The EU Referendum - Thursday 23 June (with voting poll)

First topic message reminder :

Hopefully it will stop the arguments about Gib and we can tell Spain to pee off

Hero wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:If you'd ever been on the Britain First page Hero you'll notice the amount of people who follow the group just to rip them to shreds each and every time they post some nonsense.

I was banned (didn't follow them though)

Many laughs have been had on the BF page, particular highlights have been their insistence that Barack Obama is a Muslim because he's able to quote passages from the Qur'an, why it matters either way is beyond me.

Ent wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Ent wrote:How so, please enlighten me.

I don't think those on the Remain side of the debate have denied that the working classes have been disadvantaged by the open doors policy. Watching Alastair Campbell (the spin merchant) debating on the Nolan Show, mid week, admitted himself to the fact, and he is full on Remain.

It doesn't take genius to work it out. The more migration there is to any country, the more available labour force, the more able to drive wages down due to the competition for work placement.

You also mentioned 'the EU takes our money'. The EU does take our money. Taking our money isn't an issue. What we get in return for that investment is, by way of grants/subsidies. The farming community relies heavily on these grants, for example, but those grants are set to run out in 2020. Not that the grants wont be renewed, but relying on these grants do carry a certain amount of risk. A counter argument would be, in the event of a Brexit, would the British Governments handling of grants carry any less risk?

There is no evidence for this.

Eu migrants make up a relatively small percentage of the work force, 7%.

The minimum wage protects everyone, prevents a race to the bottom. People in work create jobs as they spend money on products and services, buy houses etc.

https://fullfact.org/immigration/eu-migration-and-uk/

https://next.ft.com/content/0deacb52-178b-11e6-9d98-00386a18e39d

The eu does not take our money, we pay in based on our voluntary membership.

Nonsense. You can stick your head in the sand as much as you like but even those on the Remain side admit that the open doors policy has a negative impact on the working class. The minimum wage isn't an argument. The bigger the available workforce the easier it is for employers to keep the wage level at minimum. Oh, and the open doors policy also makes it easier to exploit immigrant workers, paying them below minimum wage, as was recently highlighted in the case of those employed on chicken farms.

The EU does take our money. Of course it does. Arguing that it's voluntary is laughable.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:

Shock horror, an organisation that gets money from the EU supports Remaining!

And that is your argument. Get facts posted - "oh well, they support Remain so they are wrong"

Conflict of interest, you cannot expect an organisation that receives EU money to deliver an accurate appraisal.

Basically it's anyone that shows facts that Remain is correct Duty sticks his fingers in his ears and goes La la la.
Then says two posts later there's no facts.
We've repeated this process for about 50 pages.

Hero wrote:Basically it's anyone that shows facts that Remain is correct Duty sticks his fingers in his ears and goes La la la.
Then says two posts later there's no facts.
We've repeated this process for about 50 pages.

That poster that Dolph posted doesn't show any facts/reasons to vote Remain. Look:

1) I agree, a terrible burden on our neighbours. Let's vote Leave.
2) Yes I know, I've been saying this for a while. It's terrible we discriminate against non-EU nationals, and the government is failing across the board on immigration.
3) Who's disputing the advantages of immigration?
4) Who cares about benefits? This isn't about benefits?
5) O....K. Not a reason to vote Remain.
6) Right. Not a reason to vote Remain.
7) Opinion, not fact.
8) Opinion, not fact.
9) Disputed study. And once more...Who's disputing the advantages of immigration?

That poster doesn't offer anything!!!

Hero wrote:Basically it's anyone that shows facts that Remain is correct Duty sticks his fingers in his ears and goes La la la.
Then says two posts later there's no facts.
We've repeated this process for about 50 pages.

It's a bit bone headed to suggest that anyone has come with any 'facts' that remain is correct, it's all just opinion and conjecture, remain voters like you and Dolph seem to think you're enlightening everyone with mere opinion.

Duty281 wrote:

Hero wrote:Basically it's anyone that shows facts that Remain is correct Duty sticks his fingers in his ears and goes La la la.
Then says two posts later there's no facts.
We've repeated this process for about 50 pages.

That poster that Dolph posted doesn't show any facts/reasons to vote Remain. Look:

1) I agree, a terrible burden on our neighbours. Let's vote Leave.
2) Yes I know, I've been saying this for a while. It's terrible we discriminate against non-EU nationals, and the government is failing across the board on immigration.
3) Who's disputing the advantages of immigration?
4) Who cares about benefits? This isn't about benefits?
5) O....K. Not a reason to vote Remain.
6) Right. Not a reason to vote Remain.
7) Opinion, not fact.
8) Opinion, not fact.
9) Disputed study. And once more...Who's disputing the advantages of immigration?

That poster doesn't offer anything!!!

Over half of people voting to leave are doing so with the main reason being immigration.

Hero wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Hero wrote:Basically it's anyone that shows facts that Remain is correct Duty sticks his fingers in his ears and goes La la la.
Then says two posts later there's no facts.
We've repeated this process for about 50 pages.

That poster that Dolph posted doesn't show any facts/reasons to vote Remain. Look:

1) I agree, a terrible burden on our neighbours. Let's vote Leave.
2) Yes I know, I've been saying this for a while. It's terrible we discriminate against non-EU nationals, and the government is failing across the board on immigration.
3) Who's disputing the advantages of immigration?
4) Who cares about benefits? This isn't about benefits?
5) O....K. Not a reason to vote Remain.
6) Right. Not a reason to vote Remain.
7) Opinion, not fact.
8) Opinion, not fact.
9) Disputed study. And once more...Who's disputing the advantages of immigration?

That poster doesn't offer anything!!!

Over half of people voting to leave are doing so with the main reason being immigration.

And what are you trying to say?

Leave draw level with Remain on Opinium's polling. This is the polling company who adjusted their methodology recently as they thought it was favourable to Leave.

EU referendum poll:
Remain: 44% (-)
Leave: 44% (+2)
(via Opinium, online / 14 - 17 Jun)

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

Hero wrote:Basically it's anyone that shows facts that Remain is correct Duty sticks his fingers in his ears and goes La la la.
Then says two posts later there's no facts.
We've repeated this process for about 50 pages.

It's a bit bone headed to suggest that anyone has come with any 'facts' that remain is correct, it's all just opinion and conjecture, remain voters like you and Dolph seem to think you're enlightening everyone with mere opinion.

Ahhh debate, you try and offer arguments for things from respected sources, you're wrong. You offer emotive reasoning, you're wrong. You disagree with anyone, you're wrong. You go full blown on why you think Leave will be getting a lot of votes from racist, you're not only wrong but tarnishing the name of anyone voting Leave.

It must be only you that enlightens this board with your opinion.

Seems to be quite a number of eye witnesses in court to see Jo Cox's killer say 'Death to traitors, freedom for Britain'.

Munchkin wrote:

Ent wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Ent wrote:How so, please enlighten me.

I don't think those on the Remain side of the debate have denied that the working classes have been disadvantaged by the open doors policy. Watching Alastair Campbell (the spin merchant) debating on the Nolan Show, mid week, admitted himself to the fact, and he is full on Remain.

It doesn't take genius to work it out. The more migration there is to any country, the more available labour force, the more able to drive wages down due to the competition for work placement.

You also mentioned 'the EU takes our money'. The EU does take our money. Taking our money isn't an issue. What we get in return for that investment is, by way of grants/subsidies. The farming community relies heavily on these grants, for example, but those grants are set to run out in 2020. Not that the grants wont be renewed, but relying on these grants do carry a certain amount of risk. A counter argument would be, in the event of a Brexit, would the British Governments handling of grants carry any less risk?

There is no evidence for this.

Eu migrants make up a relatively small percentage of the work force, 7%.

The minimum wage protects everyone, prevents a race to the bottom. People in work create jobs as they spend money on products and services, buy houses etc.

https://fullfact.org/immigration/eu-migration-and-uk/

https://next.ft.com/content/0deacb52-178b-11e6-9d98-00386a18e39d

The eu does not take our money, we pay in based on our voluntary membership.

Nonsense. You can stick your head in the sand as much as you like but even those on the Remain side admit that the open doors policy has a negative impact on the working class. The minimum wage isn't an argument. The bigger the available workforce the easier it is for employers to keep the wage level at minimum. Oh, and the open doors policy also makes it easier to exploit immigrant workers, paying them below minimum wage, as was recently highlighted in the case of those employed on chicken farms.

The EU does take our money. Of course it does. Arguing that it's voluntary is laughable.

Think we are about to have a referendum about leaving so yes the membership and payments are voluntary, this is an absolute fact and to suggest otherwise is absolutely ridiculous.

We are in a club and pay our membership.

There is no evidence immigration has effected employment rates or salaries, there is a Bank of England statement on this. Pessimistic says 1% reduction in lower income salary, optimistic creates more jobs due to service and goods purchased by immigrants.

The exploitation is speculation and illegal activity by employers. This is also true for cash in hand work etc

The level of this discussion is the equivalent of me saying that immigrants work harder where locals are lazy and more likely to take off sick etc I've no evidence for that so it isn't a credible argument for or against.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

Hero wrote:Basically it's anyone that shows facts that Remain is correct Duty sticks his fingers in his ears and goes La la la.
Then says two posts later there's no facts.
We've repeated this process for about 50 pages.

It's a bit bone headed to suggest that anyone has come with any 'facts' that remain is correct, it's all just opinion and conjecture, remain voters like you and Dolph seem to think you're enlightening everyone with mere opinion.

Ahhh debate, you try and offer arguments for things from respected sources, you're wrong. You offer emotive reasoning, you're wrong. You disagree with anyone, you're wrong. You go full blown on why you think Leave will be getting a lot of votes from racist, you're not only wrong but tarnishing the name of anyone voting Leave.

It must be only you that enlightens this board with your opinion.

The way you put across your OPINION as fact is wrong, lazy stereotyping of leave voters as racist or xenophobic is wrong but hey do carry on acting like you know more than nothing.

I have said, on this thread, that it is unfair to those who aren't, but carry on pretending you're here to discuss things.

And I've said the point that not all Leave voters are racist, I'm well aware that it allows some small businesses more opportunities if their current clients are mainly not based in the EU, the company I work for has 50% of its customers based in the Middle & Far East and gains from leaving so most shareholders are voting to leave.

Ent wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Ent wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Ent wrote:How so, please enlighten me.

I don't think those on the Remain side of the debate have denied that the working classes have been disadvantaged by the open doors policy. Watching Alastair Campbell (the spin merchant) debating on the Nolan Show, mid week, admitted himself to the fact, and he is full on Remain.

It doesn't take genius to work it out. The more migration there is to any country, the more available labour force, the more able to drive wages down due to the competition for work placement.

You also mentioned 'the EU takes our money'. The EU does take our money. Taking our money isn't an issue. What we get in return for that investment is, by way of grants/subsidies. The farming community relies heavily on these grants, for example, but those grants are set to run out in 2020. Not that the grants wont be renewed, but relying on these grants do carry a certain amount of risk. A counter argument would be, in the event of a Brexit, would the British Governments handling of grants carry any less risk?

There is no evidence for this.

Eu migrants make up a relatively small percentage of the work force, 7%.

The minimum wage protects everyone, prevents a race to the bottom. People in work create jobs as they spend money on products and services, buy houses etc.

https://fullfact.org/immigration/eu-migration-and-uk/

https://next.ft.com/content/0deacb52-178b-11e6-9d98-00386a18e39d

The eu does not take our money, we pay in based on our voluntary membership.

Nonsense. You can stick your head in the sand as much as you like but even those on the Remain side admit that the open doors policy has a negative impact on the working class. The minimum wage isn't an argument. The bigger the available workforce the easier it is for employers to keep the wage level at minimum. Oh, and the open doors policy also makes it easier to exploit immigrant workers, paying them below minimum wage, as was recently highlighted in the case of those employed on chicken farms.

The EU does take our money. Of course it does. Arguing that it's voluntary is laughable.

Think we are about to have a referendum about leaving so yes the membership and payments are voluntary, this is an absolute fact and to suggest otherwise is absolutely ridiculous.

We are in a club and pay our membership.

There is no evidence immigration has effected employment rates or salaries, there is a Bank of England statement on this. Pessimistic says 1% reduction in lower income salary, optimistic creates more jobs due to service and goods purchased by immigrants.

The exploitation is speculation and illegal activity by employers. This is also true for cash in hand work etc

The level of this discussion is the equivalent of me saying that immigrants work harder where locals are lazy and more likely to take off sick etc I've no evidence for that so it isn't a credible argument for or against.

They are not voluntary while we are in it!!!!!!!!!

Yes but we can leave if we want!!!!

Ent wrote:Yes but we can leave if we want!!!!

What has that got to do with anything? Have you no wit? The debate is about 'stay or leave'? You agree? If we stay then any payments we make to the EU have to be made. That is a condition of remaining. You agree? Is it sinking in?

Munchkin wrote:

Ent wrote:Yes but we can leave if we want!!!!

What has that got to do with anything? Have you no wit? The debate is about 'stay or leave'? You agree? If we stay then any payments we make to the EU have to be made. That is a condition of remaining. You agree? Is it sinking in?

What on earth are you talking about?

We have voluntary membership of the Eu and we pay our membership fees, we can leave if we want.

The Eu does not take our money - which you stated.

Ent wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Ent wrote:Yes but we can leave if we want!!!!

What has that got to do with anything? Have you no wit? The debate is about 'stay or leave'? You agree? If we stay then any payments we make to the EU have to be made. That is a condition of remaining. You agree? Is it sinking in?

What on earth are you talking about?

We have voluntary membership of the Eu and we pay our membership fees, we can leave if we want.

The Eu does not take our money - which you stated.

Obviously even writing it out in crayon isn't helping you grasp it. Think we should just leave it.

Ent wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Ent wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Ent wrote:How so, please enlighten me.

I don't think those on the Remain side of the debate have denied that the working classes have been disadvantaged by the open doors policy. Watching Alastair Campbell (the spin merchant) debating on the Nolan Show, mid week, admitted himself to the fact, and he is full on Remain.

It doesn't take genius to work it out. The more migration there is to any country, the more available labour force, the more able to drive wages down due to the competition for work placement.

You also mentioned 'the EU takes our money'. The EU does take our money. Taking our money isn't an issue. What we get in return for that investment is, by way of grants/subsidies. The farming community relies heavily on these grants, for example, but those grants are set to run out in 2020. Not that the grants wont be renewed, but relying on these grants do carry a certain amount of risk. A counter argument would be, in the event of a Brexit, would the British Governments handling of grants carry any less risk?

There is no evidence for this.

Eu migrants make up a relatively small percentage of the work force, 7%.

The minimum wage protects everyone, prevents a race to the bottom. People in work create jobs as they spend money on products and services, buy houses etc.

https://fullfact.org/immigration/eu-migration-and-uk/

https://next.ft.com/content/0deacb52-178b-11e6-9d98-00386a18e39d

The eu does not take our money, we pay in based on our voluntary membership.

Nonsense. You can stick your head in the sand as much as you like but even those on the Remain side admit that the open doors policy has a negative impact on the working class. The minimum wage isn't an argument. The bigger the available workforce the easier it is for employers to keep the wage level at minimum. Oh, and the open doors policy also makes it easier to exploit immigrant workers, paying them below minimum wage, as was recently highlighted in the case of those employed on chicken farms.

The EU does take our money. Of course it does. Arguing that it's voluntary is laughable.

Think we are about to have a referendum about leaving so yes the membership and payments are voluntary, this is an absolute fact and to suggest otherwise is absolutely ridiculous.

We are in a club and pay our membership.

There is no evidence immigration has effected employment rates or salaries, there is a Bank of England statement on this. Pessimistic says 1% reduction in lower income salary, optimistic creates more jobs due to service and goods purchased by immigrants.

The exploitation is speculation and illegal activity by employers. This is also true for cash in hand work etc

The level of this discussion is the equivalent of me saying that immigrants work harder where locals are lazy and more likely to take off sick etc I've no evidence for that so it isn't a credible argument for or against.

Exploitation is exploitation, no matter how you try and dress it up. The open door policy means that there are no checks on who is coming through, which in turn means it is difficult/impossible to weed out ruthless gangmasters exploiting vulnerable migrants moving in to the UK.

This link provides an example of what I am talking about:  ExploitationInUK

The British company involved in this exploitation have had no criminal charges brought against them. So much for being illegal....

The YouGov swing-a-thon continues.

EU referendum poll:
Remain: 42% (+3)
Leave: 44% (-2)
(via YouGov, online / 15 - 16 Jun)

And, with very little surprise, the scores with Survation swap around.

EU referendum poll:
Remain: 45% (+3)
Leave: 42% (-3)
(via Survation, phone / 17 - 18 Jun)

Duty281 wrote:The YouGov swing-a-thon continues.

EU referendum poll:
Remain: 42% (+3)
Leave: 44% (-2)
(via YouGov, online / 15 - 16 Jun)

And, with very little surprise, the scores with Survation swap around.

EU referendum poll:
Remain: 45% (+3)
Leave: 42% (-3)
(via Survation, phone / 17 - 18 Jun)

If I were a betting man I would bet that the undecided go with the status quo.

Munchkin wrote:

Ent wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Ent wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Ent wrote:How so, please enlighten me.

I don't think those on the Remain side of the debate have denied that the working classes have been disadvantaged by the open doors policy. Watching Alastair Campbell (the spin merchant) debating on the Nolan Show, mid week, admitted himself to the fact, and he is full on Remain.

It doesn't take genius to work it out. The more migration there is to any country, the more available labour force, the more able to drive wages down due to the competition for work placement.

You also mentioned 'the EU takes our money'. The EU does take our money. Taking our money isn't an issue. What we get in return for that investment is, by way of grants/subsidies. The farming community relies heavily on these grants, for example, but those grants are set to run out in 2020. Not that the grants wont be renewed, but relying on these grants do carry a certain amount of risk. A counter argument would be, in the event of a Brexit, would the British Governments handling of grants carry any less risk?

There is no evidence for this.

Eu migrants make up a relatively small percentage of the work force, 7%.

The minimum wage protects everyone, prevents a race to the bottom. People in work create jobs as they spend money on products and services, buy houses etc.

https://fullfact.org/immigration/eu-migration-and-uk/

https://next.ft.com/content/0deacb52-178b-11e6-9d98-00386a18e39d

The eu does not take our money, we pay in based on our voluntary membership.

Nonsense. You can stick your head in the sand as much as you like but even those on the Remain side admit that the open doors policy has a negative impact on the working class. The minimum wage isn't an argument. The bigger the available workforce the easier it is for employers to keep the wage level at minimum. Oh, and the open doors policy also makes it easier to exploit immigrant workers, paying them below minimum wage, as was recently highlighted in the case of those employed on chicken farms.

The EU does take our money. Of course it does. Arguing that it's voluntary is laughable.

Think we are about to have a referendum about leaving so yes the membership and payments are voluntary, this is an absolute fact and to suggest otherwise is absolutely ridiculous.

We are in a club and pay our membership.

There is no evidence immigration has effected employment rates or salaries, there is a Bank of England statement on this. Pessimistic says 1% reduction in lower income salary, optimistic creates more jobs due to service and goods purchased by immigrants.

The exploitation is speculation and illegal activity by employers. This is also true for cash in hand work etc

The level of this discussion is the equivalent of me saying that immigrants work harder where locals are lazy and more likely to take off sick etc I've no evidence for that so it isn't a credible argument for or against.

Exploitation is exploitation, no matter how you try and dress it up. The open door policy means that there are no checks on who is coming through, which in turn means it is difficult/impossible to weed out ruthless gangmasters exploiting vulnerable migrants moving in to the UK.

This link provides an example of what I am talking about:  ExploitationInUK

The British company involved in this exploitation have had no criminal charges brought against them. So much for being illegal....

A newspaper article is not evidence and it deals with illegal immigrants - something that will increase if we leave the eu. There is an unsecured land border with the Eu and no id for the ferry.

This is simple, there is no evidence Eu immigration effects employment rates or salaries. Anything else is just conjecture and anything you state with regards to this I can counter by saying the equally cowpat statement that locals are lazy and take too much sick leave etc unsubstantiated rubbish.

The article provides all the evidence you need. You can also link to further articles which provides details on court appearances, etc.

If you had actually read the article you would know that it deals with both illegal and legal.

The migrants involved in the court case were, of course, all legal...

Try being objective rather than feeling you must defend every aspect of the EU. History has shown us that blind loyalty is dangerous.

There is no blind loyalty, the article in question has large range over a decade in experience with both legal and illegal immigrants.

A single court case and a journalists reports are not evidence, they just simply aren't.

Workers are exploited, that is illegal - this happens to both local and immigrant workers and it should be stopped. To suggest that a single court case is evidence that immigrants adversely effect the job market when Bank of England analysis of 2 million immigrants employment says otherwise is just utter nonsense.

Im not sure how much longer I can do this, the breath taking ignorance applied continually through this thread astounds me.

.

Ent wrote:There is no blind loyalty, the article in question has large range over a decade in experience with both legal and illegal immigrants.

A single court case and a journalists reports are not evidence, they just simply aren't.

Workers are exploited, that is illegal - this happens to both local and immigrant workers and it should be stopped. To suggest that a single court case is evidence that immigrants adversely effect the job market when Bank of England analysis of 2 million immigrants employment says otherwise is just utter nonsense.

Im not sure how much longer I can do this, the breath taking ignorance applied continually through this thread astounds me.

The 'breath taking ignorance' is all yours, sir.

Read the article (it's actually about a much wider problems, and the failure of UK/Euro authorities to address them), do a bit of research on exploitation of foreign workers within the UK, before desperately trying to excuse away the hardships of vulnerable people to suit your own agenda.

Here's two links for you. Just to start you off:


UKECONOMY


Exploitation


"There is no blind loyalty....."

There's none so blind as them that will not see.........

No, just no. A student article to a student conference and a newspaper article with no numbers do not constitute evidence ffs.

There is exploitation of immigrant and non immigrant workers that needs to stop. I'm sure there is a thriving sex trade in the uk based on migrants that needs to be stopped too. This is illegal activity that had absolutely no relevance to the in/out debate.
Much the same in the way that cash in hand work is illegal.

The eu deals in legal movement and migration, these people employed legally make a massive contribution to our economy.

If your point is that illegal employment reduced job availability and wages then bravo. However there is no evidence that legal Euro immigrants have any effect on employment levels and average salary. In sub group analysis it is disputed and at the most pessimistic view reduces salary by approx 1%.

I can't help but laugh at that link to the tourism students virtual conference- you should be embarrassed by that.

To conclude the eu does not take our money and legal immigration from the eu has negligible effects on employment rate or average salary. The end.

Ent wrote:No, just no. A student article to a student conference and a newspaper article with no numbers do not constitute evidence ffs.

There is exploitation of immigrant and non immigrant workers that needs to stop. I'm sure there is a thriving sex trade in the uk based on migrants that needs to be stopped too. This is illegal activity that had absolutely no relevance to the in/out debate.
Much the same in the way that cash in hand work is illegal.

The eu deals in legal movement and migration, these people employed legally make a massive contribution to our economy.

If your point is that illegal employment reduced job availability and wages then bravo. However there is no evidence that legal Euro immigrants have any effect on employment levels and average salary. In sub group analysis it is disputed and at the most pessimistic view reduces salary by approx 1%.

I can't help but laugh at that link to the tourism students virtual conference- you should be embarrassed by that.

To conclude the eu does not take our money and legal immigration from the eu has negligible effects on employment rate or average salary. The end.

So you pick the link from the University, and your excuse for not taking it seriously is because it was written by a student. You completely disregard the fact that the article was supported with evidence - links supplied.

Nice try, but that wasn't the only link. The first link I provided? What's your excuse for that, or are you turning a blind eye to that one? Doesn't fit into your agenda so ignore it, or run it down based on the whatever excuse enters your head. There are masses of links on the subject. If you genuinely wanted to educate yourself on the subject you could. You don't though.

My point obviously isn't about illegal employment reducing job availability. I know it's late for you, but you can't be that dozy. My point is that genuine job seekers from abroad are being exploited by ruthless gangmasters and employers within the UK. How on earth can you have missed that???

A link to the Brexit movie/documentary in case anyone hasn't seen it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTMxfAkxfQ0

https://www.facebook.com/UniversityofLiverpool/videos/1293361974024537/?pnref=story

Munchkin wrote:

Ent wrote:It's a large part of the campaign Dolph.

Immigrants take out jobs and over load our public services.
Immigrants drive wages down.
The eu makes our laws.
The eu takes your money.

All rubbish but easy messages and people who don't (and can't be arsed to learn) any better take it in and go with leave.

It isn't rubbish. The open doors policy drives wages down.

This is what we started with, it doesn't. The end.

My work employs lots of immigrants and my wages went up this year.

The Sandal Bomber wrote:https://www.facebook.com/UniversityofLiverpool/videos/1293361974024537/?pnref=story

Very good video, thanks for sharing.

The Sandal Bomber wrote:https://www.facebook.com/UniversityofLiverpool/videos/1293361974024537/?pnref=story

Independent expert says Leave campaign has indulged in 'dishonesty on an industrial scale.'

Only one answer to that - he can't possibly be independent or an expert

Is there any person in England right now lower than Jack Buckby, a "man" who will be running for the seat Jo Cox held.



I would be happy to ban anyone who agrees with this kumquat

Dolphin, why put up that and then say what you say?

Are you expecting any of the regular posters here to call Jo Cox a fool?  And if not, then why construct such a presumed link between this Liberty GB outfit and posters on  606?

Cameron standing on the grave of Jo Cox so that he can drive the Remain agenda. And before you reply yes he is a representative of the Remain camp. 

And this is the point where I change my mind...again!

I am now of the opinion, after the despicable murder of Jo Cox, that 'Remain' will win the referendum on Thursday.

I am quite unsure of the link, but I have spoken to numerous people today who have raised the tragedy as a factor in their decision-making on the 23rd. And it seems whatever momentum that Leave built over the past few weeks, it has been brought to a juddering halt.

I would hope to be pleasantly surprised, but it now appears to be quite unlikely, given the time-frame, that Leave can wrestle back any of the late swing to Remain.

mikey_dragon wrote:Cameron standing on the grave of Jo Cox so that he can drive the Remain agenda. And before you reply yes he is a representative of the Remain camp. 

Would you prefer for her voice to be silenced and forgotten like her killer wanted?
He's not 'standing on her grave', do we not owe it to her memory to share her thoughts?

How are you aware of what the killer wanted? 

Cameron is doing just that.

Duty281 wrote:And this is the point where I change my mind...again!

I am now of the opinion, after the despicable murder of Jo Cox, that 'Remain' will win the referendum on Thursday.

I am quite unsure of the link, but I have spoken to numerous people today who have raised the tragedy as a factor in their decision-making on the 23rd. And it seems whatever momentum that Leave built over the past few weeks, it has been brought to a juddering halt.

I would hope to be pleasantly surprised, but it now appears to be quite unlikely, given the time-frame, that Leave can wrestle back any of the late swing to Remain.

Conspiracy theorists will have a field day.

mikey_dragon wrote:

Duty281 wrote:And this is the point where I change my mind...again!

I am now of the opinion, after the despicable murder of Jo Cox, that 'Remain' will win the referendum on Thursday.

I am quite unsure of the link, but I have spoken to numerous people today who have raised the tragedy as a factor in their decision-making on the 23rd. And it seems whatever momentum that Leave built over the past few weeks, it has been brought to a juddering halt.

I would hope to be pleasantly surprised, but it now appears to be quite unlikely, given the time-frame, that Leave can wrestle back any of the late swing to Remain.

Conspiracy theorists will have a field day.

Don't think I would blame them, for once.

mikey_dragon wrote:How are you aware of what the killer wanted? 

Cameron is doing just that.

Well being that he killed her and said 'Death to traitors, freedom for Britain' in court I'm guessing he wasn't overly a fan of what she had to say.

Hero wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:How are you aware of what the killer wanted? 

Cameron is doing just that.

Well being that he killed her and said 'Death to traitors, freedom for Britain' in court I'm guessing he wasn't overly a fan of what she had to say.

Has he a history of mental illness?

SecretFly wrote:

Hero wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:How are you aware of what the killer wanted? 

Cameron is doing just that.

Well being that he killed her and said 'Death to traitors, freedom for Britain' in court I'm guessing he wasn't overly a fan of what she had to say.

Has he a history of mental illness?

I believe he has yes.

Mikey, how about instead of pouring scorn on Cameron for as you call it 'standing on her grave' you mention the lovely groups such as this:

Far-right British group has voiced support for the murder of Jo Cox in an attempt to hijack the Vote Leave campaign.
The North-east branch of National Action posted a number of pictures of murder suspect Thomas Mair on 16 June following the shooting of the MP outside a library in Birstall, West Yorkshire.
The first image, captioned: “#voteleave, don’t let this man’s sacrifice go in vain. #JoCox would have filled Yorkshire with more sub-humans” appeared within hours of the MP’s death.
The posts follow tweets from Marine Le Pen, leader of France’s far-right group The National Front, which attempted to explain away the killing of the MP for Batley and Spen.
Le Pen said: “People resort to violence because they are sneered by the Brussels elite.”

Hero wrote:Mikey, how about instead of pouring scorn on Cameron for as you call it 'standing on her grave' you mention the lovely groups such as this:

Far-right British group has voiced support for the murder of Jo Cox in an attempt to hijack the Vote Leave campaign.
The North-east branch of National Action posted a number of pictures of murder suspect Thomas Mair on 16 June following the shooting of the MP outside a library in Birstall, West Yorkshire.
The first image, captioned: “#voteleave, don’t let this man’s sacrifice go in vain. #JoCox would have filled Yorkshire with more sub-humans” appeared within hours of the MP’s death.
The posts follow tweets from Marine Le Pen, leader of France’s far-right group The National Front, which attempted to explain away the killing of the MP for Batley and Spen.
Le Pen said: “People resort to violence because they are sneered by the Brussels elite.”

Presumably because Cameron is in a far more prominent position than 'National Action' who I have never heard of.