.
Remove dependency rights full stop, Mr. Max. That is probably the fastest way to clear the Calais camps and put the people traffickers out of business.
Mrs May could have done this at some point in her 6 years at the Home Office - If she had wanted to....
How about net immigration to turn negative before the end of 2020? (For a full year.)
Mr. Robert, I would be glad to take you up on your bet, but I doubt if I shall be around to collect (or pay out), which rather ruins the point.
I think I see where you are coming from but I think you are wrong. The hangover from family reunions, the disparity between the minimum wages and the quality of English universities are quite enough to keep the number of people seeking entrance higher than the number of people off to seek their fortune abroad for many years yet.
Of course if Students were reclassified from the immigration statistics, and the UK actually regained the power to kick people out then the terms of the bet would change in your favour.
Students need to stay in the figures. Of the 250 000 who come in each year 20% are still here 5 years later and permenantly settled.
If equal numbers came and went, by definition there would be no net effect on migration (assuming no major change in student population).
That can't be right. If out of 250,000 each year 50,000 are still here happily settled and presumably welcome after five years then the immigration figures should show that 50k not the 200k who went away again; taking with them, hopefully, happy memories, knowledge and a love of the UK and leaving behind huge wodges of cash..
Those are the figures from Migrationwatch, so 50 000 net migrants per year came initially on student visas.
Some countries are much more likely to return than others. No surprises that it is MENA and South Asian students most likely not to return (and also often bring family on accompanying visas), while others such as Chinese have a re-migration rate over 95%.
Surely it's time to remove dependency rights from student visas and anyone who stays is subject to the same rules on minimum pay to bring overseas spouses to the UK.
Remove dependency rights full stop, Mr. Max. That is probably the fastest way to clear the Calais camps and put the people traffickers out of business.
Mrs May could have done this at some point in her 6 years at the Home Office - If she had wanted to....
Turns out Ed Miliband was also a little bit Reinhard Heydrich as well it seems:
"Ed Miliband today promised new measures to prevent British people being "locked out" of jobs by foreign workers, including forcing firms to declare if they employ high numbers of immigrants."
Is Dave's infamous "Nudge Unit" still active now that Theresa has taken over?
I now have an image of David Cameron spending his days in a windswept out-of-season seaside town in the southwest, shoving 2p pieces into one of those arcade nudge machines.
"Another 2p in the right spot - and they will all just fall...."
Teignmouth in November, I can almost smell the chippies.
Oi! Some of my favourite childhood memories are of putting tuppences into the machines on Teignmouth Pier. Dad collected them throughout the year, and we'd gleefully get rid of them all in a couple of weeks.
Or of taking the pirate ferry from Teignmough to Shaldon.
Or of fishing for crabs with my toes in the Salty.
Of course, this was before I knew that SeanT was born there. It's not been the same since ...
"In her rhetoric at least, Theresa May got some of this. One of the most intriguing passages in her speech was the one in which she talked of the problems caused by low interest rates:
‘While monetary policy – with super-low interest rates and quantitative easing – provided the necessary emergency medicine after the financial crash, we have to acknowledge there have been some bad side effects.
‘People with assets have got richer. People without them have suffered. People with mortgages have found their debts cheaper. People with savings have found themselves poorer.
‘A change has got to come. And we are going to deliver it.’
She’s right: ultra low interest rates have reduced mortgage costs for existing home owners and landlords and then fed through into higher house prices for everyone else without any discernible effect on rents. What was meant to be a purely temporary response to the financial crisis has now lasted for nearly eight years and made the housing market even more dysfunctional in the process."
---
‘People with assets have got richer. People without them have suffered. People with mortgages have found their debts cheaper' ... 'A change has got to come. And we are going to deliver it.’
Few will disagree with that analysis, but do you actually have a solution, Theresa?
............. It'll be ground down but it'll take a Thatcher like will and significant socio economic dislocation to get it under 100K pa. I just don't see it myself.
100k net pa is a figure taking us back to life pre97. Is it built on solid forecasts of trends etc and the answer is No. But it is possible for the EU unskilled migrants to be reduced by 100k pa. But that will probably only start to go down in 2020 etc after we have exited the EU in 2019.
Well that's a much more nuanced and achievable goal than the current policy.
The current policy is there because Cameron stupidly promised it (twice) and its too political at the moment to be seen easing away from, once the fuss has died down I am sure a more realistic number will be found.
In my experience most of the public, even the BrExit inclined, are pretty tolerate of a fair number of immigrants, providing that they dont take the piss, which in this context means spending their life on benefits, or committing crimes, or threatening the defense of the realm, and making more than a token effort to fit in and rub along. What really pisses people off is people who don't want to make an effort, spend their whole time criticising the lifestyles of people whose families have been here for generations, and make them feel like they are not living in their own country.
It's an interesting one. As most of our politicians seem unaware of what the Single Market is or what leaving it actually means, I would not expect voters to be that switched on. Do pensioners, for example, really believe that they should no longer have the automatic right to retire to Spain and to be treated for free by the Spanish healthcare system? Do they believe that pensioners currently retired out there should lose that free access?
And what would they say if told, no you can't have your urine bottles swapped at 4 A.M. on Sunday morning because the hypothetical Ana who used to look after you is now back in Portugal?
Even if that's a ridiculous example, the point is that there are choices and consequences to those choices. Needless to say those choices and consequences are never fleshed out.
Clearly I'm unhinged, self hating remoaner who as a citizen of the world is a citizen of nowhere but we are seeing this already with Immigration. In order to meet the net migration pledge we're going to have to stop 65% to 70% of the current people entering entering. But when Rudd announces some practical measures to make a modest start on this some globalising Brexiters start bed wetting. And that's with all the outrage/fauxtrage on the companies reporting thing. Wait till people notice Rudd is proposing to nuke the finances of non Russell Group universities ( many down ticket unis are in Leave areas ) by restricting/removing their visa rights. The capacity for " I wanted Brexit but I didn't mean that " outbursts is enormous.
We don't need to cut immigration by 400,000 or so.
"In her rhetoric at least, Theresa May got some of this. One of the most intriguing passages in her speech was the one in which she talked of the problems caused by low interest rates:
‘While monetary policy – with super-low interest rates and quantitative easing – provided the necessary emergency medicine after the financial crash, we have to acknowledge there have been some bad side effects.
‘People with assets have got richer. People without them have suffered. People with mortgages have found their debts cheaper. People with savings have found themselves poorer.
‘A change has got to come. And we are going to deliver it.’
She’s right: ultra low interest rates have reduced mortgage costs for existing home owners and landlords and then fed through into higher house prices for everyone else without any discernible effect on rents. What was meant to be a purely temporary response to the financial crisis has now lasted for nearly eight years and made the housing market even more dysfunctional in the process."
‘A change has got to come. And we are going to deliver it.’
Bold.
House prices is just part one part of it. It also destroyed pension returns alongside most other investment options leaving people pushing house prices ever higher to get into BTL..
Basically if Trump's chances are 25% then that's a 50-50 chance of him winning the second debate, which is very very high for a person with Trump's public record and TV performance.
As I said if Trump wins this election I'll eat my cigars.
Let's face it, we never had a choice, the EU was so sh8t.
There's still cleaning up to do after we do Brexit though. The Whack-a-mole interventionism May is advocating wasn't voted for in 2015 and isn;t wanted either by her party or the electorate of England, to my mind. I reckon many conservatives were quietly appalled by this part of her speech.
They'll let her brexit, sure. Beyond that, not so much.
I think the last person to manage that was Ronnie Reagan in 1984.
Strictly speaking it was 49-2 as Mondale-Ferraro won the District of Columbia as well as Minnesota. DC is the only non-state to have representation in the Electoral College.
How about net immigration to turn negative before the end of 2020? (For a full year.)
Mr.
Students.
That
Those are the figures from Migrationwatch, so 50 000 net migrants per year came initially on student visas.
Some countries are much more likely to return than others. No surprises that it is MENA and South Asian students most likely not to return (and also often bring family on accompanying visas), while others such as Chinese have a re-migration rate over 95%.
Surely it's time to remove dependency rights from student visas and anyone who stays is subject to the same rules on minimum pay to bring overseas spouses to the UK.
Remove dependency rights full stop, Mr. Max. That is probably the fastest way to clear the Calais camps and put the people traffickers out of business.
Mrs May could have done this at some point in her 6 years at the Home Office - If she had wanted to....
That assumes she had free reign.
She might, or might not, be deadly serious about reducing net migration levels. But it's possible this was proposed and shot down by Osborne, perhaps because of his overtures to China, and because of the contribution to the economy.
International students arrive at a rate of 150,000 a year but are only leaving at 50,000 a year.
Basically if Trump's chances are 25% then that's a 50-50 chance of him winning the second debate, which is very very high for a person with Trump's public record and TV performance.
As I said if Trump wins this election I'll eat my cigars.
Debates are rarely won, but often lost.
Hillary is sufficiently schooled not to make a blunder or a gaffe that there is low risk. Donald clearly not, but can he shrug it off when it happens?
The next one has questions from the audience. Could be a few curveballs from the floor increasing the risk of either candidate making a blunder.
Basically if Trump's chances are 25% then that's a 50-50 chance of him winning the second debate, which is very very high for a person with Trump's public record and TV performance.
As I said if Trump wins this election I'll eat my cigars.
You've made so many predictions. Please could you predict a big win for Trump because the opposite seems to happen.
"German aircrew are to be stationed in France for the first time since the Second World War under a military co-operation agreement reached in the wake of the Brexit vote." The Times
Ideally placed to rescue desperate remainers from the roofs of their London penthouse apartments as the great unwashed close in on them.
The EEA/EFTA brigade have utterly miscalculated in thinking they would be in control of events after a vote to Leave.
Not really. Any Leave is better than a Remain vote that would have been seen as endorsing the Project.
That referendum was probably the one and only chance to run away screaming: an important consideration for all voters suspicious of where the EU was heading.
Quite. If I'd thought we'd have a vote in say ten years I'd have swallowed my doubts probably and voted remain with a held nose, but I knew this was the sole chance in my lifetime. Having been denied any vote for decades and specifically reneged on in the case of the Constitution/Lisbon I was painted into a corner. Cameron's crap attempt at renegotiation and his treating us like fools that it was great was the final straw.
I was lost to Remain because those in power have been pig headed about my assumed consent to giving more power to the Project.
I think the referendum was a moment of realisation for many voters: it was clear there was no serious reform of our EU relationship on offer, nor would there be in future, and the immigration target would be (if retained at all) for symbolism only. The vote was merely a tool to close both issues down for a generation by referencing back to the economy.
So it became now, or never.
It's hard to see much downside to voting Leave, with hindsight.
Is Dave's infamous "Nudge Unit" still active now that Theresa has taken over?
I now have an image of David Cameron spending his days in a windswept out-of-season seaside town in the southwest, shoving 2p pieces into one of those arcade nudge machines.
"Another 2p in the right spot - and they will all just fall...."
Teignmouth in November, I can almost smell the chippies.
Oi! Some of my favourite childhood memories are of putting tuppences into the machines on Teignmouth Pier. Dad collected them throughout the year, and we'd gleefully get rid of them all in a couple of weeks.
Or of taking the pirate ferry from Teignmough to Shaldon.
Or of fishing for crabs with my toes in the Salty.
Of course, this was before I knew that SeanT was born there. It's not been the same since ...
Yup, me too! So much so that, when my nearby Grandad was slowly dying, my folks almost bought a place there.
I returned earlier this year. It was err, unchanged...
How about net immigration to turn negative before the end of 2020? (For a full year.)
Mr. Robert, I would be glad to take you up on your bet, but I doubt if I shall be around to collect (or pay out), which rather ruins the point.
I think I see where you are coming from but I think you are wrong. The hangover from family reunions, the disparity between the minimum wages and the quality of English universities are quite enough to keep the number of people seeking entrance higher than the number of people off to seek their fortune abroad for many years yet.
Of course if Students were reclassified from the immigration statistics, and the UK actually regained the power to kick people out then the terms of the bet would change in your favour.
Students need to stay in the figures. Of the 250 000 who come in each year 20% are still here 5 years later and permenantly settled.
If equal numbers came and went, by definition there would be no net effect on migration (assuming no major change in student population).
That can't be right. If out of 250,000 each year 50,000 are still here happily settled and presumably welcome after five years then the immigration figures should show that 50k not the 200k who went away again; taking with them, hopefully, happy memories, knowledge and a love of the UK and leaving behind huge wodges of cash..
Those are the figures from Migrationwatch, so 50 000 net migrants per year came initially on student visas.
Some countries are much more likely to return than others. No surprises that it is MENA and South Asian students most likely not to return (and also often bring family on accompanying visas), while others such as Chinese have a re-migration rate over 95%.
Yes, but why should all overseas students be classed as immigrants?
They are if they stay over 1 year.
All migrants are counted on that basis. It is the international definition and why net figures are quoted.
So I emigrated in 1975 (to the USA) then to the UK in 1979 and then emigrated again in 1989 (to NZ) then emigrated back in 1991 according to govt figures.
So despite being born in Lancs, I have migrated to England twice.
The US most certainly does not count students as immigrants. F-1 visas are non-immigrant visas.
"In her rhetoric at least, Theresa May got some of this. One of the most intriguing passages in her speech was the one in which she talked of the problems caused by low interest rates:
‘While monetary policy – with super-low interest rates and quantitative easing – provided the necessary emergency medicine after the financial crash, we have to acknowledge there have been some bad side effects.
‘People with assets have got richer. People without them have suffered. People with mortgages have found their debts cheaper. People with savings have found themselves poorer.
‘A change has got to come. And we are going to deliver it.’
She’s right: ultra low interest rates have reduced mortgage costs for existing home owners and landlords and then fed through into higher house prices for everyone else without any discernible effect on rents. What was meant to be a purely temporary response to the financial crisis has now lasted for nearly eight years and made the housing market even more dysfunctional in the process."
---
‘People with assets have got richer. People without them have suffered. People with mortgages have found their debts cheaper' ... 'A change has got to come. And we are going to deliver it.’
Few will disagree with that analysis, but do you actually have a solution, Theresa?
Thee is a solution. Borrow heavily at these super-low rates for capital projects. Gradually interest rates will rise. It is a once in a lifetime opportunity. Like the New Deal or Marshall Plan.
How about net immigration to turn negative before the end of 2020? (For a full year.)
Mr.
Students.
That
Those are the figures from Migrationwatch, so 50 000 net migrants per year came initially on student visas.
Some countries are much more likely to return than others. No surprises that it is MENA and South Asian students most likely not to return (and also often bring family on accompanying visas), while others such as Chinese have a re-migration rate over 95%.
Surely it's time to remove dependency rights from student visas and anyone who stays is subject to the same rules on minimum pay to bring overseas spouses to the UK.
Remove dependency rights full stop, Mr. Max. That is probably the fastest way to clear the Calais camps and put the people traffickers out of business.
Mrs May could have done this at some point in her 6 years at the Home Office - If she had wanted to....
That assumes she had free reign.
She might, or might not, be deadly serious about reducing net migration levels. But it's possible this was proposed and shot down by Osborne, perhaps because of his overtures to China, and because of the contribution to the economy.
International students arrive at a rate of 150,000 a year but are only leaving at 50,000 a year.
This seems to me like a serious loophole.
I don't think that leavers are properly being counted (another thing that May could have done if she wanted).
So you are saying May was cowed/bribed to be inactive on non -EU migration? Perhaps not the best person for Brexit negotiations then.
The EEA/EFTA brigade have utterly miscalculated in thinking they would be in control of events after a vote to Leave.
Not really. Any Leave is better than a Remain vote that would have been seen as endorsing the Project.
That referendum was probably the one and only chance to run away screaming: an important consideration for all voters suspicious of where the EU was heading.
Quite. If I'd thought we'd have a vote in say ten years I'd have swallowed my doubts probably and voted remain with a held nose, but I knew this was the sole chance in my lifetime. Having been denied any vote for decades and specifically reneged on in the case of the Constitution/Lisbon I was painted into a corner. Cameron's crap attempt at renegotiation and his treating us like fools that it was great was the final straw.
I was lost to Remain because those in power have been pig headed about my assumed consent to giving more power to the Project.
I think the referendum was a moment of realisation for many voters: it was clear there was no serious reform of our EU relationship on offer, nor would there be in future, and the immigration target would be (if retained at all) for symbolism only. The vote was merely a tool to close both issues down for a generation by referencing back to the economy.
So it became now, or never.
It's hard to see much downside to voting Leave, with hindsight.
The alternative of course would have meant ever closer union as the term is commonly put.
I cannot really imagine a remain vote not being followed by EU demands for us to join Schengen and of course the Euro. Would have been hard to resist when the unelected across the channel pointed out " even your own people voted for it"
The EEA/EFTA brigade have utterly miscalculated in thinking they would be in control of events after a vote to Leave.
Not really. Any Leave is better than a Remain vote that would have been seen as endorsing the Project.
That referendum was probably the one and only chance to run away screaming: an important consideration for all voters suspicious of where the EU was heading.
Quite. If I'd thought we'd have a vote in say ten years I'd have swallowed my doubts probably and voted remain with a held nose, but I knew this was the sole chance in my lifetime. Having been denied any vote for decades and specifically reneged on in the case of the Constitution/Lisbon I was painted into a corner. Cameron's crap attempt at renegotiation and his treating us like fools that it was great was the final straw.
I was lost to Remain because those in power have been pig headed about my assumed consent to giving more power to the Project.
I think the referendum was a moment of realisation for many voters: it was clear there was no serious reform of our EU relationship on offer, nor would there be in future, and the immigration target would be (if retained at all) for symbolism only. The vote was merely a tool to close both issues down for a generation by referencing back to the economy.
So it became now, or never.
It's hard to see much downside to voting Leave, with hindsight.
We need to emerge out the other side, first, but I think by 2025 a lot of voters who voted Remain will also see it as the right decision in hindsight.
Let's face it, we never had a choice, the EU was so sh8t.
There's still cleaning up to do after we do Brexit though. The Whack-a-mole interventionism May is advocating wasn't voted for in 2015 and isn;t wanted either by her party or the electorate of England, to my mind. I reckon many conservatives were quietly appalled by this part of her speech.
They'll let her brexit, sure. Beyond that, not so much.
With 47% of all voters wanting hard Brexit and 60% of Tory voters and with a general feeling that the City has got off lightly from the 2008 crash while the working and lower middle class took most of the pain and that Osborne applied austerity too harshly May is actually probably the right person for the present mood of the nation
How about net immigration to turn negative before the end of 2020? (For a full year.)
Mr.
Students.
That
Those are the figures from Migrationwatch, so 50 000 net migrants per year came initially on student visas.
Some countries are much more likely to return than others. No surprises that it is MENA and South Asian students most likely not to return (and also often bring family on accompanying visas), while others such as Chinese have a re-migration rate over 95%.
Surely it's time to remove dependency rights from student visas and anyone who stays is subject to the same rules on minimum pay to bring overseas spouses to the UK.
Remove dependency rights full stop, Mr. Max. That is probably the fastest way to clear the Calais camps and put the people traffickers out of business.
Mrs May could have done this at some point in her 6 years at the Home Office - If she had wanted to....
That assumes she had free reign.
She might, or might not, be deadly serious about reducing net migration levels. But it's possible this was proposed and shot down by Osborne, perhaps because of his overtures to China, and because of the contribution to the economy.
International students arrive at a rate of 150,000 a year but are only leaving at 50,000 a year.
This seems to me like a serious loophole.
And....the economy seems to be absorbing them. Logically, it would appear that there would be shortage of skilled labour without them. Even more so than now.
Hillary leads today by 3.8% with RCP, 0.1% less than Obama won by in 2012, a clear win but no rout and that was before Pence won the VP debate last night and with 2 more debates to come and potential Wikileaks on Benghazi http://www.realclearpolitics.com/
How about net immigration to turn negative before the end of 2020? (For a full year.)
Mr.
Students.
That
Those are the figures from Migrationwatch, so 50 000 net migrants per year came initially on student visas.
Some countries are much more likely to return than others. No surprises that it is MENA and South Asian students most likely not to return (and also often bring family on accompanying visas), while others such as Chinese have a re-migration rate over 95%.
Surely it's time to remove dependency rights from student visas and anyone who stays is subject to the same rules on minimum pay to bring overseas spouses to the UK.
Remove dependency rights full stop, Mr. Max. That is probably the fastest way to clear the Calais camps and put the people traffickers out of business.
Mrs May could have done this at some point in her 6 years at the Home Office - If she had wanted to....
That assumes she had free reign.
She might, or might not, be deadly serious about reducing net migration levels. But it's possible this was proposed and shot down by Osborne, perhaps because of his overtures to China, and because of the contribution to the economy.
International students arrive at a rate of 150,000 a year but are only leaving at 50,000 a year.
This seems to me like a serious loophole.
I don't think that leavers are properly being counted (another thing that May could have done if she wanted).
So you are saying May was cowed/bribed to be inactive on non -EU migration? Perhaps not the best person for Brexit negotiations then.
I'm saying that as First Secretary of State, Osborne ruled the roost. I will judge May by what she does now. But I don't think there's much evidence to say she's not serious.
It was a matter of record that there were only two individuals in the Cabinet at the time who vociferously made the case for the 10,000s immigration target: Theresa May, and, surprisingly, David Cameron who backed her up because he understood people were worried about it, even if he felt powerless to do anything about it.
How about net immigration to turn negative before the end of 2020? (For a full year.)
Mr.
Students.
That
Those are the figures from Migrationwatch, so 50 000 net migrants per year came initially on student visas.
Some countries are much more likely to return than others. No surprises that it is MENA and South Asian students most likely not to return (and also often bring family on accompanying visas), while others such as Chinese have a re-migration rate over 95%.
Surely it's time to remove dependency rights from student visas and anyone who stays is subject to the same rules on minimum pay to bring overseas spouses to the UK.
Remove dependency rights full stop, Mr. Max. That is probably the fastest way to clear the Calais camps and put the people traffickers out of business.
Mrs May could have done this at some point in her 6 years at the Home Office - If she had wanted to....
That assumes she had free reign.
She might, or might not, be deadly serious about reducing net migration levels. But it's possible this was proposed and shot down by Osborne, perhaps because of his overtures to China, and because of the contribution to the economy.
International students arrive at a rate of 150,000 a year but are only leaving at 50,000 a year.
This seems to me like a serious loophole.
I don't think that leavers are properly being counted (another thing that May could have done if she wanted).
So you are saying May was cowed/bribed to be inactive on non -EU migration? Perhaps not the best person for Brexit negotiations then.
I'm saying that as First Secretary of State, Osborne ruled the roost. I will judge May by what she does now. But I don't think there's much evidence to say she's not serious.
It was a matter of record that there were only two individuals in the Cabinet at the time who vociferously made the case for the 10,000s immigration target: Theresa May, and, surprisingly, David Cameron who backed her up because he understood people were worried about it, even if he felt powerless to do anything about it.
So she set the target, got the PM to back it, then chickened out?
As of this morning, Florida Democratic Party has submitted 469k voter registration forms; Republican Party of Florida has submitted 59k
And how many have been submitted by voters?
Not sure, tho these numbers are fun to look at. My early voting statistics for the 2016 November General Election http://www.electproject.org/early_2016
However although many hispanic voters don't bother voting/registering when they do register their turnout in actually voting is high, last time it was about 89%.
This site seems to permanently be stuck at 24th June at the moment.
It happened. Brexit won. We're leaving. The non lib wing of the tories are in power until most of us retire. There is nothing any of us can do about it. Please move on.
I dread to think what will happen here if Trump wins (although that is not something I would put a great deal of money on unless he gets his act together fast).
Is Dave's infamous "Nudge Unit" still active now that Theresa has taken over?
I now have an image of David Cameron spending his days in a windswept out-of-season seaside town in the southwest, shoving 2p pieces into one of those arcade nudge machines.
"Another 2p in the right spot - and they will all just fall...."
Teignmouth in November, I can almost smell the chippies.
Oi! Some of my favourite childhood memories are of putting tuppences into the machines on Teignmouth Pier. Dad collected them throughout the year, and we'd gleefully get rid of them all in a couple of weeks.
Or of taking the pirate ferry from Teignmough to Shaldon.
Or of fishing for crabs with my toes in the Salty.
Of course, this was before I knew that SeanT was born there. It's not been the same since ...
Yup, me too! So much so that, when my nearby Grandad was slowly dying, my folks almost bought a place there.
I returned earlier this year. It was err, unchanged...
Sadly, one thing has changed. We used to go into the Clipper Cafe in Shaldon and have a rock bun and strawberry milkshake. I went back there on my coastal walk - perhaps fifteen years alter - and had a picture taken of me with a rock cake and milkshake.
How about net immigration to turn negative before the end of 2020? (For a full year.)
Mr.
Students.
That
Those are the figures from Migrationwatch, so 50 000 net migrants per year came initially on student visas.
Some countries are much more likely to return than others. No surprises that it is MENA and South Asian students most likely not to return (and also often bring family on accompanying visas), while others such as Chinese have a re-migration rate over 95%.
Surely it's time to remove dependency rights from student visas and anyone who stays is subject to the same rules on minimum pay to bring overseas spouses to the UK.
Remove dependency rights full stop, Mr. Max. That is probably the fastest way to clear the Calais camps and put the people traffickers out of business.
Mrs May could have done this at some point in her 6 years at the Home Office - If she had wanted to....
That assumes she had free reign.
She might, or might not, be deadly serious about reducing net migration levels. But it's possible this was proposed and shot down by Osborne, perhaps because of his overtures to China, and because of the contribution to the economy.
International students arrive at a rate of 150,000 a year but are only leaving at 50,000 a year.
This seems to me like a serious loophole.
I don't think that leavers are properly being counted (another thing that May could have done if she wanted).
So you are saying May was cowed/bribed to be inactive on non -EU migration? Perhaps not the best person for Brexit negotiations then.
I'm saying that as First Secretary of State, Osborne ruled the roost. I will judge May by what she does now. But I don't think there's much evidence to say she's not serious.
It was a matter of record that there were only two individuals in the Cabinet at the time who vociferously made the case for the 10,000s immigration target: Theresa May, and, surprisingly, David Cameron who backed her up because he understood people were worried about it, even if he felt powerless to do anything about it.
So she set the target, got the PM to back it, then chickened out?
Or perhaps just too careerist to be bothered?
Or maybe it wasn't ultimately her decision, and she lost the fight?
This site seems to permanently be stuck at 24th June at the moment.
It happened. Brexit won. We're leaving. The non lib wing of the tories are in power until most of us retire. There is nothing any of us can do about it. Please move on.
We can bet on it. Indeed that is what the site is ostensibly for...
Jezza and Hug a Hitler will be in total agreement with their newspaper of choice.
I wonder when those concerned at the idea of British Jobs for British workers will cast their eyes further afield.
In Africa, the Chinese have managed to stir up quite alot of resentment - taking over vast areas of land, flying in an exclusively Chinese work force etc etc.
Some African governments have actually carried out "African jobs for African workers" laws - they have shamefully abandoned the diversity rating that a 100% chinese workforce on a mega-farm has... since Chinese are, of course a minority in these countries.
When will someone speak out about this terrible abuse of immigrant workers?
This site seems to permanently be stuck at 24th June at the moment.
It happened. Brexit won. We're leaving. The non lib wing of the tories are in power until most of us retire. There is nothing any of us can do about it. Please move on.
I dread to think what will happen here if Trump wins (although that is not something I would put a great deal of money on unless he gets his act together fast).
Agree. It's May 2nd 1997. Why on earth shouldn't the Tories give up and accept they will be out of power for 13 years, perhaps for ever?
Now, I am not arguing with the Brexit results but why do you want to deny an opposing view it's voice?
"In her rhetoric at least, Theresa May got some of this. One of the most intriguing passages in her speech was the one in which she talked of the problems caused by low interest rates:
‘While monetary policy – with super-low interest rates and quantitative easing – provided the necessary emergency medicine after the financial crash, we have to acknowledge there have been some bad side effects.
‘People with assets have got richer. People without them have suffered. People with mortgages have found their debts cheaper. People with savings have found themselves poorer.
‘A change has got to come. And we are going to deliver it.’
She’s right: ultra low interest rates have reduced mortgage costs for existing home owners and landlords and then fed through into higher house prices for everyone else without any discernible effect on rents. What was meant to be a purely temporary response to the financial crisis has now lasted for nearly eight years and made the housing market even more dysfunctional in the process."
---
‘People with assets have got richer. People without them have suffered. People with mortgages have found their debts cheaper' ... 'A change has got to come. And we are going to deliver it.’
Few will disagree with that analysis, but do you actually have a solution, Theresa?
Thee is a solution. Borrow heavily at these super-low rates for capital projects. Gradually interest rates will rise. It is a once in a lifetime opportunity. Like the New Deal or Marshall Plan.
I tend to agree. But they're the wrong projects. All this HS2 bollocks to shave 15 minutes off London to Birmingham? Who gives a shit? Decent broadband and a table with a plug socket - yes.
Is Dave's infamous "Nudge Unit" still active now that Theresa has taken over?
I now have an image of David Cameron spending his days in a windswept out-of-season seaside town in the southwest, shoving 2p pieces into one of those arcade nudge machines.
"Another 2p in the right spot - and they will all just fall...."
Teignmouth in November, I can almost smell the chippies.
Oi! Some of my favourite childhood memories are of putting tuppences into the machines on Teignmouth Pier. Dad collected them throughout the year, and we'd gleefully get rid of them all in a couple of weeks.
Or of taking the pirate ferry from Teignmough to Shaldon.
Or of fishing for crabs with my toes in the Salty.
Of course, this was before I knew that SeanT was born there. It's not been the same since ...
Yup, me too! So much so that, when my nearby Grandad was slowly dying, my folks almost bought a place there.
I returned earlier this year. It was err, unchanged...
Sadly, one thing has changed. We used to go into the Clipper Cafe in Shaldon and have a rock bun and strawberry milkshake. I went back there on my coastal walk - perhaps fifteen years alter - and had a picture taken of me with a rock cake and milkshake.
Comments
I think a more interesting bet would be for the <100k net migration target to be met before 2020GE and sustained up until that election.
I would be interested at £20 at evens.
So it became now, or never.
All migrants are counted on that basis. It is the international definition and why net figures are quoted.
So I emigrated in 1975 (to the USA) then to the UK in 1979 and then emigrated again in 1989 (to NZ) then emigrated back in 1991 according to govt figures.
So despite being born in Lancs, I have migrated to England twice.
Does anyone remember this ?
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/10/03/ex-top-trump-aide-says-expect-a-big-anti-clinton-wikileaks-revelation-on-wednesday/
These allegations of government officials intimidating voters is disturbing, if true http://chicago.suntimes.com/politics/kankakee-county-investigates-vote-buying-allegations/ …
It is becoming a rout. 49-1 ?
"Ed Miliband today promised new measures to prevent British people being "locked out" of jobs by foreign workers, including forcing firms to declare if they employ high numbers of immigrants."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ed-miliband-promises-new-immigration-measures-to-protect-british-workers-7876158.html
Or of taking the pirate ferry from Teignmough to Shaldon.
Or of fishing for crabs with my toes in the Salty.
Of course, this was before I knew that SeanT was born there. It's not been the same since ...
http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/working-for-everyone/7017096.blog
"In her rhetoric at least, Theresa May got some of this. One of the most intriguing passages in her speech was the one in which she talked of the problems caused by low interest rates:
‘While monetary policy – with super-low interest rates and quantitative easing – provided the necessary emergency medicine after the financial crash, we have to acknowledge there have been some bad side effects.
‘People with assets have got richer. People without them have suffered. People with mortgages have found their debts cheaper. People with savings have found themselves poorer.
‘A change has got to come. And we are going to deliver it.’
She’s right: ultra low interest rates have reduced mortgage costs for existing home owners and landlords and then fed through into higher house prices for everyone else without any discernible effect on rents. What was meant to be a purely temporary response to the financial crisis has now lasted for nearly eight years and made the housing market even more dysfunctional in the process."
---
‘People with assets have got richer. People without them have suffered. People with mortgages have found their debts cheaper' ... 'A change has got to come. And we are going to deliver it.’
Few will disagree with that analysis, but do you actually have a solution, Theresa?
I think the last person to manage that was Ronnie Reagan in 1984.
Looking a comfortable win though.
As I said if Trump wins this election I'll eat my cigars.
Let's face it, we never had a choice, the EU was so sh8t.
There's still cleaning up to do after we do Brexit though. The Whack-a-mole interventionism May is advocating wasn't voted for in 2015 and isn;t wanted either by her party or the electorate of England, to my mind. I reckon many conservatives were quietly appalled by this part of her speech.
They'll let her brexit, sure. Beyond that, not so much.
daniel a. smith
@electionsmith
As of this morning, Florida Democratic Party has submitted 469k voter registration forms; Republican Party of Florida has submitted 59k
She might, or might not, be deadly serious about reducing net migration levels. But it's possible this was proposed and shot down by Osborne, perhaps because of his overtures to China, and because of the contribution to the economy.
International students arrive at a rate of 150,000 a year but are only leaving at 50,000 a year.
This seems to me like a serious loophole.
Hillary is sufficiently schooled not to make a blunder or a gaffe that there is low risk. Donald clearly not, but can he shrug it off when it happens?
The next one has questions from the audience. Could be a few curveballs from the floor increasing the risk of either candidate making a blunder.
Ideally placed to rescue desperate remainers from the roofs of their London penthouse apartments as the great unwashed close in on them.
I returned earlier this year. It was err, unchanged...
So you are saying May was cowed/bribed to be inactive on non -EU migration? Perhaps not the best person for Brexit negotiations then.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/783747884105732096
Morning Star political analysis hits a new high.
I cannot really imagine a remain vote not being followed by EU demands for us to join Schengen and of course the Euro. Would have been hard to resist when the unelected across the channel pointed out " even your own people voted for it"
Would have been right too.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/
"Some people call us the Nazi party."
It was a matter of record that there were only two individuals in the Cabinet at the time who vociferously made the case for the 10,000s immigration target: Theresa May, and, surprisingly, David Cameron who backed her up because he understood people were worried about it, even if he felt powerless to do anything about it.
Most of the post-2010 government seems to have spent it's time trying to undo that dreadful period of government.
Or perhaps just too careerist to be bothered?
However although many hispanic voters don't bother voting/registering when they do register their turnout in actually voting is high, last time it was about 89%.
It happened. Brexit won. We're leaving. The non lib wing of the tories are in power until most of us retire. There is nothing any of us can do about it. Please move on.
I dread to think what will happen here if Trump wins (although that is not something I would put a great deal of money on unless he gets his act together fast).
It's a bit posher now.
http://www.theclipper360.co.uk/
Peak euro fiasco/euro austerity combined with further eastern european accession then changed the flow.
Brexit is the only means of dealing with this following Cameron's sham renegotiation.
new thread
In Africa, the Chinese have managed to stir up quite alot of resentment - taking over vast areas of land, flying in an exclusively Chinese work force etc etc.
Some African governments have actually carried out "African jobs for African workers" laws - they have shamefully abandoned the diversity rating that a 100% chinese workforce on a mega-farm has... since Chinese are, of course a minority in these countries.
When will someone speak out about this terrible abuse of immigrant workers?
Now, I am not arguing with the Brexit results but why do you want to deny an opposing view it's voice?