Nothing coy at all, I just assumed that everyone already knows what the issues are. The only question is the extent of their actual impact and then comparing them with other issues which flow from the free movement of people, goods, services and capital.

Of course you can try to go for a model which allows for the free movement of just goods and services but not people and capital but it would be a half-baked system which would not work in the long term so you have to decide if you want the full pie or none of it.

The problems with free movement of people is that you get economic migration. This has an impact on the receiving countries in terms of ethnic differences/tensions (including actual and latent racism but also very legitimate concerns about different cultures, religions and lifestyles), people prepared to work for less than the local population and overstretch on local services.

Are those problems actually that insoluble? No.

Are they actually major problems? Only if you choose to make them major.

Are they a price worth paying for all the other benefits? Absolutely

The option of course remains to leave the EU, pull up the drawbridge and act like little England. But if you raise your sights a little, realize that the UK has only become what it is now because we were the world's pre-eminent traders and migrators, then you accept that, on balance, migration and trade are a good thing and make the best of it.

Just because I don't care doesn't mean I don't understand!

My opinions may have changed, but not the fact that I am right.

(Member of the School of Optimism 1969-2016 inclusive)

It is great to see that the left wing are respecting democracy...

[Link]

"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02

May's 'elections' will see big losses for all pro-EU parties, ie the three major parties and hopefully, the Liberals in particular. Pro-EU remnants will then say that the answer is 'more Europe', whatever the economic reality and whatever the wishes of their constituents. For years, their policies have caused unemployment, deflation and emigration across Europe, while the IOUs pile up in the richer member states. Nothing makes them question their faith. No amount of suffering, no amount of debt moves them to admit that the single currency might have been a mistake. They are literally beyond argument - which raises the question, who are the real extremists here?

Tapping in to the concerns about Job insecurity, low wages and competition for limited affordable housing are really what UKIP draw support from. These problems have all been exacerbated by Thatcher's (and the neo-conservative free market politicians) policies. Its ironic that if you support Thatcher - therefore free markets - that you are against immigration as free movement of labour fits in with the free market idea and non-state intervention of markets eg by applying immigration controls. But more ironic is that a party that is more Thatcherite than Thatcher gains from the insecurities that Thatcher's policies created.

The idea of a fair day's pay for a fair day's work, affordable housing and legislation to support workers against employers are left wing ideas. UKIP having nothing to offer at all here. But lazy people like easy targets...especially when their information system is the right wing press.

Edited by Bert the Head (15 May 2014 11.29pm)

Edited by Bert the Head (15 May 2014 11.29pm)

I don't see that. If you are pro free markets then you are pro the free movement of people. I don't recall Thatcher ever being against the free movement of people. She was against unaccountability and bureaucracy from Brussels but very much in favour of the single market.

Just because I don't care doesn't mean I don't understand!

My opinions may have changed, but not the fact that I am right.

(Member of the School of Optimism 1969-2016 inclusive)

Can't argue with the first point and there are certainly major problems with the single currency, although most are about how it was introduced, rather than the principle of it.

I don't see how the rest of your post makes much sense though. The debate is very much moving towards a 'smaller Europe', which I think is sensible, but to blame 'Europe' for unemployment and deflation is not supported by the facts.

I am not clear, from your posts, what you propose as an alternative though? Are you looking for an isolated, UKIP-style UK, a UK as the 51st state of the USA or the Socialist Republic of Britain?

Edited by SloveniaDave (15 May 2014 11.04pm)

'Major problems' with the single currency - don't you mean the biggest disaster in financial history? (If only it had been 'introduced' better!!!! Then it would have been a roaring success?)

If we are 'isolated' from the whirlpool of the EU disappearing down its own plughole under the weight of its inherent contradictions - fine. 'Socialst Republic of Britain (you think I advocate that?) - the EU has far more in common with the various failed Communist 'systems' of the past with its ludicrous 'planning', 'controls' and rigged markets.