These restrictions don't seem that massively different from most developed countries, like Canada or Australia, and certainly nowhere near as restrictive as the US.
Funnily enough, these places have huge numbers of people want to move to (and do) every year. And in Canada's case, it definitely ain't for the weather.
Canada and Australia have far higher immigration rates than Britain.
That's what I said....despite having similar "restriction" immigration systems.
Canada and Australia want immigrants. Britain is pulling up the drawbridge.
Canada has extremely tight immigration restrictions.
So tight that its net migration rate is more than twice that of Britain’s.
So I’m confused. If we introduce Canadian/ Australian style immigration systems are we going to reduce immigration if not?
The style of system does not set the number of migrants by itself. Both Australia and Canada operate the system in a way designed to attract migrants.
Britain, meanwhile, is making great play of how it is telling most past EU migrants, including many current British residents, that they are unwelcome. We can expect the style of system to be operated in a way to deter migrants.
Don't all existing EU residents here effectively get indefinite leave to remain? They aren't being told to leave.
They’re not being told to leave. They’re being told they should never have been let in. As I said, they are being told that they are unwelcome.
Why would they think that? They got here legitimately under the system in place at the time. Now a new system is replacing it, which has no effect on their ability to stay in the UK.
Because the Guardian is making a big thing of 101 year olds falling foul of the millennium bug?
These restrictions don't seem that massively different from most developed countries, like Canada or Australia, and certainly nowhere near as restrictive as the US.
Funnily enough, these places have huge numbers of people want to move to (and do) every year. And in Canada's case, it definitely ain't for the weather.
Canada and Australia have far higher immigration rates than Britain.
That's what I said....despite having similar "restriction" immigration systems.
Canada and Australia want immigrants. Britain is pulling up the drawbridge.
Canada has extremely tight immigration restrictions.
Does it?
We were recommended to open a development center in Quebec because of how easy it was to bring in people from Canada, the US and Asia. (And there are tonnes of subsidies too. And there's skiing. I still want to go for it, but my colleagues have vetoed it.)
They require English language ability and a skilled qualification to move there for work on a permanent basis. Unskilled workers can only go on a temporary basis, need a job offer and a high school diploma.
That doesn't sound like "extremely tight". It sounds like "welcome to skilled immigrants".
We've just said we're not going to be giving lots of visas to skilled foreigners because British firms should train people up.
This is why I love my £x,000/year compulsory health insurance. It makes foreigners a bit more expensive. It's enough to really discourage low skilled immigration, but it's essentially bureaucracy-free, and it encourages British firms to upskill their employees. But it doesn't stop people from getting someone from abroad if they really need them.
These restrictions don't seem that massively different from most developed countries, like Canada or Australia, and certainly nowhere near as restrictive as the US.
Funnily enough, these places have huge numbers of people want to move to (and do) every year. And in Canada's case, it definitely ain't for the weather.
Canada and Australia have far higher immigration rates than Britain.
That's what I said....despite having similar "restriction" immigration systems.
Canada and Australia want immigrants. Britain is pulling up the drawbridge.
Canada has extremely tight immigration restrictions.
Does it?
We were recommended to open a development center in Quebec because of how easy it was to bring in people from Canada, the US and Asia. (And there are tonnes of subsidies too. And there's skiing. I still want to go for it, but my colleagues have vetoed it.)
They require English language ability and a skilled qualification to move there for work on a permanent basis. Unskilled workers can only go on a temporary basis, need a job offer and a high school diploma.
That doesn't sound like "extremely tight". It sounds like "welcome to skilled immigrants".
We've just said we're not going to be giving lots of visas to skilled foreigners because British firms should train people up.
This is why I love my £x,000/year compulsory health insurance. It makes foreigners a bit more expensive. It's enough to really discourage low skilled immigration, but it's essentially bureaucracy-free, and it encourages British firms to upskill their employees. But it doesn't stop people from getting someone from abroad if they really need them.
It basically rules out the vast majority of brown and black people around the world. Canada loves to be this beacon of progressivism but the reality is it won't tolerate poor immigrants yearning to be free.
These restrictions don't seem that massively different from most developed countries, like Canada or Australia, and certainly nowhere near as restrictive as the US.
Funnily enough, these places have huge numbers of people want to move to (and do) every year. And in Canada's case, it definitely ain't for the weather.
Canada and Australia have far higher immigration rates than Britain.
That's what I said....despite having similar "restriction" immigration systems.
Canada and Australia want immigrants. Britain is pulling up the drawbridge.
Canada has extremely tight immigration restrictions.
Does it?
We were recommended to open a development center in Quebec because of how easy it was to bring in people from Canada, the US and Asia. (And there are tonnes of subsidies too. And there's skiing. I still want to go for it, but my colleagues have vetoed it.)
They require English language ability and a skilled qualification to move there for work on a permanent basis. Unskilled workers can only go on a temporary basis, need a job offer, not to be taking that job from a local and have a high school diploma.
That doesn't sound like "extremely tight". It sounds like "welcome to skilled immigrants".
We've just said we're not going to be giving lots of visas to skilled foreigners because British firms should train people up.
This is why I love my £x,000/year compulsory health insurance. It makes foreigners a bit more expensive. It's enough to really discourage low skilled immigration, but it's essentially bureaucracy-free, and it encourages British firms to upskill their employees. But it doesn't stop people from getting someone from abroad if they really need them.
If you move to Canada, the employee has to have private health cover for the first 1-2 years.
These restrictions don't seem that massively different from most developed countries, like Canada or Australia, and certainly nowhere near as restrictive as the US.
Funnily enough, these places have huge numbers of people want to move to (and do) every year. And in Canada's case, it definitely ain't for the weather.
Canada and Australia have far higher immigration rates than Britain.
That's what I said....despite having similar "restriction" immigration systems.
Canada and Australia want immigrants. Britain is pulling up the drawbridge.
Canada has extremely tight immigration restrictions.
So tight that its net migration rate is more than twice that of Britain’s.
So I’m confused. If we introduce Canadian/ Australian style immigration systems are we going to reduce immigration if not?
The style of system does not set the number of migrants by itself. Both Australia and Canada operate the system in a way designed to attract migrants.
Britain, meanwhile, is making great play of how it is telling most past EU migrants, including many current British residents, that they are unwelcome. We can expect the style of system to be operated in a way to deter migrants.
Don't all existing EU residents here effectively get indefinite leave to remain? They aren't being told to leave.
They’re not being told to leave. They’re being told they should never have been let in. As I said, they are being told that they are unwelcome.
You mean like a Prime Minister promising "British Jobs For British Workers" or a Prime Minister promising to reduce net immigration to the tens of thousands ?
Those sorts of telling people they are unwelcome ?
These restrictions don't seem that massively different from most developed countries, like Canada or Australia, and certainly nowhere near as restrictive as the US.
Funnily enough, these places have huge numbers of people want to move to (and do) every year. And in Canada's case, it definitely ain't for the weather.
Canada and Australia have far higher immigration rates than Britain.
That's what I said....despite having similar "restriction" immigration systems.
Canada and Australia want immigrants. Britain is pulling up the drawbridge.
Canada has extremely tight immigration restrictions.
Does it?
We were recommended to open a development center in Quebec because of how easy it was to bring in people from Canada, the US and Asia. (And there are tonnes of subsidies too. And there's skiing. I still want to go for it, but my colleagues have vetoed it.)
They require English language ability and a skilled qualification to move there for work on a permanent basis. Unskilled workers can only go on a temporary basis, need a job offer, not to be taking that job from a local and have a high school diploma.
Quebec requires English language ability? 🤔
Sorry. English ability for most of Canada, French for Quebec.
These restrictions don't seem that massively different from most developed countries, like Canada or Australia, and certainly nowhere near as restrictive as the US.
Funnily enough, these places have huge numbers of people want to move to (and do) every year. And in Canada's case, it definitely ain't for the weather.
Canada and Australia have far higher immigration rates than Britain.
That's what I said....despite having similar "restriction" immigration systems.
Canada and Australia want immigrants. Britain is pulling up the drawbridge.
Canada has extremely tight immigration restrictions.
Does it?
We were recommended to open a development center in Quebec because of how easy it was to bring in people from Canada, the US and Asia. (And there are tonnes of subsidies too. And there's skiing. I still want to go for it, but my colleagues have vetoed it.)
They require English language ability and a skilled qualification to move there for work on a permanent basis. Unskilled workers can only go on a temporary basis, need a job offer, not to be taking that job from a local and have a high school diploma.
Quebec requires English language ability? 🤔
Well they can't speak proper French there anyway....so its no good speaking French fluently.
These restrictions don't seem that massively different from most developed countries, like Canada or Australia, and certainly nowhere near as restrictive as the US.
Funnily enough, these places have huge numbers of people want to move to (and do) every year. And in Canada's case, it definitely ain't for the weather.
Canada and Australia have far higher immigration rates than Britain.
That's what I said....despite having similar "restriction" immigration systems.
Canada and Australia want immigrants. Britain is pulling up the drawbridge.
Canada has extremely tight immigration restrictions.
Does it?
We were recommended to open a development center in Quebec because of how easy it was to bring in people from Canada, the US and Asia. (And there are tonnes of subsidies too. And there's skiing. I still want to go for it, but my colleagues have vetoed it.)
They require English language ability and a skilled qualification to move there for work on a permanent basis. Unskilled workers can only go on a temporary basis, need a job offer and a high school diploma.
That doesn't sound like "extremely tight". It sounds like "welcome to skilled immigrants".
We've just said we're not going to be giving lots of visas to skilled foreigners because British firms should train people up.
This is why I love my £x,000/year compulsory health insurance. It makes foreigners a bit more expensive. It's enough to really discourage low skilled immigration, but it's essentially bureaucracy-free, and it encourages British firms to upskill their employees. But it doesn't stop people from getting someone from abroad if they really need them.
It basically rules out the vast majority of brown and black people around the world. Canada loves to be this beacon of progressivism but the reality is it won't tolerate poor immigrants yearning to be free.
If you've spent any time in the oil sands in Fort McMurray, you'll meet an awful lot of low skilled labour from India, Bangladesh, Nepal, etc.
The government has just put up a big sign reading “GO ELSEWHERE”. I expect the message will be received.
Utter nonsense
Calling it nonsense is hardly much of an answer. The government has with great fanfare introduced a swathe of restrictions on immigration and is presenting them as such. They will no doubt be very popular among that cohort of Leavers who regret the passing of the last millennium. But the message is just as clearly heard in other countries and its meaning is clear.
Brexit derangement syndrome at it's greatest (and I mean that solely in the magnitude sense)
Once we stop having a practically infinite supply of labour willing to work for minimum wage our productivity should finally start to recover. Having thousands of people spend their life washing cars is a great waste of humanity.
The productivity stagnation is an international phenomenon, not a UK one. The exceptions are the Emerging economies of Asia.
A sensible, long-term UK-EU agreement is possible, probably, only after Brexit is well in the rear view mirror.
Hmm. I rememberSome humility, contrition and a few apologies on their parts would be in order.
I agree.months
Since you have seas were poised to descend on Britain if it remained in the EU, that’s all of a piece with your previous behaviour.
Seems to me this points system will give overseas Muslims equal status with Europeans when it comes to opportunities to work in the Uk.
Congrats to Boris eh ?
Who in their right minds isdrive and dynamism.
Another mindless quote.
What do e retrained as rocket scientists, you’re going to go to Germany.
EU. More from further east in Europe and Asia, most likely.
You possibly under-estimate the appeal of London, and the English language. Lots of young Europeans will still want to come here, to learn the lingo, study in great British universities, and work and live in a world city (the only one in Europe).
Ireland just isn't the same (and they have just elected a potential government of religious fascists, hardly a welcome mat).
Yes we will see a reduction in EU migrants, but hopefully we will see the Roma Big Issue sellers disappear, too, and they are an outright scandal, coming here JUST to be "homeless", and to claim tax credits.
We will also see a big drop in real homeless, many of which are EU citizens, especially in London.
Yep, London will still attract European students and young people generally, for sure. It will also suck in a lot of cash-in-hand self-employed who will chance their arm until they’re caught. The big challenge will be outside London, but there will always be non-EU citizens to recruit. I think it could have been a lot worse. As long as the red tape is manageable.
It's not going away, but the draconian quarantine restrictions are keeping a lid on it?
49% mortality for critically ill, though that may reflect the overwhelming demand on ICU beds in Hubei. We are a long way from being out of the woods.
There's a reason they were building hospitals in ten days, unconnected with a visit from the Guiness Book of Records.
Still think the appalling urban air quality in China is a massive factor there. People have shot lungs. And they smoke, just to fuck them further. This respitory virus is making hay.
It wasn’t truly a hospital but a quarantine facility built by the army to battlefield prefab standards. Why else do you think people are being dragged there literally kicking and screaming.
The poor underlying public health in provincial China is certainly a factor in higher mortality in Hubei. But so too is the competence of the government there.
Don’t be dazzled by the bright lights of Pudong. If you’ve ever been to interior provinces like Hunan, Henan, Hubei etc... you’ll know that the Chinese economic miracle has a long way to run. And if you’ve ever had commercial dealing with the communist party’s business proxies, you also know that Xi’s anti corruption and anti incompetence drive hasn’t yet scratched the surface.
Eadric you can chill out. A Matt Damon global disaster movie this is not. It’s more like Katrina. The extreme policy response is to spare the blushes of the communist party for letting Wuhan’s health system collapse, in the face of a disease no more dangerous or impactful than influenza (which kills tens of thousands and hospitalises hundreds of thousands a year globally). Everyone else has imperfect info so for safety first, have taken their policy lead from the Chinese. And it’s that which will now cause a 2020 recession, evens money I reckon.
Anyone wanting to come to the UK to work must have a job offer with a salary threshold of £25,600 – though a salary “floor” of £20,480 will be acceptable in special cases where there might have a skills shortage skills, such as in nursing.
The skills threshold for foreign nationals wanting to work in the UK will be lowered from degree to A-levels or their equivalent.
The cap on the numbers of skilled workers is being scrapped – and a small number of highly skilled workers will be allowed to come in without a job.
Places like Canada you need a degree or a specialist skill to get anywhere near the points, then there are pseudo age restrictions i.e if you are over 35 (i think) you lose a load of points, etc.
These restrictions don't seem that massively different from most developed countries, like Canada or Australia, and certainly nowhere near as restrictive as the US.
Funnily enough, these places have huge numbers of people want to move to (and do) every year. And in Canada's case, it definitely ain't for the weather.
Canada and Australia have far higher immigration rates than Britain.
That's what I said....despite having similar "restriction" immigration systems.
Canada and Australia want immigrants. Britain is pulling up the drawbridge.
Canada has extremely tight immigration restrictions.
So tight that its net migration rate is more than twice that of Britain’s.
So I’m confused. If we introduce Canadian/ Australian style immigration systems are we going to reduce immigration if not?
The style of system does not set the number of migrants by itself. Both Australia and Canada operate the system in a way designed to attract migrants.
Britain, meanwhile, is making great play of how it is telling most past EU migrants, including many current British residents, that they are unwelcome. We can expect the style of system to be operated in a way to deter migrants.
Don't all existing EU residents here effectively get indefinite leave to remain? They aren't being told to leave.
They’re not being told to leave. They’re being told they should never have been let in. As I said, they are being told that they are unwelcome.
Why would they think that? They got here legitimately under the system in place at the time. Now a new system is replacing it, which has no effect on their ability to stay in the UK.
EU citizens in the UK are actually going to get a very sweet deal.
They keep all their rights to live and work in the UK, but they also keep all their rights as EU passport holders, able to move around the EU at will.
After the initial shock, they won't be complaining. They will be in a uniquely positive position.
If only there was a way we could benefit from such a deal for all British citizens...
These restrictions don't seem that massively different from most developed countries, like Canada or Australia, and certainly nowhere near as restrictive as the US.
Funnily enough, these places have huge numbers of people want to move to (and do) every year. And in Canada's case, it definitely ain't for the weather.
Canada and Australia have far higher immigration rates than Britain.
That's what I said....despite having similar "restriction" immigration systems.
Canada and Australia want immigrants. Britain is pulling up the drawbridge.
Canada has extremely tight immigration restrictions.
Does it?
We were recommended to open a development center in Quebec because of how easy it was to bring in people from Canada, the US and Asia. (And there are tonnes of subsidies too. And there's skiing. I still want to go for it, but my colleagues have vetoed it.)
They require English language ability and a skilled qualification to move there for work on a permanent basis. Unskilled workers can only go on a temporary basis, need a job offer and a high school diploma.
That doesn't sound like "extremely tight". It sounds like "welcome to skilled immigrants".
We've just said we're not going to be giving lots of visas to skilled foreigners because British firms should train people up.
This is why I love my £x,000/year compulsory health insurance. It makes foreigners a bit more expensive. It's enough to really discourage low skilled immigration, but it's essentially bureaucracy-free, and it encourages British firms to upskill their employees. But it doesn't stop people from getting someone from abroad if they really need them.
It basically rules out the vast majority of brown and black people around the world. Canada loves to be this beacon of progressivism but the reality is it won't tolerate poor immigrants yearning to be free.
If you've spent any time in the oil sands in Fort McMurray, you'll meet an awful lot of low skilled labour from India, Bangladesh, Nepal, etc.
And presumably they are there on a temporary basis and have high school diplomas.
...I foresee a unilateral abolition of tariffs by the UK...
If that does happens I will feel a lot better. But it does somewhat rely on the Government being economically literate and willing to ignore the electoral disadvantages, and I don't think the Right does that these days.
I've started referring to Boris's party as the "New Populist Conservatives", to distinguish it from previous Conservative strains. The NPC are socially conservative and financially liberal. Given its behavior and the behavior of similar populist conservatives worldwide, I suspect that - unfortunately - they will do the exact opposite to what you propose. They will impose tariffs, blame the Europeans, and reap the electoral awards.
I will be pleased if you are right, but I don't think it'll happen...
And presumably they are there on a temporary basis and have high school diplomas.
Of course.
But you said that Canada has extremely restrictive immigration controls. And now it appears that you barely need more than the ability to speak English or French and have a high school diploma.
I'm struggling with your definition of "restrictive". It seems to be a lot less restrictive than - say - the US. Or the UK. Or Japan.
Anyone wanting to come to the UK to work must have a job offer with a salary threshold of £25,600 – though a salary “floor” of £20,480 will be acceptable in special cases where there might have a skills shortage skills, such as in nursing.
The skills threshold for foreign nationals wanting to work in the UK will be lowered from degree to A-levels or their equivalent.
The cap on the numbers of skilled workers is being scrapped – and a small number of highly skilled workers will be allowed to come in without a job.
Places like Canada you need a degree or a specialist skill to get anywhere near the points, then there are pseudo age restrictions i.e if you are over 35 (i think) you lose a load of points, etc.
It seems the headlines are a lot, lot tougher than the details.
Anyone wanting to come to the UK to work must have a job offer with a salary threshold of £25,600 – though a salary “floor” of £20,480 will be acceptable in special cases where there might have a skills shortage skills, such as in nursing.
The skills threshold for foreign nationals wanting to work in the UK will be lowered from degree to A-levels or their equivalent.
The cap on the numbers of skilled workers is being scrapped – and a small number of highly skilled workers will be allowed to come in without a job.
Places like Canada you need a degree or a specialist skill to get anywhere near the points, then there are pseudo age restrictions i.e if you are over 35 (i think) you lose a load of points, etc.
It seems the headlines are a lot, lot tougher than the details.
Exactly. It's quite a liberal immigration policy, but it is not EU style let-them-all-in.
It is the sort of immigration policy that befits a free trading island nation that needs and wants skilled foreigners, but which is densely populated and simply can't allow a free-for-all.
It will be unpopular with xenophobic BNP loons and foamy, Brexit-loathing Remoaners alike, so it is probably about right.
Labour and Lib Dems already up in arms about this....way to win back the red wall.
Anyone wanting to come to the UK to work must have a job offer with a salary threshold of £25,600 – though a salary “floor” of £20,480 will be acceptable in special cases where there might have a skills shortage skills, such as in nursing.
The skills threshold for foreign nationals wanting to work in the UK will be lowered from degree to A-levels or their equivalent.
The cap on the numbers of skilled workers is being scrapped – and a small number of highly skilled workers will be allowed to come in without a job.
Places like Canada you need a degree or a specialist skill to get anywhere near the points, then there are pseudo age restrictions i.e if you are over 35 (i think) you lose a load of points, etc.
It seems the headlines are a lot, lot tougher than the details.
Exactly. It's quite a liberal immigration policy, but it is not EU style let-them-all-in.
It is the sort of immigration policy that befits a free trading island nation that needs and wants skilled foreigners, but which is densely populated and simply can't allow a free-for-all.
It will be unpopular with xenophobic BNP loons and foamy, Brexit-loathing Remoaners alike, so it is probably about right.
The government's policy has been to talk very tough, and then implement something that looks rather reasonable (even liberal).
What has changed is that Johnson abandoned May's policy of alignment, hence taking the next step down to WTO.
I am surprised that Number 10 are too thick to understand this.
I refer you to my (endless) previous posts. They are not thick. They are doing it deliberately. "Failing and blaming" is electorally popular.
That isn't true though. Regulatory autonomy and ECJ jurisdiction are specifically two of the conditions ruled out to get us to Canada or Korea. You and Foxy are the ones deliberately ignoring what is on the slide. Because you back the EU even when they are being unreasonable, just like most Remainers. And Remainers taking this line will make the EU feel confident in not backing down and prevent a politically tenable deal.
So we will have lost the referendum, failed to vote for EEA+CU, failed to vote for May's deal, and now failed to back a Canada-style deal. We will have lost again and again in this process, but it will be alright because we can blame it on Boris and feel good about ourselves even though we got our worst possible end result.
What has changed is that Johnson abandoned May's policy of alignment, hence taking the next step down to WTO.
I am surprised that Number 10 are too thick to understand this.
I refer you to my (endless) previous posts. They are not thick. They are doing it deliberately. "Failing and blaming" is electorally popular.
That isn't true though. Regulatory autonomy and ECJ jurisdiction are specifically two of the conditions ruled out to get us to Canada or Korea. You and Foxy are the ones deliberately ignoring what is on the slide. Because you back the EU even when they are being unreasonable, just like most Remainers. And Remainers taking this line will make the EU feel confident in not backing down and prevent a politically tenable deal.
So we will have lost the referendum, failed to vote for EEA+CU, failed to vote for May's deal, and now failed to back a Canada-style deal. We will have lost again and again in this process, but it will be alright because we can blame it on Boris and feel good about ourselves even though we got our worst possible end result.
Anyone wanting to come to the UK to work must have a job offer with a salary threshold of £25,600 – though a salary “floor” of £20,480 will be acceptable in special cases where there might have a skills shortage skills, such as in nursing.
The skills threshold for foreign nationals wanting to work in the UK will be lowered from degree to A-levels or their equivalent.
The cap on the numbers of skilled workers is being scrapped – and a small number of highly skilled workers will be allowed to come in without a job.
Places like Canada you need a degree or a specialist skill to get anywhere near the points, then there are pseudo age restrictions i.e if you are over 35 (i think) you lose a load of points, etc.
Yep, it could have been a lot worse. However, there will be sector-specific challenges. There are a lot of jobs in social care that pay less than £20,000 a year outside London. That is one area that is going to require constant monitoring as the need for staff is only going to increase.
Last week in Singapore the PM went on telly and basically told everyone “calm the fuck down”. There are quite irritating restrictions on life here right now, temperature screenings at malls and office buildings etc... but this is a consequence of the Amber alert according to the post SARS protocols. They have been clear that there is a next to zero chance of this alert being raised to Red.
Last year in Singapore 600 people died of influenza. At present there are only 4 in critical care from corona, and all are said to be “doing well”. Singapore has a very tight and well managed system for public health feedback, close population monitoring and swift health testing. Hardly anyone smokes, Chinese medicine is complementary rather than the sole healthcare choice. Air quality is good. And the hospitals are well funded and competently managed.
You have allowed yourself to be infected Eadric. By hysteria. The cure is a cold hard look at the incentives at play in the Chinese Communist Party. Social media videos of dead bodies strewn on hospital floors needed a Big Bad to excuse. If it allows a window to rebase economic data towards the truth then that’s a nice side effect. If it allows the Party to squeeze the cashflow of certain private sector enterprises to either nationalise or shut them, all the better.
Ask yourself this, where are the social media videos of all the dead bodies that couldn’t fit in the morgue of the Diamond Princess?
What has changed is that Johnson abandoned May's policy of alignment, hence taking the next step down to WTO.
I am surprised that Number 10 are too thick to understand this.
I refer you to my (endless) previous posts. They are not thick. They are doing it deliberately. "Failing and blaming" is electorally popular.
That isn't true though. Regulatory autonomy and ECJ jurisdiction are specifically two of the conditions ruled out to get us to Canada or Korea. You and Foxy are the ones deliberately ignoring what is on the slide. Because you back the EU even when they are being unreasonable, just like most Remainers. And Remainers taking this line will make the EU feel confident in not backing down and prevent a politically tenable deal.
So we will have lost the referendum, failed to vote for EEA+CU, failed to vote for May's deal, and now failed to back a Canada-style deal. We will have lost again and again in this process, but it will be alright because we can blame it on Boris and feel good about ourselves even though we got our worst possible end result.
“We”
You are right. It isn't me because I argued for backing CU&SM in the indicative votes. I argued for May's deal. I am arguing now for a Canada deal. While you argued against all of them. And your arguments won out, leaving us in a far more distant relationship, because you are a purist idiot more concerned about feeling good about being sanctimonious while I actually wanted to actually have the better policy option.
Anyone wanting to come to the UK to work must have a job offer with a salary threshold of £25,600 – though a salary “floor” of £20,480 will be acceptable in special cases where there might have a skills shortage skills, such as in nursing.
The skills threshold for foreign nationals wanting to work in the UK will be lowered from degree to A-levels or their equivalent.
The cap on the numbers of skilled workers is being scrapped – and a small number of highly skilled workers will be allowed to come in without a job.
Places like Canada you need a degree or a specialist skill to get anywhere near the points, then there are pseudo age restrictions i.e if you are over 35 (i think) you lose a load of points, etc.
It seems the headlines are a lot, lot tougher than the details.
Exactly. It's quite a liberal immigration policy, but it is not EU style let-them-all-in.
It is the sort of immigration policy that befits a free trading island nation that needs and wants skilled foreigners, but which is densely populated and simply can't allow a free-for-all.
It will be unpopular with xenophobic BNP loons and foamy, Brexit-loathing Remoaners alike, so it is probably about right.
Labour and Lib Dems already up in arms about this....way to win back the red wall.
Perhaps they think £500 per week is too much for a plumber to earn.
Or that they should be able to employ domestics without telling HMRC.
I agree. You would do well to show humility and contrition for your deeply unpleasant behaviour over the last 12-18 months
Since you have seamlessly moved from “anyone who advocates a second referendum before Britain leaves is a traitor to democracy” to “Britain can’t rejoin the EU without a broad consensus (which I will never subscribe to)”, your outstanding hypocrisy is laid bare for all to see.
But since you were entirely happy to fall in behind a campaign that frightened voters into believing that millions of Muslims were poised to descend on Britain if it remained in the EU, that’s all of a piece with your previous behaviour.
Seems to me this points system will give overseas Muslims equal status with Europeans when it comes to opportunities to work in the Uk.
Congrats to Boris eh ?
Who in their right minds is going to come to anti-immigrant bureaucratic “fuck business” Britain? Anyone with any gumption is going to be hightailing it to a country that actually welcomes someone with drive and dynamism.
Another mindless quote.
What do you think is inviting about today’s news if you are a bright young graduate in the EU considering your career options? Rather than jump through endless hoops like a performing poodle at Cruft’s to satisfy a government in thrall to people who think that NEETs can be retrained as rocket scientists, you’re going to go to Germany.
You are just bitter and have no way of knowing how EU citizens and others will see their career prospects in the UK in the future
The government has just put up a big sign reading “GO ELSEWHERE”. I expect the message will be received.
Utter nonsense
But the message is just as clearly heard in other countries and its meaning is clear.
“If you are not going to be a net benefit to this nation, jog on”
What has changed is that Johnson abandoned May's policy of alignment, hence taking the next step down to WTO.
I am surprised that Number 10 are too thick to understand this.
I refer you to my (endless) previous posts. They are not thick. They are doing it deliberately. "Failing and blaming" is electorally popular.
That isn't true though. Regulatory autonomy and ECJ jurisdiction are specifically two of the conditions ruled out to get us to Canada or Korea. You and Foxy are the ones deliberately ignoring what is on the slide. Because you back the EU even when they are being unreasonable, just like most Remainers. And Remainers taking this line will make the EU feel confident in not backing down and prevent a politically tenable deal.
So we will have lost the referendum, failed to vote for EEA+CU, failed to vote for May's deal, and now failed to back a Canada-style deal. We will have lost again and again in this process, but it will be alright because we can blame it on Boris and feel good about ourselves even though we got our worst possible end result.
“We”
You are right. It isn't me because I argued for backing CU&SM in the indicative votes. I argued for May's deal. I am arguing now for a Canada deal. While you argued against all of them. And your arguments won out, leaving us in a far more distant relationship, because you are a purist idiot more concerned about feeling good about being sanctimonious while I actually wanted to actually have the better policy option.
Rejoiners for Boris Johnson is, to say the least, a niche group.
And you’re so wrapped up in your fake persona that you are just telling lies about me now. I consistently argued for Theresa May’s deal as the least bad outcome. But that’s one more apology I’m owed but won’t get from the site’s Leavers.
From here it’s a disaster come what may. I’m candidly pretty disengaged now because the outer limits of Europhobia have yet to be fully explored. I’m morbidly curious where Leavers will go after No Deal. Because it won’t end when Britain crashes out.
Last week in Singapore the PM went on telly and basically told everyone “calm the fuck down”. There are quite irritating restrictions on life here right now, temperature screenings at malls and office buildings etc... but this is a consequence of the Amber alert according to the post SARS protocols. They have been clear that there is a next to zero chance of this alert being raised to Red.
Last year in Singapore 600 people died of influenza. At present there are only 4 in critical care from corona, and all are said to be “doing well”. Singapore has a very tight and well managed system for public health feedback, close population monitoring and swift health testing. Hardly anyone smokes, Chinese medicine is complementary rather than the sole healthcare choice. Air quality is good. And the hospitals are well funded and competently managed.
You have allowed yourself to be infected Eadric. By hysteria. The cure is a cold hard look at the incentives at play in the Chinese Communist Party. Social media videos of dead bodies strewn on hospital floors needed a Big Bad to excuse. If it allows a window to rebase economic data towards the truth then that’s a nice side effect. If it allows the Party to squeeze the cashflow of certain private sector enterprises to either nationalise or shut them, all the better.
Ask yourself this, where are the social media videos of all the dead bodies that couldn’t fit in the morgue of the Diamond Princess?
Interesting.
I do love me a bit of hysteria, that is true.
Tho I also think corona COULD be a genuine 9/11 moment. And I very much hope I am wrong.
I was crapping my pants about this before Chinese New Year. “The policy response was SO extreme, it must mean the virus is far more dangerous than they are telling the world”. I now think the opposite.
Last week in Singapore the PM went on telly and basically told everyone “calm the fuck down”. There are quite irritating restrictions on life here right now, temperature screenings at malls and office buildings etc... but this is a consequence of the Amber alert according to the post SARS protocols. They have been clear that there is a next to zero chance of this alert being raised to Red.
Last year in Singapore 600 people died of influenza. At present there are only 4 in critical care from corona, and all are said to be “doing well”. Singapore has a very tight and well managed system for public health feedback, close population monitoring and swift health testing. Hardly anyone smokes, Chinese medicine is complementary rather than the sole healthcare choice. Air quality is good. And the hospitals are well funded and competently managed.
You have allowed yourself to be infected Eadric. By hysteria. The cure is a cold hard look at the incentives at play in the Chinese Communist Party. Social media videos of dead bodies strewn on hospital floors needed a Big Bad to excuse. If it allows a window to rebase economic data towards the truth then that’s a nice side effect. If it allows the Party to squeeze the cashflow of certain private sector enterprises to either nationalise or shut them, all the better.
Ask yourself this, where are the social media videos of all the dead bodies that couldn’t fit in the morgue of the Diamond Princess?
Interesting.
I do love me a bit of hysteria, that is true.
Tho I also think corona COULD be a genuine 9/11 moment. And I very much hope I am wrong.
Last week in Singapore the PM went on telly and basically told everyone “calm the fuck down”. There are quite irritating restrictions on life here right now, temperature screenings at malls and office buildings etc... but this is a consequence of the Amber alert according to the post SARS protocols. They have been clear that there is a next to zero chance of this alert being raised to Red.
Last year in Singapore 600 people died of influenza. At present there are only 4 in critical care from corona, and all are said to be “doing well”. Singapore has a very tight and well managed system for public health feedback, close population monitoring and swift health testing. Hardly anyone smokes, Chinese medicine is complementary rather than the sole healthcare choice. Air quality is good. And the hospitals are well funded and competently managed.
You have allowed yourself to be infected Eadric. By hysteria. The cure is a cold hard look at the incentives at play in the Chinese Communist Party. Social media videos of dead bodies strewn on hospital floors needed a Big Bad to excuse. If it allows a window to rebase economic data towards the truth then that’s a nice side effect. If it allows the Party to squeeze the cashflow of certain private sector enterprises to either nationalise or shut them, all the better.
Ask yourself this, where are the social media videos of all the dead bodies that couldn’t fit in the morgue of the Diamond Princess?
Interesting.
I do love me a bit of hysteria, that is true.
Tho I also think corona COULD be a genuine 9/11 moment. And I very much hope I am wrong.
Has anyone suggested the theory that the Chinese government are behind it all and are attempting to kill millions of their old / sick / poor because of their upcoming demographic problems ?
Last week in Singapore the PM went on telly and basically told everyone “calm the fuck down”. There are quite irritating restrictions on life here right now, temperature screenings at malls and office buildings etc... but this is a consequence of the Amber alert according to the post SARS protocols. They have been clear that there is a next to zero chance of this alert being raised to Red.
Last year in Singapore 600 people died of influenza. At present there are only 4 in critical care from corona, and all are said to be “doing well”. Singapore has a very tight and well managed system for public health feedback, close population monitoring and swift health testing. Hardly anyone smokes, Chinese medicine is complementary rather than the sole healthcare choice. Air quality is good. And the hospitals are well funded and competently managed.
You have allowed yourself to be infected Eadric. By hysteria. The cure is a cold hard look at the incentives at play in the Chinese Communist Party. Social media videos of dead bodies strewn on hospital floors needed a Big Bad to excuse. If it allows a window to rebase economic data towards the truth then that’s a nice side effect. If it allows the Party to squeeze the cashflow of certain private sector enterprises to either nationalise or shut them, all the better.
Ask yourself this, where are the social media videos of all the dead bodies that couldn’t fit in the morgue of the Diamond Princess?
That is pretty similar to the feedback from the people in our HK office.
Anyone wanting to come to the UK to work must have a job offer with a salary threshold of £25,600 – though a salary “floor” of £20,480 will be acceptable in special cases where there might have a skills shortage skills, such as in nursing.
The skills threshold for foreign nationals wanting to work in the UK will be lowered from degree to A-levels or their equivalent.
The cap on the numbers of skilled workers is being scrapped – and a small number of highly skilled workers will be allowed to come in without a job.
Places like Canada you need a degree or a specialist skill to get anywhere near the points, then there are pseudo age restrictions i.e if you are over 35 (i think) you lose a load of points, etc.
It seems the headlines are a lot, lot tougher than the details.
Exactly. It's quite a liberal immigration policy, but it is not EU style let-them-all-in.
It is the sort of immigration policy that befits a free trading island nation that needs and wants skilled foreigners, but which is densely populated and simply can't allow a free-for-all.
It will be unpopular with xenophobic BNP loons and foamy, Brexit-loathing Remoaners alike, so it is probably about right.
Labour and Lib Dems already up in arms about this....way to win back the red wall.
It is a policy which will harm the social care sector, already one of the biggest domestic problems facing this country.
Trite calls to increase wages ignore the fact that people and local councils are already unable or unwilling to pay existing high fees. If fees are increased even further, how are people going to pay? And what happens to those who cannot?
Boris promised us that he had a plan for social care when he became PM. If this is it his plan seems to be to abolish it.
Tourism is one of Britain’s biggest earners. The hospitality industry is part of that and again this policy harms that. (And anyone who knows anything about hospitality knows that there is a hell of a lot of skill involved in running a profitable restaurant, hotel, pub etc, rather more IMO than in writing offensive rubbish on a blog from a desk in No 10.)
“Fuck business” indeed.
And yet Tory supporters on here continue to worship the ground Boris treads on. It is baffling. Perhaps now that the Corbyn cult seems to be coming to an end, it is time for the Boris cult.
Maybe this is the new rule of British politics: that at any one time one of the main parties must be behaving like a cult.
What has changed is that Johnson abandoned May's policy of alignment, hence taking the next step down to WTO.
I am surprised that Number 10 are too thick to understand this.
I refer you to my (endless) previous posts. They are not thick. They are doing it deliberately. "Failing and blaming" is electorally popular.
That isn't true though. Regulatory autonomy and ECJ jurisdiction are specifically two of the conditions ruled out to get us to Canada or Korea. You and Foxy are the ones deliberately ignoring what is on the slide. Because you back the EU even when they are being unreasonable, just like most Remainers. And Remainers taking this line will make the EU feel confident in not backing down and prevent a politically tenable deal.
So we will have lost the referendum, failed to vote for EEA+CU, failed to vote for May's deal, and now failed to back a Canada-style deal. We will have lost again and again in this process, but it will be alright because we can blame it on Boris and feel good about ourselves even though we got our worst possible end result.
You severely overrate my ability to influence events and you are doing so in a rude manner. I work in an office. My influence on events is literally zero. Stop blaming me for events and stop being rude in doing so.
What has changed is that Johnson abandoned May's policy of alignment, hence taking the next step down to WTO.
I am surprised that Number 10 are too thick to understand this.
I refer you to my (endless) previous posts. They are not thick. They are doing it deliberately. "Failing and blaming" is electorally popular.
That isn't true though. Regulatory autonomy and ECJ jurisdiction are specifically two of the conditions ruled out to get us to Canada or Korea. You and Foxy are the ones deliberately ignoring what is on the slide. Because you back the EU even when they are being unreasonable, just like most Remainers. And Remainers taking this line will make the EU feel confident in not backing down and prevent a politically tenable deal.
So we will have lost the referendum, failed to vote for EEA+CU, failed to vote for May's deal, and now failed to back a Canada-style deal. We will have lost again and again in this process, but it will be alright because we can blame it on Boris and feel good about ourselves even though we got our worst possible end result.
“We”
You are right. It isn't me because I argued for backing CU&SM in the indicative votes. I argued for May's deal. I am arguing now for a Canada deal. While you argued against all of them. And your arguments won out, leaving us in a far more distant relationship, because you are a purist idiot more concerned about feeling good about being sanctimonious while I actually wanted to actually have the better policy option.
Rejoiners for Boris Johnson is, to say the least, a niche group.
And you’re so wrapped up in your fake persona that you are just telling lies about me now. I consistently argued for Theresa May’s deal as the least bad outcome. But that’s one more apology I’m owed but won’t get from the site’s Leavers.
From here it’s a disaster come what may. I’m candidly pretty disengaged now because the outer limits of Europhobia have yet to be fully explored. I’m morbidly curious where Leavers will go after No Deal. Because it won’t end when Britain crashes out.
Your endless self pity is not a good look for such a clever man. Please get over it.
Self-pity? No. Disgust for the limitless delusion of Leavers who decided that race-baiting and trashing the nation’s institutions was worth securing their mad obsession, and who continue to stoke each other up with steadily more extreme requirements for “true Brexit”? Yes.
The 538 model is interesting, but it does assume everyone stays in.
If Warren dropped out today and endorsed Sanders, then it would basically be all over.
Likewise, if Buttigieg and Klobuchar called it quits and endorsed Bloomberg, then it would be very, very interesting the other way. (DIsclaimer: I don't think that likely.)
What has changed is that Johnson abandoned May's policy of alignment, hence taking the next step down to WTO.
I am surprised that Number 10 are too thick to understand this.
I refer you to my (endless) previous posts. They are not thick. They are doing it deliberately. "Failing and blaming" is electorally popular.
That isn't true though. Regulatory autonomy and ECJ jurisdiction are specifically two of the conditions ruled out to get us to Canada or Korea. You and Foxy are the ones deliberately ignoring what is on the slide. Because you back the EU even when they are being unreasonable, just like most Remainers. And Remainers taking this line will make the EU feel confident in not backing down and prevent a politically tenable deal.
So we will have lost the referendum, failed to vote for EEA+CU, failed to vote for May's deal, and now failed to back a Canada-style deal. We will have lost again and again in this process, but it will be alright because we can blame it on Boris and feel good about ourselves even though we got our worst possible end result.
“We”
You are right. It isn't me because I argued for backing CU&SM in the indicative votes. I argued for May's deal. I am arguing now for a Canada deal. While you argued against all of them. And your arguments won out, leaving us in a far more distant relationship, because you are a purist idiot more concerned about feeling good about being sanctimonious while I actually wanted to actually have the better policy option.
Rejoiners for Boris Johnson is, to say the least, a niche group.
And you’re so wrapped up in your fake persona that you are just telling lies about me now. I consistently argued for Theresa May’s deal as the least bad outcome. But that’s one more apology I’m owed but won’t get from the site’s Leavers.
From here it’s a disaster come what may. I’m candidly pretty disengaged now because the outer limits of Europhobia have yet to be fully explored. I’m morbidly curious where Leavers will go after No Deal. Because it won’t end when Britain crashes out.
I voted for the Lib Dems, said so before the election, and argued the prorogation and lack of apology for homophobia meant decent people shouldn't vote for Boris. So please, spare me the santimonium.
What has changed is that Johnson abandoned May's policy of alignment, hence taking the next step down to WTO.
I am surprised that Number 10 are too thick to understand this.
I refer you to my (endless) previous posts. They are not thick. They are doing it deliberately. "Failing and blaming" is electorally popular.
That isn't true though. Regulatory autonomy and ECJ jurisdiction are specifically two of the conditions ruled out to get us to Canada or Korea. You and Foxy are the ones deliberately ignoring what is on the slide. Because you back the EU even when they are being unreasonable, just like most Remainers. And Remainers taking this line will make the EU feel confident in not backing down and prevent a politically tenable deal.
So we will have lost the referendum, failed to vote for EEA+CU, failed to vote for May's deal, and now failed to back a Canada-style deal. We will have lost again and again in this process, but it will be alright because we can blame it on Boris and feel good about ourselves even though we got our worst possible end result.
You severely overrate my ability to influence events and you are doing so in a rude manner. I work in an office. My influence on events is literally zero. Stop blaming me for events and stop being rude in doing so.
Saying you are deliberately ignoring what is on the slide is being rude? So tell me, does the slide already mention regulatory autonomy and ECJ jurisdiction or does it not?
What has changed is that Johnson abandoned May's policy of alignment, hence taking the next step down to WTO.
I am surprised that Number 10 are too thick to understand this.
I refer you to my (endless) previous posts. They are not thick. They are doing it deliberately. "Failing and blaming" is electorally popular.
That isn't true though. Regulatory autonomy and ECJ jurisdiction are specifically two of the conditions ruled out to get us to Canada or Korea. You and Foxy are the ones deliberately ignoring what is on the slide. Because you back the EU even when they are being unreasonable, just like most Remainers. And Remainers taking this line will make the EU feel confident in not backing down and prevent a politically tenable deal.
So we will have lost the referendum, failed to vote for EEA+CU, failed to vote for May's deal, and now failed to back a Canada-style deal. We will have lost again and again in this process, but it will be alright because we can blame it on Boris and feel good about ourselves even though we got our worst possible end result.
“We”
You are right. It isn't me because I argued for backing CU&SM in the indicative votes. I argued for May's deal. I am arguing now for a Canada deal. While you argued against all of them. And your arguments won out, leaving us in a far more distant relationship, because you are a purist idiot more concerned about feeling good about being sanctimonious while I actually wanted to actually have the better policy option.
They really messed up. Like the Tory Spartans, they refused compromise and demanded purity, with the chance of losing everything. A foolish strategy doomed to absolute failure for one side. How badly they’ve failed is really becoming apparent. The chance to be firmly in the EU’s orbit was in reach. Their gimp, locked in the European dungeon, at their mercy.
These amazing negotiators at the EU managed to agree a deal so punitive and offensive that the government of the day suffered a parliamentary loss unrivalled for a century.
We now have a strategy that has accepted that regulatory alignment, free movement and future compliance will be demanded for deeper trading relationship. And they’ve just been told to go and fack themselves.
You think that anyone in Brussels thinks that Boris Johnson is listening to sane Remain voices? Wakey wakey.
God no. I do however think that the EU hasn’t yet realised that the current UK government will actually walk away. They won’t realise this until the June deadline, and even then not until their ‘friends’ in UK politics and media make it clear to them.
The current UK government is the one that capitulated to putting the principle of an Irish Sea customs border in UK law. Why would they think it is serious about walking away? In fact Boris Johnson gives no impression of being serious about any of it. It's all theatre to manage domestic politics and play the Eurosceptic hardman, just like proroguing parliament was.
Yes, Boris will agree to anything that doesn't harm his immediate prospects. An economic calamity would. Capitulation to the EU less so - Boris will calculate there's still enough Boris love out there from him to get away with it. And he's probably right.
Boris can sell complete capitulation as total victory as he gets to brag about proving the doubters and doomsters wrong, and he can point to the absence of checks in the Irish Sea as proof that he was right all along.
Nailed on. Johnson will declare victory and move on, just as America did in Vietnam in 1973.
The public is not a homogeneous mass on this. Half of them may swallow it, but the other half will point out the flaws.
I think the Leavers would resign if Boris now accepted rule-taking and ECJ oversight.
Leavers don't understand the details. I wouldn't worry.
This is true of Leaver voters, but not of Leaver MP's and ministers.
But what are they going to do... Provoke a Tory leadership challenge? Support a VoNC in the Government?
Either would take us back to the chaos of last autumn and I just cannot see it. Boris is surely safe to push through whatever type of Brexit he wants.
Last week in Singapore the PM went on telly and basically told everyone “calm the fuck down”. There are quite irritating restrictions on life here right now, temperature screenings at malls and office buildings etc... but this is a consequence of the Amber alert according to the post SARS protocols. They have been clear that there is a next to zero chance of this alert being raised to Red.
Last year in Singapore 600 people died of influenza. At present there are only 4 in critical care from corona, and all are said to be “doing well”. Singapore has a very tight and well managed system for public health feedback, close population monitoring and swift health testing. Hardly anyone smokes, Chinese medicine is complementary rather than the sole healthcare choice. Air quality is good. And the hospitals are well funded and competently managed.
You have allowed yourself to be infected Eadric. By hysteria. The cure is a cold hard look at the incentives at play in the Chinese Communist Party. Social media videos of dead bodies strewn on hospital floors needed a Big Bad to excuse. If it allows a window to rebase economic data towards the truth then that’s a nice side effect. If it allows the Party to squeeze the cashflow of certain private sector enterprises to either nationalise or shut them, all the better.
Ask yourself this, where are the social media videos of all the dead bodies that couldn’t fit in the morgue of the Diamond Princess?
I believe Royal Caribbean is saving them for their next big marketing campaign.
What has changed is that Johnson abandoned May's policy of alignment, hence taking the next step down to WTO.
I am surprised that Number 10 are too thick to understand this.
I refer you to my (endless) previous posts. They are not thick. They are doing it deliberately. "Failing and blaming" is electorally popular.
That isn't true though. Regulatory autonomy and ECJ jurisdiction are specifically two of the conditions ruled out to get us to Canada or Korea. You and Foxy are the ones deliberately ignoring what is on the slide. Because you back the EU even when they are being unreasonable, just like most Remainers. And Remainers taking this line will make the EU feel confident in not backing down and prevent a politically tenable deal.
So we will have lost the referendum, failed to vote for EEA+CU, failed to vote for May's deal, and now failed to back a Canada-style deal. We will have lost again and again in this process, but it will be alright because we can blame it on Boris and feel good about ourselves even though we got our worst possible end result.
You severely overrate my ability to influence events and you are doing so in a rude manner. I work in an office. My influence on events is literally zero. Stop blaming me for events and stop being rude in doing so.
Saying you are deliberately ignoring what is on the slide is being rude? So tell me, does the slide already mention regulatory autonomy and ECJ jurisdiction or does it not?
No. Blaming me for events is being rude ("Remainers taking this line will make the EU feel confident"). Inferring motive without evidence ("deliberately ignoring") is being rude.
What has changed is that Johnson abandoned May's policy of alignment, hence taking the next step down to WTO.
I am surprised that Number 10 are too thick to understand this.
I refer you to my (endless) previous posts. They are not thick. They are doing it deliberately. "Failing and blaming" is electorally popular.
That isn't true though. Regulatory autonomy and ECJ jurisdiction are specifically two of the conditions ruled out to get us to Canada or Korea. You and Foxy are the ones deliberately ignoring what is on the slide. Because you back the EU even when they are being unreasonable, just like most Remainers. And Remainers taking this line will make the EU feel confident in not backing down and prevent a politically tenable deal.
So we will have lost the referendum, failed to vote for EEA+CU, failed to vote for May's deal, and now failed to back a Canada-style deal. We will have lost again and again in this process, but it will be alright because we can blame it on Boris and feel good about ourselves even though we got our worst possible end result.
You severely overrate my ability to influence events and you are doing so in a rude manner. I work in an office. My influence on events is literally zero. Stop blaming me for events and stop being rude in doing so.
Saying you are deliberately ignoring what is on the slide is being rude? So tell me, does the slide already mention regulatory autonomy and ECJ jurisdiction or does it not?
No. Blaming me for events is being rude ("Remainers taking this line will make the EU feel confident"). Inferring motive without evidence ("deliberately ignoring") is being rude.
I said Remainers as a collective, not you individually. And in the very post I was referring to, you were inferring motive without evidence ("They are doing this deliberately").
I notice you still dodged the main question.
So tell me, does the slide already mention regulatory autonomy and ECJ jurisdiction or does it not?
What has changed is that Johnson abandoned May's policy of alignment, hence taking the next step down to WTO.
I am surprised that Number 10 are too thick to understand this.
I refer you to my (endless) previous posts. They are not thick. They are doing it deliberately. "Failing and blaming" is electorally popular.
That isn't true though. ossible end result.
“We”
You are right. It isn't me because I argued for backing CU&SM in the indicative votes. I argued for May's deal. I am arguing now for a Canada deal. While you argued against all of them. And your arguments won out, leaving us in a far more distant relationship, because you are a purist idiot more concerned about feeling good about being sanctimonious while I actually wanted to actually have the better policy option.
Rejoiners for Boris Johnson is, to say the least, a niche group.
And you’re so wrapped up in your fake persona that you are just telling lies about me now. I consistently argued for Theresa May’s deal as the least bad outcome. But that’s one more apology I’m owed but won’t get from the site’s Leavers.
From here it’s a disaster come what may. I’m candidly pretty disengaged now because the outer limits of Europhobia have yet to be fully explored. I’m morbidly curious where Leavers will go after No Deal. Because it won’t end when Britain crashes out.
Your endless self pity is not a good look for such a clever man. Please get over it.
Self-pity? No. Disgust for the limitless delusion of Leavers who decided that race-baiting and trashing the nation’s institutions was worth securing their mad obsession, and who continue to stoke each other up with steadily more extreme requirements for “true Brexit”? Yes.
Stop. You are not yourself. Have a glass of Tokay, summon up your inner Briton, then proceed calmly and anew.
My new start, fortunately, allows me to turn my back on the rest of the country. Its steady and chronic deterioration is a great shame. But it is a problem that for the most part I can isolate myself from. The things that I most valued in it have already been defaced and degraded. It is only going to get worse, as Leavers’ mania intensifies. It has some way yet to go before it burns out.
What has changed is that Johnson abandoned May's policy of alignment, hence taking the next step down to WTO.
I am surprised that Number 10 are too thick to understand this.
I refer you to my (endless) previous posts. They are not thick. They are doing it deliberately. "Failing and blaming" is electorally popular.
That isn't true though. Regulatory autonomy and ECJ jurisdiction are specifically two of the conditions ruled out to get us to Canada or Korea. You and Foxy are the ones deliberately ignoring what is on the slide. Because you back the EU even when they are being unreasonable, just like most Remainers. And Remainers taking this line will make the EU feel confident in not backing down and prevent a politically tenable deal.
So we will have lost the referendum, failed to vote for EEA+CU, failed to vote for May's deal, and now failed to back a Canada-style deal. We will have lost again and again in this process, but it will be alright because we can blame it on Boris and feel good about ourselves even though we got our worst possible end result.
You severely overrate my ability to influence events and you are doing so in a rude manner. I work in an office. My influence on events is literally zero. Stop blaming me for events and stop being rude in doing so.
Saying you are deliberately ignoring what is on the slide is being rude? So tell me, does the slide already mention regulatory autonomy and ECJ jurisdiction or does it not?
No. Blaming me for events is being rude ("Remainers taking this line will make the EU feel confident"). Inferring motive without evidence ("deliberately ignoring") is being rude.
I said Remainers as a collective, not you individually. And in the very post I was referring to, you were inferring motive without evidence ("They are doing this deliberately").
I notice you still dodged the main question.
So tell me, does the slide already mention regulatory autonomy and ECJ jurisdiction or does it not?
Damn right I dodged the main question. This is not a Newsnight interview. If you have any sense of propriety you should reflect on your rudeness. You have been shamelessly rude to me tonight and I do not wish to further interact with you tonight. Goodnight.
Anyone wanting to come to the UK to work must have a job offer with a salary threshold of £25,600 – though a salary “floor” of £20,480 will be acceptable in special cases where there might have a skills shortage skills, such as in nursing.
The skills threshold for foreign nationals wanting to work in the UK will be lowered from degree to A-levels or their equivalent.
The cap on the numbers of skilled workers is being scrapped – and a small number of highly skilled workers will be allowed to come in without a job.
Places like Canada you need a degree or a specialist skill to get anywhere near the points, then there are pseudo age restrictions i.e if you are over 35 (i think) you lose a load of points, etc.
It seems the headlines are a lot, lot tougher than the details.
Exactly. It's quite a liberal immigration policy, but it is not EU style let-them-all-in.
It is the sort of immigration policy that befits a free trading island nation that needs and wants skilled foreigners, but which is densely populated and simply can't allow a free-for-all.
It will be unpopular with xenophobic BNP loons and foamy, Brexit-loathing Remoaners alike, so it is probably about right.
Labour and Lib Dems already up in arms about this....way to win back the red wall.
The actual article written by the Guardian's economics editor, Larry Elliot, is completely in contradiction with the knee jerk headline written by the subs
The imbecile headline is this:
"Points-based plan makes it hard for low-skilled migrants to work – it pulls up the drawbridge rather than takes back control"
Did the subs even read what was written? It seems not. They just leapt to their favoured conclusion.
Because, at the end of the article, Elliot writes this:
"But taking back control is not the same as pulling up the drawbridge. Ministers believe voters do not object to immigration as such; they merely want the government to be able to regulate the numbers."
Hence a fairly liberal new immigration policy.
Not surprised they changed the headline, Elliot is the Guardian's token Brexiteer.
What has changed is that Johnson abandoned May's policy of alignment, hence taking the next step down to WTO.
I am surprised that Number 10 are too thick to understand this.
I refer you to my (endless) previous posts. They are not thick. They are doing it deliberately. "Failing and blaming" is electorally popular.
.
You severely overrate my ability to influence events and you are doing so in a rude manner. I work in an office. My influence on events is literally zero. Stop blaming me for events and stop being rude in doing so.
Saying you are deliberately ignoring what is on the slide is being rude? So tell me, does the slide already mention regulatory autonomy and ECJ jurisdiction or does it not?
No. Blaming me for events is being rude ("Remainers taking this line will make the EU feel confident"). Inferring motive without evidence ("deliberately ignoring") is being rude.
I said Remainers as a collective, not you individually. And in the very post I was referring to, you were inferring motive without evidence ("They are doing this deliberately").
I notice you still dodged the main question.
So tell me, does the slide already mention regulatory autonomy and ECJ jurisdiction or does it not?
Damn right I dodged the main question. This is not a Newsnight interview. If you have any sense of propriety you should reflect on your rudeness. You have been shamelessly rude to me tonight and I do not wish to further interact with you tonight. Goodnight.
You were pinned down in your terrible argument so you are resorting to complaining about rudeness for the exact thing you were doing. And then flouncing off when called out for that. My conscience is clean. You should go away and examine your intellectual dishonesty.
What has changed is that Johnson abandoned May's policy of alignment, hence taking the next step down to WTO.
I am surprised that Number 10 are too thick to understand this.
I refer you to my (endless) previous posts. They are not thick. They are doing it deliberately. "Failing and blaming" is electorally popular.
.
You severely overrate my ability to influence events and you are doing so in a rude manner. I work in an office. My influence on events is literally zero. Stop blaming me for events and stop being rude in doing so.
Saying you are deliberately ignoring what is on the slide is being rude? So tell me, does the slide already mention regulatory autonomy and ECJ jurisdiction or does it not?
No. Blaming me for events is being rude ("Remainers taking this line will make the EU feel confident"). Inferring motive without evidence ("deliberately ignoring") is being rude.
I said Remainers as a collective, not you individually. And in the very post I was referring to, you were inferring motive without evidence ("They are doing this deliberately").
I notice you still dodged the main question.
So tell me, does the slide already mention regulatory autonomy and ECJ jurisdiction or does it not?
Damn right I dodged the main question. This is not a Newsnight interview. If you have any sense of propriety you should reflect on your rudeness. You have been shamelessly rude to me tonight and I do not wish to further interact with you tonight. Goodnight.
You were pinned down in your terrible argument so you are resorting to complaining about rudeness for the exact thing you were doing. And then flouncing off when called out for that. My conscience is clean. You should go away and examine your intellectual dishonesty.
You are right. It isn't me because I argued for backing CU&SM in the indicative votes. I argued for May's deal. I am arguing now for a Canada deal. While you argued against all of them. And your arguments won out, leaving us in a far more distant relationship, because you are a purist idiot more concerned about feeling good about being sanctimonious while I actually wanted to actually have the better policy option.
Rejoiners for Boris Johnson is, to say the least, a niche group.
And you’re son’t end when Britain crashes out.
Your endless self pity is not a good look for such a clever man. Please get over it.
Self-pity? No. Disgust for the limitless delusion of Leavers who decided that race-baiting and trashing the nation’s institutions was worth securing their mad obsession, and who continue to stoke each other up with steadily more extreme requirements for “true Brexit”? Yes.
Stop. You are not yourself. Have a glass of Tokay, summon up your inner Briton, then proceed calmly and anew.
My new start, fortunately, allows me to turn my back on the rest of the country. Its steady and chronic deterioration is a great shame. But it is a problem that for the most part I can isolate myself from. The things that I most valued in it have already been defaced and degraded. It is only going to get worse, as Leavers’ mania intensifies. It has some way yet to go before it burns out.
To be honest, you just sound a bit demented. Sorry.
I sincerely hope all goes well for you and your partner.
And you appal me with your pawky cheerleading of an endeavour founded on race-baiting, pursued through trashing every civic institution in the country - and for what? To indulge a collective pathological and visceral hatred of an international institution.
At this late stage of this process the country, famed for tolerance, is irretrievably divided, isolated, diminished and confused. And still Leavers want to wreak yet more chaos, dissatisfied that they have left two stones of the country’s reputation standing and wanting to salt the earth to make any return impossible.
What has changed is that Johnson abandoned May's policy of alignment, hence taking the next step down to WTO.
I am surprised that Number 10 are too thick to understand this.
I refer you to my (endless) previous posts. They are not thick. They are doing it deliberately. "Failing and blaming" is electorally popular.
.
You severely overrate my ability to influence events and you are doing so in a rude manner. I work in an office. My influence on events is literally zero. Stop blaming me for events and stop being rude in doing so.
Saying you are deliberately ignoring what is on the slide is being rude? So tell me, does the slide already mention regulatory autonomy and ECJ jurisdiction or does it not?
No. Blaming me for events is being rude ("Remainers taking this line will make the EU feel confident"). Inferring motive without evidence ("deliberately ignoring") is being rude.
I said Remainers as a collective, not you individually. And in the very post I was referring to, you were inferring motive without evidence ("They are doing this deliberately").
I notice you still dodged the main question.
So tell me, does the slide already mention regulatory autonomy and ECJ jurisdiction or does it not?
Damn right I dodged the main question. This is not a Newsnight interview. If you have any sense of propriety you should reflect on your rudeness. You have been shamelessly rude to me tonight and I do not wish to further interact with you tonight. Goodnight.
You were pinned down in your terrible argument so you are resorting to complaining about rudeness for the exact thing you were doing. And then flouncing off when called out for that. My conscience is clean. You should go away and examine your intellectual dishonesty.
No.
Just admit you were wrong. You rushed to defend the EU and concocted an argument too quickly that turned out to be wildly incorrect. The slide showed that, in the EU's view, regulatory autonomy meant a Canada or a Korea deal. The EU is now going back on that position for its own political reasons. It is ok to just admit it.
I suppose I would feel pretty bitter if I woke up one day to find my nationhood and sense of identity had been taken away from me. For example if the UK became a provincial authority of the United States of Europe.
There aren’t many of them in Britain but I guess there are some whose sense of national self identity was that of “EU Citizen”. That sucks for you guys, hope you feel better in time because it must feel terrible right now. Doesn’t do much good throwing rocks at each other in the meantime.
And presumably they are there on a temporary basis and have high school diplomas.
Of course.
But you said that Canada has extremely restrictive immigration controls. And now it appears that you barely need more than the ability to speak English or French and have a high school diploma.
I'm struggling with your definition of "restrictive". It seems to be a lot less restrictive than - say - the US. Or the UK. Or Japan.
I guess it's more restrictive than Dubai.
Ha, Dubai is getting much more difficult now. Unskilled workers have about £2k in visa fees and mandatory private health insurance, with employer also responsible for accommodation. For skilled workers, degrees and professional qualifications need to be “attested” (which can take months) and you have to interview a number of local Arabs before offering the job to an expatriate. Setting up your own business is expensive, and depending on the nature of the business often requires a local partner shareholder.
I suppose I would feel pretty bitter if I woke up one day to find my nationhood and sense of identity had been taken away from me. For example if the UK became a provincial authority of the United States of Europe.
There aren’t many of them in Britain but I guess there are some whose sense of national self identity was that of “EU Citizen”. That sucks for you guys, hope you feel better in time because it must feel terrible right now. Doesn’t do much good throwing rocks at each other in the meantime.
It’s nothing to do with national self-identity. It’s the appalling realisation that a large body of the population is willing to and has trashed every civic institution in pursuit of a mad obsession. What’s been taken away is any sense that Britain is a country where decency and moderation wins out. It’s now a country where people like you enthusiastically fall into line behind xenophobic lies and look to impose a destructive Brexit on the rest of us. One day you will realise just how disgustingly you and other Leavers have behaved. In the meantime, the country continues to degrade.
Comments
We've just said we're not going to be giving lots of visas to skilled foreigners because British firms should train people up.
This is why I love my £x,000/year compulsory health insurance. It makes foreigners a bit more expensive. It's enough to really discourage low skilled immigration, but it's essentially bureaucracy-free, and it encourages British firms to upskill their employees. But it doesn't stop people from getting someone from abroad if they really need them.
Those sorts of telling people they are unwelcome ?
The poor underlying public health in provincial China is certainly a factor in higher mortality in Hubei. But so too is the competence of the government there.
Don’t be dazzled by the bright lights of Pudong. If you’ve ever been to interior provinces like Hunan, Henan, Hubei etc... you’ll know that the Chinese economic miracle has a long way to run. And if you’ve ever had commercial dealing with the communist party’s business proxies, you also know that Xi’s anti corruption and anti incompetence drive hasn’t yet scratched the surface.
Eadric you can chill out. A Matt Damon global disaster movie this is not. It’s more like Katrina. The extreme policy response is to spare the blushes of the communist party for letting Wuhan’s health system collapse, in the face of a disease no more dangerous or impactful than influenza (which kills tens of thousands and hospitalises hundreds of thousands a year globally). Everyone else has imperfect info so for safety first, have taken their policy lead from the Chinese. And it’s that which will now cause a 2020 recession, evens money I reckon.
Anyone wanting to come to the UK to work must have a job offer with a salary threshold of £25,600 – though a salary “floor” of £20,480 will be acceptable in special cases where there might have a skills shortage skills, such as in nursing.
The skills threshold for foreign nationals wanting to work in the UK will be lowered from degree to A-levels or their equivalent.
The cap on the numbers of skilled workers is being scrapped – and a small number of highly skilled workers will be allowed to come in without a job.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/feb/18/uk-to-close-door-to-non-english-speakers-and-unskilled-workers
Places like Canada you need a degree or a specialist skill to get anywhere near the points, then there are pseudo age restrictions i.e if you are over 35 (i think) you lose a load of points, etc.
I am surprised that Number 10 are too thick to understand this.
I've started referring to Boris's party as the "New Populist Conservatives", to distinguish it from previous Conservative strains. The NPC are socially conservative and financially liberal. Given its behavior and the behavior of similar populist conservatives worldwide, I suspect that - unfortunately - they will do the exact opposite to what you propose. They will impose tariffs, blame the Europeans, and reap the electoral awards.
I will be pleased if you are right, but I don't think it'll happen...
But you said that Canada has extremely restrictive immigration controls. And now it appears that you barely need more than the ability to speak English or French and have a high school diploma.
I'm struggling with your definition of "restrictive". It seems to be a lot less restrictive than - say - the US. Or the UK. Or Japan.
I guess it's more restrictive than Dubai.
Anybody who wants to hire a Lithuanian nanny will have to pay them £500 a week – and make sure the taxman knows about it.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/feb/18/the-new-uk-immigration-rules-tell-employers-to-suck-it-up
And, for the record, you should also tell the taxman if you have a Liverpudlian nanny, and you should be paying employer's NI.
But don't tell anyone.
So we will have lost the referendum, failed to vote for EEA+CU, failed to vote for May's deal, and now failed to back a Canada-style deal. We will have lost again and again in this process, but it will be alright because we can blame it on Boris and feel good about ourselves even though we got our worst possible end result.
I also like the Guardian assumption that 'the self-employed Polish plumber will be a thing of the past'.
Clearly they don't think that self-employed plumbers should earn as much as £500 per week.
Last year in Singapore 600 people died of influenza. At present there are only 4 in critical care from corona, and all are said to be “doing well”. Singapore has a very tight and well managed system for public health feedback, close population monitoring and swift health testing. Hardly anyone smokes, Chinese medicine is complementary rather than the sole healthcare choice. Air quality is good. And the hospitals are well funded and competently managed.
You have allowed yourself to be infected Eadric. By hysteria. The cure is a cold hard look at the incentives at play in the Chinese Communist Party. Social media videos of dead bodies strewn on hospital floors needed a Big Bad to excuse. If it allows a window to rebase economic data towards the truth then that’s a nice side effect. If it allows the Party to squeeze the cashflow of certain private sector enterprises to either nationalise or shut them, all the better.
Ask yourself this, where are the social media videos of all the dead bodies that couldn’t fit in the morgue of the Diamond Princess?
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/greece-gets-elgin-marbles-included-in-eu-trade-deal-demands-sz5vdh5wd
The parties should address issues relating to the return or restitution of unlawfully removed cultural objects to their country of origin.
Or that they should be able to employ domestics without telling HMRC.
And you’re so wrapped up in your fake persona that you are just telling lies about me now. I consistently argued for Theresa May’s deal as the least bad outcome. But that’s one more apology I’m owed but won’t get from the site’s Leavers.
From here it’s a disaster come what may. I’m candidly pretty disengaged now because the outer limits of Europhobia have yet to be fully explored. I’m morbidly curious where Leavers will go after No Deal. Because it won’t end when Britain crashes out.
Trite calls to increase wages ignore the fact that people and local councils are already unable or unwilling to pay existing high fees. If fees are increased even further, how are people going to pay? And what happens to those who cannot?
Boris promised us that he had a plan for social care when he became PM. If this is it his plan seems to be to abolish it.
Tourism is one of Britain’s biggest earners. The hospitality industry is part of that and again this policy harms that. (And anyone who knows anything about hospitality knows that there is a hell of a lot of skill involved in running a profitable restaurant, hotel, pub etc, rather more IMO than in writing offensive rubbish on a blog from a desk in No 10.)
“Fuck business” indeed.
And yet Tory supporters on here continue to worship the ground Boris treads on. It is baffling. Perhaps now that the Corbyn cult seems to be coming to an end, it is time for the Boris cult.
Maybe this is the new rule of British politics: that at any one time one of the main parties must be behaving like a cult.
If Warren dropped out today and endorsed Sanders, then it would basically be all over.
Likewise, if Buttigieg and Klobuchar called it quits and endorsed Bloomberg, then it would be very, very interesting the other way. (DIsclaimer: I don't think that likely.)
How badly they’ve failed is really becoming apparent. The chance to be firmly in the EU’s orbit was in reach. Their gimp, locked in the European dungeon, at their mercy.
These amazing negotiators at the EU managed to agree a deal so punitive and offensive that the government of the day suffered a parliamentary loss unrivalled for a century.
We now have a strategy that has accepted that regulatory alignment, free movement and future compliance will be demanded for deeper trading relationship. And they’ve just been told to go and fack themselves.
I notice you still dodged the main question.
So tell me, does the slide already mention regulatory autonomy and ECJ jurisdiction or does it not?
At this late stage of this process the country, famed for tolerance, is irretrievably divided, isolated, diminished and confused. And still Leavers want to wreak yet more chaos, dissatisfied that they have left two stones of the country’s reputation standing and wanting to salt the earth to make any return impossible.
Unfortunately, we're not much further on in knowing which parties will make up the next Dáil coalition.
What we do know is, Alan Kelly looks set to be the next Irish Labour Leader.
There aren’t many of them in Britain but I guess there are some whose sense of national self identity was that of “EU Citizen”. That sucks for you guys, hope you feel better in time because it must feel terrible right now. Doesn’t do much good throwing rocks at each other in the meantime.