EU referendum are you in or out

[gumboot]

Countries that don't allow dual citizenship usually fail to enforce it anyway. The US is said to not allow dual citizenship but many people have US and foreign citizenships all the same. Though, in the current climate a foreign passport and official policy may be sufficient for CBP to fuck you over pretty hard on a whim. There's no authority like the authority of what actually happens (possibly "alternative facts" has higher authority, TBD).

If you marry someone in the UK then you can apply for temporary, then permanent leave to remain, then citizenship after a few years. Each of these stages you apply for on your own initiative. Nothing is automatic. If you stop at permanent leave then you shouldn't leave for more than two years at once, but you may be able to make special arrangements ahead of time like in the US.

[KlaxonCow]

That's it NO MORE NOTHING NON BRITISH, NO MORE pizza, NO MORE Prosecco, NO MORE Ferrero Roches, NO MORE Nutella, NO MORE FANCY SMANCY IMPORTED FOODS, NO MORE CURRY, from now all ALL AND ONLY BRITISH .. you have to go back to meat, water, LARD and gruel , oats maybe only on sunday when it's good time, potatoes and cabbage.

Exactly. That's what I was saying above and have been saying since this Brexit farce began.

This solves nothing.

Brexit voters are complaining about Muslims and hijabs and shit. But the Muslims in the UK largely come from Pakistan (or maybe Bangladesh), which is due to our Commonwealth connections, not because of the EU. It's the wrong fucking target. The EU is overwhelmingly Christian and / or secular (most secular region on the entire planet, in fact).

The racists really haven't thought this one through at all. They're stopping the white people coming in, in preference to dealing with "the wider world" which is, you know, not so white as Europe is. I know racists are stupid, by definition, but you'd think they could at least work out that they've been conned into backing the wrong horse.

Migrants aren't stealing the jobs.

Automation is stealing the jobs. Technological advances and globalisation that allows your customer service call to be handled by some bloke in India is stealing the jobs. The decline of manufacturing - leaving everything to get produced in China - is stealing the jobs. The bankers ruining the world fucking economy has stolen all the jobs.

It's a quaint idea from the past that manning the borders will make a difference but it won't. Those folks in India and China don't have to come here to steal your job anymore. The world stopped working like that an awful long time ago.

Even on the terms that the Brexiteers voted for this - which I don't agree with at all, by the way, because I'm not a gullible fucking idiot - there's no possible way that this could work to achieve their aims. None of it actually makes any sense. They've been conned.

The proposed "solution" does not address the alleged problem at all.

"Take back control", they say.

Who owns our nuclear power stations? Who owns our football teams? Who owns our newspapers? Who owns most of the properties in central London? Who owns our energy companies? Our mobile phone providers? Who owns our supermarkets?

Starting to get the gist? As you realise, answering those questions, that the majority of this country is already foreign-owned. And nearly everything we buy comes from China. And we're all answering the phone to Indians every day.

It's too fucking late. There is nothing to "take back control" of anymore.

[rowan]

the other thing a quick read tells me, really did not know that, is that even if you marry a UK citizen you DO NOT become UK citizen unless you apply for citizenship.

Which to me sounds a bit odd I took some stuff was supposed to "automatically happen".

Another quick look at things shows me that to get an UK citizenship is quite a bit of a complex process.

In the US you can get citizenship through marriage [maybe it's harder these days] and I have a friend who did this and had to carry around half a ton of paperwork, I think for some years after the marriage in case he got randomly stopped and it was decided it was a marriage of convenience.

Meanwhile I work with a German here in UK who's been married twice but thinking about it, she was moaning about having to go all the way to London to the German embassy to renew her passport [used to be able to do it at the office in Peterborough which is closer + cheaper.] So yeah I guess nothing automatic.

And final thing, any native who sees the kind of questions appearing on citizenship tests tends to think they wouldn't stand a chance of passing.

[gilesgoat]

the other thing a quick read tells me, really did not know that, is that even if you marry a UK citizen you DO NOT become UK citizen unless you apply for citizenship.

Which to me sounds a bit odd I took some stuff was supposed to "automatically happen".

Another quick look at things shows me that to get an UK citizenship is quite a bit of a complex process.

In the US you can get citizenship through marriage [maybe it's harder these days] and I have a friend who did this and had to carry around half a ton of paperwork, I think for some years after the marriage in case he got randomly stopped and it was decided it was a marriage of convenience.

Meanwhile I work with a German here in UK who's been married twice but thinking about it, she was moaning about having to go all the way to London to the German embassy to renew her passport [used to be able to do it at the office in Peterborough which is closer + cheaper.] So yeah I guess nothing automatic.

And final thing, any native who sees the kind of questions appearing on citizenship tests tends to think they wouldn't stand a chance of passing.

I know something about this.

It is about the fact in the past some people were able/used to pay some girl in us for a marriage, marry her and the next day she was going back to her business and you to yours with your us citizen.

Or sort of, so INS became extremely vigilant of that, if they get even remotely suspicious you married only for that purpose they will deport you straight away, I heard foreign people being pestered for years after marriage to check "they rally are married".

Now the funny part is, if you look at the whole history and formation of the whole USA country and such, that should be the last country in the planet having immigration laws, actually to be fair with what they done "there should be none at all".

People came, people did, people took people almost totally exterminated the only real local people and then set up a country "in the name of freedom and such" and have now maybe the most restrictive immigration laws in the planet.

Ironic is it ?

[merman]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the point of Brexit to give back sovereignty to Parliament?*

So why are Leavers up in arms when part of our Parliamentary process - the bill going through the House of Lords - doesn't go the way they want?


*I know it's about immigration really. But Lord Tebbitt pontificating about foreigners is hypocritical, as the former carer for his wife has pointed out - she was Czech, and many of her fellow carers and cleaners were also foreign.

[KlaxonCow]

Worse than that.

Brexit has given us an unelected - by neither country nor party - Prime Minister, who declared any Parliamentary debate or scrutiny of her plans at all to be wholly "unacceptable" and had to be forced, by private citizens taking the executive to court, to even respect the sovereignty of Parliament this far.

And the main point of contention here is, after all, just not being a total cunt to hold the rights of EU citizens living in the UK to ransom as a "bargaining chip". On that, the Lords are entirely right and it's shameful that the Commons didn't force the executive to capitulate over that one moral point before sanctioning it themselves. For shame, the Commons. For shame.

We're the land of the Magna Carta. We invented codified human rights. It's decidedly not British whatsoever to bargain with basic human decency.

The Lords have nailed it here. We will guarantee the rights of EU citizens in this country regardless. Full fucking stop.

That's not just moral, but perfectly pragmatic. If you want the rights of British citizens in the EU respected then you don't fuck about threatening not to respect the rights of EU citizens here. If we want to "define a new relationship with the EU" then you don't begin that negotiation with threats, no matter your desperation.

This is the EU. They're the ones who want freedom of movement and universal human rights in the first place, after all. They're not going to be cunts and unilaterally deport British citizens after we've already solidly guaranteed the rights of EU citizens here.

This isn't just a point of basic morality - though there is that - but this is atrociously poor negotiating tactics, which bodes awfully for Brexit talks, if they can't even get this most basic point of negotiation and diplomacy right.

You must walk into talks showing goodwill, or you are goading those you negotiating with to feel resentment for you and, thus, likely give you a more shitty deal. Because, simply, they just don't like you much, as you're being an arsehole.

It's not just moral, it's clever. But if "dictator May" can't even get that fucking right before we've even began, then I wholly lack faith that she'll be able to secure a good deal.

She clearly doesn't even understand the first thing about negotiation. Her illegal attempts to avoid Parliament's sovereignty entirely just shows how fucking awful she is at this. What is the point of even trying to threaten things that are illegal, when you know that it will be forced to court where the law will insist on it anyway? That's just fucking stupid. A waste of everybody's time, in order to do nothing more than piss off exactly those who you want to side with you. She clearly doesn't have a fucking clue what she's doing.

Dictator May is not a good leader at all. She hasn't got the slightest clue. She's, unfortunately, one of these idiots who thinks that laying down dictatorial decrees is "strong leadership". E.g. "I am a good boss because I shout at my employees a lot". No, it's just being an arsehole and everyone will hate you for it, so when you actually want people to do things for you - which is necessary - you've just pissed off exactly those who you now depend on to side with you. Which is just plain stupid.

She is a moron. Brexit talks will go badly.

[Ollie]

We know their game plan, though. Yes, talks will go badly. That's deliberate. They're not after any sort of mutually beneficial agreement with the EU. They're after an excuse to carry out their threat to turn the UK into a tax haven, and to blame the EU for giving them no choice. Let's not fool ourselves into thinking that this government gives much of a shit about its citizens, not the ones who can't afford to make large donations to the Party at any rate.

[Barney]

It's decidedly not British whatsoever to bargain with basic human decency.

That might be how we view ourselves in modern times, but history tells a very, very different story for pretty much all of British history.

[(o)(o)]

It's decidedly not British whatsoever to bargain with basic human decency.

That might be how we view ourselves in modern times, but history tells a very, very different story for pretty much all of British history.

Right and it seems people that are into Tory stuff, really want to take us back to, I dunno.. mid 17th century.. ?

[Barney]

It's decidedly not British whatsoever to bargain with basic human decency.

That might be how we view ourselves in modern times, but history tells a very, very different story for pretty much all of British history.

Right and it seems people that are into Tory stuff, really want to take us back to, I dunno.. mid 17th century.. ?

I dunno, we should ask one. Where is Pogo anyway?

[KlaxonCow]

Right and it seems people that are into Tory stuff, really want to take us back to, I dunno.. mid 17th century.. ?

You're being much too generous in your estimations.

This is from 1215:

All merchants are to be safe and secure in departing from and coming to England, and in their residing and movements in England, by both land and water, for buying and selling, without any evil exactions but only paying the ancient and rightful customs, except in time of war and if they come from the land against us in war. And if the latter are found in our land at the outbreak of war, they are to be attached without harm to their bodies and goods, until we or our chief justiciar know how merchants of our own land, who are then found in the land against us in war; are being treated, and if ours are safe there, the others are to be safe in our land.

This is the original "freedom of movement" clause. Literally the first one ever codified.

And you can see that it unilaterally guarantees the safety of all merchants - from absolutely anywhere on the planet - in times of peace, without any qualifications whatsoever, and even guarantees their safety in times of war should our own merchants abroad be treated similarly.

So, quite literally and said as a solid demonstrable fact, our Tory Prime Minister, Theresa May, is dragging us back to a legal standard that's worse than what existed in the early 13th century. Not a joke, but genuinely actually true, as you can see for yourself right there.

[Little stoned kiwi]

It's a little ironic that you are talking about freedom of trade when the EU is an anti-competitive trading bloc.

[venusian]

It's a little ironic that you are talking about freedom of trade when the EU is an anti-competitive trading bloc.

You keep saying that but it's not getting more true. It's an easy argument to make, that the EU stifles competition, but it's also easy to make the opposite argument and also that the main mechanism it uses to suppress competition is actually a good thing.

[Little stoned kiwi]

Only if you're in it. Which is the whole point, isn't it? Brexit is about how you have to be all in or out.
The EU dictates trade, regulation, and laws. I understand that creates a level of protection from the winds of the free-market...at the cost of freedom and innovation. If they were generally nice and easy going then a good trade deal for a Brexited UK would be a no brainier as it benefits everyone involved, instead everyone is worried the EU will punish the UK or make social and political demands.

[venusian]

No, not only if you're in it. The biggest threat to "competition and innovation" is global corporations occupying markets as oligopolies and competing only by driving down standards and price (strictly price to consumer, not actual price). By pushing up standards the EU is pushing back against this.

For the people outside, the EU's main barrier to entry is it's regulatory framework, particularly that imports need to meet minimum standards for the good themselves and their their process of production. This acts as suppressor on how effective race-to-the-bottom production can be. It makes it harder for global corporations to compete by shitting on their workforces, dumping their chemical waste in local rivers and shipping dangerous goods. Higher standards all around can make smaller producers more viable in global markets.

A group of countries like the EU has the ability to impose aspirational regulations, such as for vehicle emissions. These force corporations to innovate (or cheat) to meet them even though the motivation is external to the industry and therefore wouldn't ever be met by market forces.

Having a common regulatory framework for internal market for a group of countries, like the EU, can reduce legal and admin costs for produces. This would be particularly useful for smaller producers. The existence of a large homogeneous body of consumers increases internal and external trade.

Of course one can reverse any argument and assert your own view of the world but it's a naively simplistic ideology to simply state that trading blocs reduce competition and innovation.

The EU doesn't dictate laws any more that any government dictates them. Putting a word in italics communicates your disdain but is doesn't change what it means.

A reasonable deal with the EU is possible. "Everyone" is worried more by the incompetency of the current government, in every regard, than by the EU.