More Fun To Compute
Member
Scripted questions from the back bench are always part of the routine.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The UK votes to leave the European Union |OUT2| Mayday, Mayday, I've lost an ARM
- Thread starter Hasney
- Start date
- Status
Scripted questions from the back bench are always part of the routine.
MilkyJoe
Member
Such full
Much capacity reached
Amaze immigration
Public resources. Are you suggesting they g live in the fields?
I've lived my entire live in the most densely populated city in the country. One of the most expensive in the world. Property prices are insane. I earn pretty good money, but still struggle to save for my own home.
Even with that all said, I'd have to be a complete bell-end to put a gun to the head of our economy for those reasons alone. Overreaction doesn't even begin to describe it.
More Fun To Compute
Member
Such full
Much capacity reached
Amaze immigration
All that land is in use for agriculture but maybe you want to knock down the church and build a mega mosque there I know you globalist communist types.
anonymous_abc
Member
Well there is at least room for housing, schools, hospitals, fire departments, kindergartens, garden centres, grocery stores, train stations, bus depots, home depots, IKEA, Starbucks, the Bill, etc...
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
We don't have a set amount of public resources, though. Not enough schools? Build more. Not enough homes? Build more. The only limitations are financial ones... but on average, EU immigrants paid more in tax than non-EU immigrants, which means that they should actually be able to support more schools-per-person than residents. That means the problem is a political one - it's failure to properly invest infrastructure.
Silent Chief
Member
Basically the status quo minus voting privileges? That would take care of UKIP.
Did the EU give us more proverbial mouths to feed? Yes. But that same union also put significantly more food on the table.
Blame our government(s) for failing to use some of the increased revenue to expand housing, social security, and prepare better for the unavoidable globalisation of the economy which severely impacted the working class.
MilkyJoe
Member
What's that got to do with waiting 2 months for a dental appointment?
So we cement over the whole country and build more houses, superstores, schools?
If you think destroying the countryside is valid solution then I really don't know what to say... Jesus wept...
QuicheFontaine
Member
No lol, I really don't understand the confusion here. The referendum asked a simple question and got a simple answer. We're leaving.
LeavING! In the future! The question wasn't "Should we leave before the end of the year?" or "Should we leave in the next two years?", it was just "Should we leave?".
Look, maybe this is a better way of putting it. My wife and I currently rent a one bedroom flat. We've both decided to move into a bigger place. We didn't need a referendum because there's only two of us, but needless to say a decision was made by some mechanism.
Now, we haven't given our landlord notice because we haven't found a new place yet! And if you want to start sticking your oar in and saying "Why haven't you left yet huh? I thought you wanted to leave?", well I just have to say calm down. It's obvious why we haven't given notice yet, and similarly obvious why we haven't invoked Art. 50 yet.
anonymous_abc
Member
Yes that is exactly what I am proposing, there literally is no middle ground there!
[/s]
Tory PM in 2054: "Look we let the people decide and as a country decided it was the right thing to leave the EU, I firmly stand behind this decision and respect the will of the people even if I voted remain. Nevertheless I promise to work my entire tenure on getting us the best deals but rest assured I will not press the button till we've squeezed their balls dry. Remember the question wasn't "Should we leave before the end of the year?" or "Should we leave in the next two years?", it was just "Should we leave?". And we will do so when we are ready! Britannia Waves the Rules!"
Huw_Dawson
Member
That's entirely expected. Ashdown and Kennedy had their own big personalities to fall on to get the media's attention (Kennedy being Chat Show Charlie, Ashdown being ex-SBS) whereas Campbell, Clegg and now Farron are a bit more normal. Clegg polled similarly in 08 and 09 - it was the reason why Cleggmania was a thing. Being allowed to be the solo centrist voice against the Tories and Brown, plus him being an erudite and intelligent speaker, plus him being the unknown underdog, plus the TV thing being all new and shiny.
Farron's a good egg, plus he is much more aligned to the Lib Dem bases and membership. I think a lot of those don't knows would like him if the same lightning struck twice and he got the same opportunity Clegg got in 2010.
It helps that he's from the sort of area that the Brexit vote was used as a call to help from. Preston lad, parent was a single working class mum, worked his socks off to get to where he is now, and he represents Kendal and the surrounding Lake District, an area that relies on tourism, but is not exactly on the priority list for government investment.
Of course the real challenge is putting together a platform to gain relevance, and then win seats in a GE. That is the real issue for us in the LDs, not that our leader is unknown.
Psychotext
Member
It means that the money to cover any level of immigration is there if the government is willing to spend it.
If anything, it also means that we should probably stop wasting so much money on lazy fucking natives.
QuicheFontaine
Member
To be fair, you're not making it that easy to work out what you're proposing with your "le epic meme" posts and a picture of the British countryside.
Crikey, I really think this referendum result has made you lose the plot a bit.
So what's actually different from what we had beforehand? We could have chosen to invoke Article 50 at any time convenient to us before the referendum, but now instead we're... choosing to invoke Article 50 at any time convenient to us?
I suppose that there's a difference that we're actively looking for a convenient such time, though. But that doesn't necessarily guarantee we'll find one. Lots of the Leave rhetoric was about starting the process ASAP; unless May sets a date immediately today (certainly a possibility), that won't happen.
Of course, the more we delay it, the more we drift away from the state of public opinion at the point the decision was made. Should a government in 2020 feel that they are bound by the results of a referendum from 2016?
If we cement over the entire country we'd have (cramped) space to house about a billion people.
More realistically, 2% of the country was designated as 'urban' in 2012. If you're saying there's no comfortable level between 2% and 100% to build much-needed infrastructure and housing then...I dunno what else to say really?
MilkyJoe
Member
Unfortunately both counts will never happen.
QuicheFontaine
Member
What's different is that the British people have expressed their desire, by a margin of 52% to 48%, to leave the EU. I don't think it would have been very sensible to invoke Art. 50 before that happened!
As for the questions of future govts being bound by previous referendum results - absolutely not! They can campaign in the GE on whatever platform they like. They're not bound by previous governments' decisions if they win after all are they?
The Friendly Monster
Member
Well I hope people with that attitude are equally hostile to expecting mothers.
Is it sensible to invoke Article 50 at a point in time at which there is a margin more in favour of remaining?
MilkyJoe
Member
Most people live where the work is and most work is in established cities
Do kids move out of home aged 1 day now?
QuicheFontaine
Member
Exactly. So "At some point in the future" comes with an awful lot of inconvenience and inaccuracy. That's a reason why a lot of the rhetoric was around an immediate triggering of Article 50 - because as time passes, the referendum's relevance to now degrades.
(Said inconvenience and inaccuracy is also built into Article 50, of course - the two-year gap can have a similar effect)
Royal_Phalanx
Member
Except EU migration isn't even that much of a problem. They contribute, work, pay their taxes. And free movement is necessary if you want the single market (Switzerland tried to cap it for some job sectors and the EU put their foot down). Immigration is a convenient scapegoat for government not investing properly into services and housing. The UK hoping to limit free movement is not possible unless the EU decides to cave into Swiss demands for a job sector cap. At best, a job sector cap is what the UK will receive.
Another interesting but ultimately depressing article from the Political Economy Research Centre, especially from a socialist/left-ist perspective: Liberalism after Brexit
Helensmith
Member
The sad thing is that perhaps the goverment would have focused on funding more infrastructure once we were out of the deficit. Was Obsborne aiming for surplus next year after austerity ending? Now we've completely scuppered our chances because we'll be in another long recession.
shinra-bansho
Member
Lucrative banking jobs and all of the associated value add that generates in other sectors, and foreign direct investment are set to relocate depending on the form of exit. And a freeze on new hiring.
It's not suddenly going to make the Conservative government invest in affordable housing.
It's not suddenly going to make the Conservative government invest in affordable housing.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
there are 66,000 hectares of brownfield site in the UK (ie: not countryside). If you put four houses per hectare, that's enough for 264,000 houses, and assuming an average family of 4 people, enough for over a million people.
Even re: greenfield, only 10.6% of England has development on it or is enclosed by development (lots of areas classified as urban are parks and the like), 4.1% of Wales, 3.9% of NI, and 1.9% of Scotland (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18623096).
We have astonishing amounts of room and resources for immigrants, we just have a shit government that won't invest in the north.
Oh my sweet summer child. Osborne's aim for a surplus has been repeatedly pushed back, with the most recent targeted date being 2021 iirc. Anyway, they were never going to achieve a surplus.
And had they somehow magically created a surplus, they'd just cut taxes. Osborne might talk big about a Northern Powerhouse and government investment in the north, but he sure as hell won't put our money where his mouth is.
Consensus forecast for UK economy in 2017 of roughly 0.5%
Credit Suisse economics team forecasting a contraction of 1% next year citing 5 main reasons
Bear in mind this is all before the actual impact of leaving (i.e unfavourable trading conditions with our main customer hits). Most companies are preceding under the watchful assumption that EEA membership is the fallback. I don't think that's going to fly politically myself so the forecasts may get worse as the political reality becomes apparent.
Why doesn't UK stimulate more EU dentists to come there then?
Ravensmash
Member
I'm just loving all of this news about Larry the cat.
Got into a bit of bother with the cat from the Foreign Office too...
http://metro.co.uk/2016/07/12/the-battle-for-number-ten-still-isnt-over-6002230/
Got into a bit of bother with the cat from the Foreign Office too...
http://metro.co.uk/2016/07/12/the-battle-for-number-ten-still-isnt-over-6002230/
The Friendly Monster
Member
Don't be silly, kids can't afford to ever move out now.
QuicheFontaine
Member
That....doesn't sound like that much though? Net migration to the UK was 333,000 last year, so that's gone in like three years.
anonymous_abc
Member
I'm using humour to come to terms with it...
A lot of people thought that it was a sure thing that remain would win.
shinra-bansho
Member
Crab's housing estimate is very low density.
chromatic9
Member
Don't know about the rest of the country but in the Manchester area we're having lots of little grass verge areas being sold at auction by councils so they can squeeze a shoe box of a house on instead of expanding elsewhere it seems.
It's actually quite sad. At the end of a row of houses you often have a tiny bit of grass and a tree but these little areas once considered not adequate for housing are being sold off. We've already seen lots of weird looking houses being squeezed in the oddest of places.
Thing is no new roads can be built, no new schools. Streets are losing any character they once had.
Also another situation is arising where a row of houses built for one family or couple in the 1960s are now being split into flats, so these already small homes now have downstairs as one flat and upstairs is the second flat. It's a shame the country can't expand properly.
It's actually quite sad. At the end of a row of houses you often have a tiny bit of grass and a tree but these little areas once considered not adequate for housing are being sold off. We've already seen lots of weird looking houses being squeezed in the oddest of places.
Thing is no new roads can be built, no new schools. Streets are losing any character they once had.
Also another situation is arising where a row of houses built for one family or couple in the 1960s are now being split into flats, so these already small homes now have downstairs as one flat and upstairs is the second flat. It's a shame the country can't expand properly.
QuicheFontaine
Member
Your posts have no place in May's Britain. Report to your local re-education centre for processing.
Coriolanus
Banned
Ah, but who would be Vader and Luke?
anonymous_abc
Member
lol7
Too many politicians have recently lost an arm and a leg.
MilkyJoe
Member
But people will not move to the remote places as there is no work. And you are right. The south needs to be left be and the North and Midlands needs investing. Take Boris Island, WTF does London need another airport for? Chuck it in the Midlands and join it to London with a high speed rail link if needs be and encourage a financial district up yonder. Things will be better for everyone that way.
4 houses per hectare is stupidly low density. You'd probably see about 25, which is UK average.
Vader was involved in Ukraine politics last time I heard. I have no idea about Luke.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked