Is Britain about to leave the EU?

[Akka]

I think that unemployment is a bit more complex than "people of nationality X don't want to do those jobs so we need immigration".

 

[JohannaK]

Yes, but it also more complex than 'when the immigrants leave, all the unemployed will take those jobs'.

 

[FriendlyFire]

I think that unemployment is a bit more complex than "people of nationality X don't want to do those jobs so we need immigration".

Not sure what is going on with the UK
But I found out why the Leavers want a LOT more INDIAN immigrants rather then look at employing British anglosaxons.
(Any ideas why ?)

Even ethnic minorities fared better than while males.

Men from south Asian ethic minorities were less affected by previous unemployment or inactivity than white men – of those who were not in work or education in 2001, 78 per cent of Indian ethnicity and 65 per cent of Pakistani and Bangladeshi were employed in 2011, compared with 59 per cent of white British men.

“However, significant concerns remain regarding employment probabilities among young white British men, but also among ethnic minority women, who are increasingly left behind.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...ong-hardest-hit-by-unemployment-research-fin/

 

[EnglishEdward]

Again you can only produce a % of qualified nurses from the pool of population. Because currently the drop out rate for UK nurses is very high between 54% and 78%. If the most qualified to take the nursing course are dropping out like crazy, then expanding education places probably not going to
produce more nurses. Back to the drawing board with that idea

Clearly there is something wrong with a student drop out rate of 78%.
I do not know what. It sounds like things were very badly run there.
A point I'd make is that most qualified is not the same as most motivated.
Setting quotas for student loans to academic courses, where there is simply not the
demand for the graduates produced, could divert students towards engineering/health.

What's the solution to the low skill labour shortage then ?

Mechanisation and automation.

British dont want to work minimal wage job
and dont want immigrants to take those jobs.

This very typical misleading sentence is quoted all the time.

It successfully confuses two quite different issues,
to insult the British or Americans as the case may be.

I shall separate them.

British don't want to work minimal wage job

No, not if they can get a better paid job, do Australians want to work for less?

and don't want immigrants to take those jobs.

If they can not get a better paid job, they want the minimum paid job, which
they cannot get when the employer agency system only recruits immigrants.

With Leavers planning to abolish even the minimal EU worker protections
the only logical solution would be to reduce welfare then ?

The UK's minimum wage was introduced by the UK parliament not the EU.

 

[EnglishEdward]

Not sure what is going on with the UK

That is very clear to me. And reading a politicised press,
often full of diatribes, on this does not necessarily help.

I shall try to explain.

But I found out why the Leavers want a LOT more INDIAN
immigrants rather then look at employing British anglosaxons.

First off it is only some Leavers, and probably only a small minority for good reasons;
such as Sir James Dyson who has explained his problem with a shortage of engineers.

(Any ideas why ?)

Let me explain.

If a UK company employs a UK employee particularly one with skills in demand
or family or savings to support them, the employer needs to treat them fairly.

Because if they do not, they will quit and go and work for a competitor down the road,
start up their own business or merely rest for a while living with family or on savings.

If they employ an Indian employee on a visa that says they can only work for
company ABC or its subsidiaries etc, the employer can treat them like "chite".
Yes, Indians are bought over and worked 12-13 hour days 67 days a week and
if they complain, they are told they will be sacked and take next flight home.
And they are often paid much less than the UK national minimum wage.

Hence many employers actively prefer to employ foreign non EU nationals.

Not all UK employers are so exploitive, some will pay fairly to buy in best in
the world, but enough are exploitive to significantly drive down the real
employment levels among the British (of whatever origin) and effective pay.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

No, it highlights that the social care system alone necessitates a migration influx of over a million in the next 20 years, that is over 50,000 immigrants a year for the social care alone.

But the only reason they are saying Brexit will threaten this is based on a model in which ALL IMMIGRATION IS STOPPED. Which is clearly not going to happen, nor is it anyone's policy that this should happen. Which isn't to say that there might not be a problem, but if they're going to publish a prediction of the future based on a theoretical model then surely there should be some requirement that the model at least somewhat reflects reality. Repeat with more reasonable assumptions and then we'll talk.

 

[EnglishEdward]

Yes, but it also more complex than 'when the immigrants leave, all the unemployed will take those jobs'.

Why are you using quotes as nobody here has stated that?

 

[Lillefix]

So, in a recent YouGov poll, the following charts were presented:

Spoiler YouGov charts :

Make of those what you will.

some of the posters in the link and some of the posters here, seem to say the following(correct me if I'm wrong):
1. Importing more than exporting is a problem.
2. The solution to this problem is to stop trading with countries with which you have a trade deficit.

Do the economists here think that 1 is a problem and that 2 is the solution to this problem?

 

[JohannaK]

But the only reason they are saying Brexit will threaten this is based on a model in which ALL IMMIGRATION IS STOPPED. Which is clearly not going to happen, nor is it anyone's policy that this should happen. Which isn't to say that there might not be a problem, but if they're going to publish a prediction of the future based on a theoretical model then surely there should be some requirement that the model at least somewhat reflects reality. Repeat with more reasonable assumptions and then we'll talk.

This is not a prediction of reality nor does it want to be. It is designed to highlight the system's demand, which it does.

Why are you using quotes as nobody here has stated that?

If I am quoting someone I will use double quotes. If I use single quotes is to paraphrase. My bad.

 

[Arakhor]

Not all UK employers are so exploitive, some will pay fairly to buy in best in the world, but enough are exploitive to significantly drive down the real employment levels among the British (of whatever origin) and effective pay.

People breaking the law are bad and should be stopped, whatever they're doing.

 

[Traitorfish]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the premise of the entire UKIP to begin with is centered around leaving the EU.

What is the future of the UKIP now that not only they got what they wanted, but Farage resigned?

White nationalism?

Replace "white" with "English" and you're on to something. Opposition to the EU was the party's flag-pole, but it wasn't what it was for, not why people turned up to meetings and passed out leaflets. It's the party of right-wing English nationalism, shading heavily into Anglo-Saxon ethnic nationalism on the rightward edges. Even without an EU, flag, faith and family remain a strong motivation for a certain kind of person.

In the absence of an achievable goal like the Brexit referendum, mind, it's not clear how long how they can maintain a strong public profile, and while the Tories probably can only push far enough right without splintering, unless they can start turning votes into seats, they may well splinter into a dozen competing micro-parties and fringe groups. It's possible that we'll see the emergence of a right-of-Conservative milieu, like the now-venerable left-of-Labour, which Britain has never previously had, the Conservative Party being historically such an institution, the political wing of the aristocracy and the Church of England, that only out-and-out fascists actually dissented. (Outside of Ireland, anyway, but the one inflexible rule in world history is that Ireland Is Different.) Now, it could be different.

People breaking the law are bad and should be stopped, whatever they're doing.

Oh, so now some sort of "state" is so supposed to go around "enforcing" so-called "laws", with some sort of "police force" that has a "monopoly on the legitimate use of force"? Pah, you bleeding-heart lefties will never understand the real world.

 

[W|M]

(Outside of Ireland, anyway, but the one inflexible rule in world history is that Ireland Is Different.) Now, it could be different.

Does this mean that Britain will turn into Ireland?

 

[Takhisis]

Well, part of the Kingdom already is in Ireland, so there's some reasonable danger of contagion.

 

[FriendlyFire]

Hence many employers actively prefer to employ foreign non EU nationals.

Not all UK employers are so exploitive, some will pay fairly to buy in best in
the world, but enough are exploitive to significantly drive down the real
employment levels among the British (of whatever origin) and effective pay.

That dose make a lot of sense, unpaid over time and underpaying dose happen with immigrants. But the weird thing is UK is now deporting Indians who doing many of the low paying jobs. It seems the Leavers only want Tier 1 immigrants and nurses/medical professional whom are exempt

I have a feeling that this wont produce the economic Boom, reduced unemployment and more revenue.

Indian workers face deportation under new UK immigration law

Indians in the UK may get hit by a new law from next month under which they could be deported if their annual salary is below 35,000 pounds.

The changes will affect professionals living and working in Britain on a Tier-2 visa who earn less than 35,000 pounds a year at the end of five years of their stay in the country.

According to the UK's Office of National Statistics (ONS), of the 55,589 Tier-2 sponsored visa applications cleared in 2014-2015, nearly 78 per cent were for Indians (31,058).

We need to do more to change that, which means reducing the demand for migrant labour. That is why we commissioned the Migration Advisory Committee to provide advice on significantly reducing economic migration from outside the EU," the spokesperson said.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...w-uk-immigration-law/articleshow/51412766.cms

 

[Silurian]

Yes, Silurian; there is a lot of detail to be sorted out.


The problem is people think that this all has to be negotiated.


It does not.

I agree that nothing needs to be negotiated.

The EU and the UK could just act in a way that they think is in their own best interests.

How would this work.


Some time in 2017 the UK triggers the exit, to leave two years latter in 2019.

Will the UK then state its position on all the things it can think of and state that it does not intend to negotiate.

How will the EU respond. I would assume they would set out their position on all the things the UK thought of plus some more points and ask to negotiate.

The UK would say no we dont want to negotiate.

The next two years pass.

The UK leaves the EU in 2019.

What then.

The UK treats EU organisations and citizens as it stated in 2017 and the EU treats UK organisations and citizens as it stated in 2017?

 

[Manfred Belheim]

This is not a prediction of reality nor does it want to be. It is designed to highlight the system's demand, which it does.

It clearly is. Look at the headline of the article if nothing else. It's being presented as a plausible future scenario.

 

[JohannaK]

The headline tells me this is a news outlet's story. Trying to sell and get more views and clicks. The spin the papers put on it is not necessarily the intent of whoever made the model. It is also not untrue. Granted it's extremely unlikely, but it could happen.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

The headline tells me this is a news outlet's story. Trying to sell and get more views and clicks. The spin the papers put on it is not necessarily the intent of whoever made the model. It is also not untrue. Granted it's extremely unlikely, but it could happen.

I wasn't commenting on the intent of whoever made the model, I was commenting on the news story.

 

[EnglishEdward]

I agree that nothing needs to be negotiated.

The EU and the UK could just act in a way that they think is in their own best interests.

How would this work.


Some time in 2017 the UK triggers the exit, to leave two years latter in 2019.

Will the UK then state its position on all the things it can think of and state that it does not intend to negotiate.

How will the EU respond. I would assume they would set out their position on all the things the UK thought of plus some more points and ask to negotiate.

The UK would say no we dont want to negotiate.

The next two years pass.

The UK leaves the EU in 2019.

What then.

The UK treats EU organisations and citizens as it stated in 2017 and the EU treats UK organisations and citizens as it stated in 2017?

At the moment both the UK government and the EU seem to take the view
that there should be a negotiation process including virtually everything
that should be agreed in its entirety or not at all.


The logic is that one party takes advantages of its leverage on one topic
(e.g. letting German car manufacturers export to UK tariff free) with the other
party in exchange for obtaining concessions where it has no leverage
(e.g. financial services passporting) or (letting Poles immigrate) in exchange
(for financial passporting); for a comprehensive "one big deal" to be reached.

However I know from my observation of multi-threaded outsourcing deals
that this does not work. It would be better to do a series of separate deals.


The one big deal presupposes that the parties know what their priorities are
between threads (neither does) and know where they have leverage
(I do not think they do) and can negotiate in an organised (I must laugh) fashion
and achieve a sign off of the deal from all (very dubious).

Thing is people can believe their worse fears. We are already in a mexican stand off,
with the Polish government saying it will veto anything that does not allow free
movement of labour (out of fears of mass deportations) and the UK government
conversely saying it can not agree that (fears of further mass immigrations).

As such there is high probability of a hard exit.

Regarding timing. First thing to do is invoke Article 50 and seek an early exit date.

Then UK to specify its policies (or arange of options) on

* migration and movement of people.
* agricultural goods.
* manufactured goods.
* financial services.
* foreign ownership.
* health services
* etc

The way to do this is to establish the facts, provide options, invite comment,
parliamentary debate, decide main direction and then let the EU respond.

 

[Yeekim]

This would actually be workable in practice, but would:
- go against the promises of Leavers, who promised "a deal";
- lead to (very) "hard" exit, creating huge problems for many, many citizens and businesses in UK (as well as in EU).