Should the UK remain a member of the EU

[Cardie]

I'd say 'unbelievable' but it isn't...

 

Not quite as unbelievable as people believing we have uncontrolled immigration thrust upon us by the EU. 

[FanchesterCity]

50% of out immigration has been entirely under our control, and the fact that we've failed to control it is nobody's fault but out own.

Many people arrive on our shores perfectly legally, but stay longer than they are supposed to, at that point, they become illegal immigrants, and we have a very poor system for keeping track of those people. We don't even count the numbers leaving and measure the disparity between those who arrived - ergo knowing how many are still here.

 

Regardless of people's views on immigration, the fact that he has a poor system of control only serves to suggest it won't get any better by leaving the EU and 'regaining control'.

Furthermore, the border controls don't just switch on like a light - they need to be staffed, and better systems put in place - which costs time and money. Who will pay for this?

 

'Regain Control' is a wonderful political soundbite, but it only works if you're capable of exerting that control, and nothing about our border control in the last 20 years suggests we're particularly adept at it.

 

You need only visit the USA to get a feel for what stringent border control is about, and we've never been at that standard.

[dennis tooth]

He's only liberal on the rich elites and big business/financial sector, on matters related to people at the bottom of society he is conservative to the maximum. Or neolib

[FanchesterCity]

Yes containerisation had its hand but because the uk started trading with the eu east coast ports where favoured and got invetsment while liverpool didnt. It still lead to the mass unemployment with dockers losing their jobs.

 

Peel Holdings have now invested in a deep sea container terminal in liverpool which has nothing to do with the eu.

 

Ask yourself this...

 

What did you think might happen to a port that had previously thrived during the industrial revolution (and earlier) but was now geographically far less expedient a port?

 

Did you think people would ship goods to mainland Europe via the UK?

 

Rotterdam was always going to happen, either there or somewhere else on mainland Europe's coast. Liverpool wasn't the only European port to suffer.

If it had been MY money and MY responsibility to invest it for the good of Europe, I'd not have invested in Liverpool either. 

 

Rotterdam was already the world's biggest port by the early 60's and the writing was on the wall for many ports across Europe.

 

You can't possibly blame trading with Europe as the reason why dockers lost their jobs, and you massively understate the role containerisation played (another reason for Rotterdam's success - as it was already geared up for containerisation, modern and efficient and the need for liquid bulk by mainland Europe was immense. Even today, liquid bulk is probably at least half of the imports at Rotterdam.

 

Even if the UK elected never to trade with Europe, and only with the Americas, there's still no guarantee Liverpool would have remained the port of choice, and no nation can have a trade policy that's aimed at sustaining a port.

[dennis tooth]

It doesn't have to be a contradiction. You could have a system where each part of government is democratically elected via the workers from the industry that corresponds with the position in government, and subject to instant recall if anything goes wrong. You could also have each position be on a mandatory revolving basis, so that you don't get people settled in government and losing touch with the rest of the country.

Yeah we should get to say not who is in charge but if we even want anyone in charge at all. As I've repeated endlessly representative democracy is representative democracy. It's not democracy a totally different entity which requires public participation to give us a day to vote every five years. Lazily claiming we live in a democracy doesn't change that truth anymore than when they claim democracy in north korea.

[Barrington Womble]

 

 

50% of out immigration has been entirely under our control, and the fact that we've failed to control it is nobody's fault but out own.

Many people arrive on our shores perfectly legally, but stay longer than they are supposed to, at that point, they become illegal immigrants, and we have a very poor system for keeping track of those people. We don't even count the numbers leaving and measure the disparity between those who arrived - ergo knowing how many are still here.

 

Regardless of people's views on immigration, the fact that he has a poor system of control only serves to suggest it won't get any better by leaving the EU and 'regaining control'.

Furthermore, the border controls don't just switch on like a light - they need to be staffed, and better systems put in place - which costs time and money. Who will pay for this?

 

'Regain Control' is a wonderful political soundbite, but it only works if you're capable of exerting that control, and nothing about our border control in the last 20 years suggests we're particularly adept at it.

 

You need only visit the USA to get a feel for what stringent border control is about, and we've never been at that standard.

The americans have no better idea than who stays beyond their visit than we do. You complete an esta that last 2 years, give them some flight details and as long as you fly back indirectly via another US city, you won't even have you passport scanned on the way home and they've no idea if you've stayed or not. Before today, I've returned when they still assumed I was still in the country because of the way my flights were booked and how I returned. Nobody has control of their borders in the West.

[thechap]

50% of out immigration has been entirely under our control, and the fact that we've failed to control it is nobody's fault but out own.

Many people arrive on our shores perfectly legally, but stay longer than they are supposed to, at that point, they become illegal immigrants, and we have a very poor system for keeping track of those people. We don't even count the numbers leaving and measure the disparity between those who arrived - ergo knowing how many are still here.

 

Regardless of people's views on immigration, the fact that he has a poor system of control only serves to suggest it won't get any better by leaving the EU and 'regaining control'.

Furthermore, the border controls don't just switch on like a light - they need to be staffed, and better systems put in place - which costs time and money. Who will pay for this?

 

'Regain Control' is a wonderful political soundbite, but it only works if you're capable of exerting that control, and nothing about our border control in the last 20 years suggests we're particularly adept at it.

 

You need only visit the USA to get a feel for what stringent border control is about, and we've never been at that standard.

 

In the main I agree.  Free movement went a long way to diluting the control of who comes in and out.  However, the biggest problem has been the unspoken and unwritten policy of successive governments to allow as many into this country as possible.  Promises of "We must look at this" were utterly meaningless when the powers-that-be positively encouraged by their passiveness as many who wanted to come to come here. 

 

If we had any backbone in charge we would have proper border controls for the ones we can control ie non-EU arrivals.  We would also deport those who shouldn't be here, including those who pick up certain criminal convictions.  We would make it clear that if you weren't what this country needed you would not be getting in.  We would overturn outrageous court decisions that say someone who deserves to be deported can stay because they are entitled to a 'family life'.

 

Even post-Brexit I have no faith in the powers-that-be to take a tough line against undesireables or to implement strong border controls. 

[Kloppite]

Ask yourself this...

 

What did you think might happen to a port that had previously thrived during the industrial revolution (and earlier) but was now geographically far less expedient a port?

 

Did you think people would ship goods to mainland Europe via the UK?

 

Rotterdam was always going to happen, either there or somewhere else on mainland Europe's coast. Liverpool wasn't the only European port to suffer.

If it had been MY money and MY responsibility to invest it for the good of Europe, I'd not have invested in Liverpool either.

 

Rotterdam was already the world's biggest port by the early 60's and the writing was on the wall for many ports across Europe.

 

You can't possibly blame trading with Europe as the reason why dockers lost their jobs, and you massively understate the role containerisation played (another reason for Rotterdam's success - as it was already geared up for containerisation, modern and efficient and the need for liquid bulk by mainland Europe was immense. Even today, liquid bulk is probably at least half of the imports at Rotterdam.

 

Even if the UK elected never to trade with Europe, and only with the Americas, there's still no guarantee Liverpool would remained the port of choice, and no nation can have a trade policy that's aimed at sustaining a port.

Rotterdam is a port that land locked countries use why it is so big.

 

The fact you wouldnt invest in liverpool is very much like why the eu didnt and that is because you are a manchester city fan and although you seem quite charming there is no love lost between you and this city. Why would you want to see liverpool do well when your own vested interests are more important. You seeing liverpool on its knees gives you huge satisfaction contrary to what you say and your own lot will always be more important so why would you play a fair game the fact is you wouldnt.

 

Sent from my GT-I8200N using Tapatalk

 

 

[dennis tooth]

In the main I agree. Free movement went a long way to diluting the control of who comes in and out. However, the biggest problem has been the unspoken and unwritten policy of successive governments to allow as many into this country as possible. Promises of "We must look at this" were utterly meaningless when the powers-that-be positively encouraged by their passiveness as many who wanted to come to come here.

 

If we had any backbone in charge we would have proper border controls for the ones we can control ie non-EU arrivals. We would also deport those who shouldn't be here, including those who pick up certain criminal convictions. We would make it clear that if you weren't what this country needed you would not be getting in. We would overturn outrageous court decisions that say someone who deserves to be deported can stay because they are entitled to a 'family life'.

 

Even post-Brexit I have no faith in the powers-that-be to take a tough line against undesireables or to implement strong border controls.

It'd be cheaper and more effective if we stopped bombing or supporting bombing and wars in third world countries and creating millions of refugees. And training more of our own docs and nurses and paying them properly. Arc.

[FanchesterCity]

 

The americans have no better idea than who stays beyond their visit than we do. You complete an esta that last 2 years, give them some flight details and as long as you fly back indirectly via another US city, you won't even have you passport scanned on the way home and they've no idea if you've stayed or not. Before today, I've returned when they still assumed I was still in the country because of the way my flights were booked and how I returned. Nobody has control of their borders in the West.

 

You boarded a plane leaving the USA and didn't have your passport scanned? How did you check in?

[Barrington Womble]

You boarded a plane leaving the USA and didn't have your passport scanned? How did you check in?

 

On the internet.

 

[thechap]

It'd be cheaper and more effective if we stopped bombing or supporting bombing and wars in third world countries and creating millions of refugees. And training more of our own docs and nurses and paying them properly. Arc.

 

Let's do both.

[FanchesterCity]

Rotterdam is a port that land locked countries use why it is so big.

 

The fact you wouldnt invest in liverpool is very much like why the eu didnt and that is because you are a manchester city fan and although you seem quite charming there is no love lost between you and this city. Why would you want to see liverpool do well when your own vested interests are more important. You seeing liverpool on its knees gives you huge satisfaction contrary to what you say and your own lot will always be more important so why would you play a fair game the fact is you wouldnt.

 

Sent from my GT-I8200N using Tapatalk

 

Oh behave with the football crap. It's nothing to do with it. Liverpool was just never going to be the best port for Europe.

If was investing in the best airport for Europe, I'd not invest in Manchester either it would make no sense to do so.

As for wanting to see Liverpool do well - of course I would - it's 30 miles away, a prosperous Liverpool is good for Manchester and vice versa.

 

I really cannot believe you're coming out with this Liverpool vs Manchester crap. It's totally irrelevant to the discussing of the EU and why Liverpool's docks no longer employ high volumes of workers.

[FanchesterCity]

On the internet.

 

Electronic Boarding Passes have your passport number encoded don't they?

If not passport, then SFPD which is supposed to uniquely identify you (I don't know how though, other than name and DOB etc).

 

Interesting what you've said though - but even if not perfect, it's still a hell of a step up from what we have. At least you tend to get a short interview at the US border and a quick 'sound out' to see if you at least seem legit!

[Section_31]

You can't deny that leave won on the basis of thick people who are pig ignorant voting against their self interests.

While some leave voters may have had eloquent reasons for staying the vast, vast majority just saw immigrants as the enemy.

 

Ditto the working class and benefit scroungers, there always has to be someone to blame, and they always have to be more vulnerable.

 

That said the referendum is done and the people have spoken.

Let us reap what we sow.

The irony is though, one one hand a lot of those moaning claim to be liberal and pro working class/anti establishment, yet their venomous attacks are often aimed at said working class.

 

It all smacks of trendy liberalism to me, ill advertise my spare room to a Syrian refugee on Facebook but I'll happily declare someone on the dole to be a chav.

 

The anti establishment mob have actually become unwitting establishment foot soldiers, helping to establish this new narrative that the poor should be saved from themselves.

 

It'd be funny if it wasn't so soul-destroyingly predictable and obscene.

[dennis tooth]

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/adam-hamdy/brexit-ttip_b_10728774.html?edition=uk

 

[Kloppite]

Oh behave with the football crap. It's nothing to do with it. Liverpool was just never going to be the best port for Europe.

If was investing in the best airport for Europe, I'd not invest in Manchester either it would make no sense to do so.

As for wanting to see Liverpool do well - of course I would - it's 30 miles away, a prosperous Liverpool is good for Manchester and vice versa.

 

I really cannot believe you're coming out with this Liverpool vs Manchester crap. It's totally irrelevant to the discussing of the EU and why Liverpool's docks no longer employ high volumes of workers.

For Europe not it wasnt but for the uk.

 

Sent from my GT-I8200N using Tapatalk

 

 

[Dicko]

The irony is though, one one hand a lot of those moaning claim to be liberal and pro working class/anti establishment, yet their venomous attacks are often aimed at said working class.

 

It all smacks of trendy liberalism to me, ill advertise my spare room to a Syrian refugee on Facebook but I'll happily declare someone on the dole to be a chav.

 

The anti establishment mob have actually become unwitting establishment foot soldiers, helping to establish this new narrative that the poor should be saved from themselves.

 

It'd be funny if it wasn't so soul-destroyingly predictable and obscene.

 

I agree with this to an extent but when 6000 constituents of Anfield & Walton voted UKIP & Tory last election after five years of austerity it was hard not to come to the conclusion that we the working class get exactly what we fucking deserve.

 

That said better education not restrictions on voting is the answer.

[Cardie]

The irony is though, one one hand a lot of those moaning claim to be liberal and pro working class/anti establishment, yet their venomous attacks are often aimed at said working class.

 

It all smacks of trendy liberalism to me, ill advertise my spare room to a Syrian refugee on Facebook but I'll happily declare someone on the dole to be a chav.

 

The anti establishment mob have actually become unwitting establishment foot soldiers, helping to establish this new narrative that the poor should be saved from themselves.

 

It'd be funny if it wasn't so soul-destroyingly predictable and obscene.

 

When you have those people standing among huge universities, sporting facilities and regeneration projects in what were previously desolate area's of the country asking the question "what have the EU ever done for us, we're better off out of it" then it's hard not to jump to conclusions.

[Dicko]

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/adam-hamdy/brexit-ttip_b_10728774.html?edition=uk

Yet if Gove gets in it is probably increasingly likely to happen in this country.

Irony of ironies.

[Barrington Womble]

Electronic Boarding Passes have your passport number encoded don't they?

If not passport, then SFPD which is supposed to uniquely identify you (I don't know how though, other than name and DOB etc).

 

Interesting what you've said though - but even if not perfect, it's still a hell of a step up from what we have. At least you tend to get a short interview at the US border and a quick 'sound out' to see if you at least seem legit!

They've no idea if it's me though, as nobody checked. I travel there a lot and never been checked when I fly back via another US city.

[Sputnik1]

They've no idea if it's me though, as nobody checked. I travel there a lot and never been checked when I fly back via another US city.

 

 

Do you have a chipped passport?

[FanchesterCity]

Apparently, when you book a flight, you don't need a passport at that point in time, but you cannot get a boarding pass until the airline has obtained SFPD (secure flight passenger data) which is supposed to be a unique handle on you as an individual. So they know precisely who you are. You won't get a boarding pass until then. 

If you check in electronically, there's no proof of who you say you are (someone could have booked a flight, paid for it and given all the right details but the wrong person boards the plane - which is why there's supposed to be a final check that the boarding pass matches the passport just as you board the plane (which admittedly usually no more than a corresponding name check).

 

Anyway we digress - I'm sure you can defeat the US system!

 

Doesn't make our system any more better though.

[Kloppite]

Oh behave with the football crap. It's nothing to do with it. Liverpool was just never going to be the best port for Europe.

If was investing in the best airport for Europe, I'd not invest in Manchester either it would make no sense to do so.

As for wanting to see Liverpool do well - of course I would - it's 30 miles away, a prosperous Liverpool is good for Manchester and vice versa.

 

I really cannot believe you're coming out with this Liverpool vs Manchester crap. It's totally irrelevant to the discussing of the EU and why Liverpool's docks no longer employ high volumes of workers.

Just because i'm paranoid doesnt mean they havent got it in for me.

 

Exactly that is the point the eu isnt going to invest in manchester airport because it isnt whats best for europe but what about whats best for manchester and manchester airport. You have a race to the bottom with one or two big winners and lots and lots of losers.

 

Similary like the steel sutuation. You have a surplus of steel in europe because some eu companies have got so big and efficient at making steel it makes steel so cheap and plentiful. Steel works like port talbot cant sell their steal or no one orders from them then it shuts down.

 

You repeat this situation a few times more about whats best for europe and the unemployment rises. In the end your big companies are making steel and there is no customers to buy it because unemployment is so high. What happens when these super companies go tits up?

 

Sent from my GT-I8200N using Tapatalk

 

 

[FanchesterCity]

For Europe not it wasnt but for the uk.

 

Sent from my GT-I8200N using Tapatalk

Yes but people would still trade with Europe regardless of the UK being in or out. The only advantage of Liverpool as a port would be to access the UK. So anybody from Japan wanting to ship products to Europe wouldn't choose Liverpool, they'd choose somewhere like Rotterdam.

 

If they sold more products in the UK, then it would make sense to ship to the UK (possibly through Liverpool), but who does? not many.