EU rebuffs May, says no-plan Brexiteers deserve 'place in hell'

[Spidey]

1 minute ago, Laughing Gravy said:

Show me where I have listened to this man.

If you can't then apologise.

You mirror his views.

[Laughing Gravy]

Just now, Spidey said:

You mirror his views.

So you can't show me where I have listened to his view then? Is there an apology?
 

For your information I do not mirror his views. It is easy to state that. If he and I don't know, believes in Brexit then you are right. The rest I am nothing like him or his views.

[Chomper Higgot]

13 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

Show me where I have listened to this man.

If you can't then apologise.

 

9 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

So you can't show me where I have listened to his view then? Is there an apology?
 

For your information I do not mirror his views. It is easy to state that. If he and I don't know, believes in Brexit then you are right. The rest I am nothing like him or his views.

I’m not sure how you can assuredly assert ‘I’m nothing like him or his views’ without having listened to him.

[Spidey]

10 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

So you can't show me where I have listened to his view then? Is there an apology?
 

For your information I do not mirror his views. It is easy to state that. If he and I don't know, believes in Brexit then you are right. The rest I am nothing like him or his views.

You have consistently expressed a racist attitude throughout this thread. It's you that should apologise, not me. However I'm glad to see that it's the only thing that you disagreed with in my post.

[Laughing Gravy]

4 minutes ago, Spidey said:

You have consistently expressed a racist attitude throughout this thread. It's you that should apologise, not me. However I'm glad to see that it's the only thing that you disagreed with in my post.

I have not made unfounded statements like you. I guess you will not 'man up' and admit what you said, has no facts to back up your lewd claim.

 

By the way. Being against the EU is not racist. The EU is not a race.

[rixalex]

1 hour ago, Spidey said:

I too am a British citizen. I voted in the last referendum and would vote in the next referendum, if there were to be one. Some of your posts have been racist and xenophobic. Even this post hints at your racism ("I still remember you defending a certain religion"). I am a patriot, you are a nationalist. I want what's best for the future of my country.

A patriot wouldn't make the sweeping and unfair judgements that you do on your "fellow" countrymen.

 

As far as racism goes, if you are against it, i don't understand how you can support the current British immigration policy that treats immigrants from inside the EU so differently from those outside.

 

I know why remainers like Grouse supports it. He thinks those from inside the EU are more his kind of people. People from Africa and Asia... nah, not so much. Foreign is ok, but not too foreign please.

[samran]

40 minutes ago, rixalex said:

A patriot wouldn't make the sweeping and unfair judgements that you do on your "fellow" countrymen.

 

As far as racism goes, if you are against it, i don't understand how you can support the current British immigration policy that treats immigrants from inside the EU so differently from those outside.

 

I know why remainers like Grouse supports it. He thinks those from inside the EU are more his kind of people. People from Africa and Asia... nah, not so much. Foreign is ok, but not too foreign please.

You are drawing a very very long bow there to say that if you support freedom of movement of people from the same economic grouping as you then you are somehow ‘racist’. It simply makes sense that if you are in the same economy block, fee movement all the factors of production are left unhindered. 

 

Viewed in the context of the virulent nationalism which caused 2 great wars on the European continent it is anything but ‘racist’ to support free moment.

 

Letting your former enemy come and live and work on your own soil with the same rights as a native person, well that is a remarkably un-predjudiced thing to do when viewed through the lense history.

 

And, I must say, having migrated to the UK once upon a time (my head isn’t so far up my own arse that i have  to call myself an expat)  under the famed ‘points system’ that brexiters want (note, you actually had the scheme from 2003 to 2008), I just want to make the point that successive governments actually did away with the scheme to placate the people who were voting for anti-immigrant parties.

 

Hard to imagine these same folk are going to be opening their arms just because they have come on a points system.

 

They won’t. And you know they won’t, cause under a system like this, people will be even better educated, better skilled and based on the experience of Canada, Australia and NZ, significantly darker in skin tone. And if they can’t handle Eastern Europeans very well in Sunderland, I dare say they are going to have some real trouble with your new post brexit wave of migrants.

 

 

[rixalex]

2 minutes ago, samran said:

You are drawing a very very long bow there to say that if you support freedom of movement of people from the same economic grouping as you then you are somehow ‘racist’. It simply makes sense that if you are in the same economy block, fee movement all the factors of production are left unhindered.

An immigration policy that treats immigrants differently dependent on whether they happen to have been born inside the EU, or whether they were born outside it, IS highly discriminatory, and justifying it as just something that makes sense in terms of being part an economic block, let's be honest, is pretty weak.

 

You are very casually putting economic pragmatism ahead of fairness and equality.

 

If you support free movement and see yourself as an egalitarian, as most remainers seem to, how about a bit of consistency? Make it free for all.

[Spidey]

1 hour ago, rixalex said:

A patriot wouldn't make the sweeping and unfair judgements that you do on your "fellow" countrymen.

 

No logic in that I'm afraid. Respect is earned not given with nationality.

[Spidey]

1 hour ago, rixalex said:

As far as racism goes, if you are against it, i don't understand how you can support the current British immigration policy that treats immigrants from inside the EU so differently from those outside.

 

I don't support totally free movement from within the EU. I think that we should stay in the EU and fight for change.

[rixalex]

1 minute ago, Spidey said:

I don't support totally free movement from within the EU. I think that we should stay in the EU and fight for change.

Staying in the EU will always mean treating EU immigrants vastly different from non EU immigrants. It's a central concept of the EU.

[samran]

43 minutes ago, rixalex said:

An immigration policy that treats immigrants differently dependent on whether they happen to have been born inside the EU, or whether they were born outside it, IS highly discriminatory, and justifying it as just something that makes sense in terms of being part an economic block, let's be honest, is pretty weak.

 

You are very casually putting economic pragmatism ahead of fairness and equality.

 

If you support free movement and see yourself as an egalitarian, as most remainers seem to, how about a bit of consistency? Make it free for all.

You implied in a previous post that support of free movement is racist. It isn’t. 

 

Is it discriminatory and preferential? Yep. That is the nature and the raisin d’etre of economic blocs at their most basic. I’ve got no great issue with that all things considered. 

 

It isn’t just economics that justifies it, though I’d argue that it a bigger factor than you give it credit for. Add this to the European project - a union where people can live and work beside each other rather than killing each other, then you have a wonderful argument for free movement. 

 

But back to discrimination. Just like over 50’s can come and live in Thailand just by chucking GBP 20K in the bank, it is discriminatory. 

 

Just like cinemas, utilities and public transport give pensioners discounts. It is discriminatory.

 

So I guess if you decide to rip up your pensioners discount card, and you go out to convince others here foregoe living in Thailand on a retirement visa, I’ll start listening to you about egalitarianism. 

[Spidey]

Quoted wrong post.

[Spidey]

4 minutes ago, rixalex said:

Staying in the EU will always mean treating EU immigrants vastly different from non EU immigrants. It's a central concept of the EU.

That doesn't necessarily mean that it's racist. If you filter migrants on economic grounds (as Thailand does) or on grounds of bringing needed skills into the country (as Australia does) it isn't racist.

[rixalex]

6 minutes ago, Spidey said:

No logic in that I'm afraid. Respect is earned not given with nationality.

Well, if you don't respect people until you deem they have earnt it, that's a pretty negative mindset.

[rixalex]

28 minutes ago, samran said:

You implied in a previous post that support of free movement is racist. It isn’t. 

 

Is it discriminatory and preferential? Yep. That is the nature and the raisin d’etre of economic blocs at their most basic. I’ve got no great issue with that all things considered. 

 

It isn’t just economics that justifies it, though I’d argue that it a bigger factor than you give it credit for. Add this to the European project - a union where people can live and work beside each other rather than killing each other, then you have a wonderful argument for free movement. 

 

But back to discrimination. Just like over 50’s can come and live in Thailand just by chucking GBP 20K in the bank, it is discriminatory. 

 

Just like cinemas, utilities and public transport give pensioners discounts. It is discriminatory.

 

So I guess if you decide to rip up your pensioners discount card, and you go out to convince others here foregoe living in Thailand on a retirement visa, I’ll start listening to you about egalitarianism. 

Some fairly silly comparisons there. OK, there are different types of discrimination.

 

I have no problem with a system in which everyone over 50 has to show 20k in the bank to live in Thailand, as long as it is open to all. Yes, it is discriminating against people who don't have 20k in the bank, but people who don't have 20k in the bank can't reasonably be expected to support themselves.

 

I have no problem with pensioners being given special benefits because pensioners are usually on a fixed income and i think taking care of the older generation is important and doing so is not discriminating against younger people. After all, younger people will be old one day if they are lucky, and get the same benefits.

 

I also have no problem with discriminating immigrants based upon the skills they have and how they will integrate into the country. That's because if they can't fit in and don't have the skills that will see them gainfully employed, the system won't be able to support them (and nor should it) and society will become divided. That is a totally different type of discrimination to welcoming one immigrant because he or she was born in country "x", but turning away another immigrant purely because they happen to be born in country "y".

[Laughing Gravy]

3 hours ago, Spidey said:

You have consistently expressed a racist attitude throughout this thread. It's you that should apologise, not me. However I'm glad to see that it's the only thing that you disagreed with in my post.

Once again you accuse me of listening to Tommy Robinson which you have no evidence. A better man would own up and apologise. I didn't reply to the rest of your thread as you can't even respond to one item.

 

Lets get something clear. Religion is not a race. The EU is not a race. The countries like Germany, France, Ireland, Greece, etc etc are lovely with great people in. I have previously mentioned I have lived in a couple and have first hand experience.

 

Throwing the racist and xenophobic card is cheap, unwarranted and shows little intellect. It seems that in the UK and on here if you are against the entity of the EU you get slanted with being racist and a xenophobe which is totally incorrect.

 

It seems to be the norm now that having a difference opinion on the EU and you get shouted down. I see it happening on TV with politicians and is quite frankly embarrassing.

 

Show me where I am racist or a xenophobe. I would suggest that you look up the definition flower.

 

 

[samran]

32 minutes ago, rixalex said:

Some fairly silly comparisons there. OK, there are different types of discrimination.

 

I have no problem with a system in which everyone over 50 has to show 20k in the bank to live in Thailand, as long as it is open to all. Yes, it is discriminating against people who don't have 20k in the bank, but people who don't have 20k in the bank can't reasonably be expected to support themselves.

 

I have no problem with pensioners being given special benefits because pensioners are usually on a fixed income and i think taking care of the older generation is important and doing so is not discriminating against younger people. After all, younger people will be old one day if they are lucky, and get the same benefits.

 

I also have no problem with discriminating immigrants based upon the skills they have and how they will integrate into the country. That's because if they can't fit in and don't have the skills that will see them gainfully employed, the system won't be able to support them (and nor should it) and society will become divided. That is a totally different type of discrimination to welcoming one immigrant because he or she was born in country "x", but turning away another immigrant purely because they happen to be born in country "y".

As I said, common market, I have no issues with the freedom of movement capital, labour, goods and services. Not a whit. 

 

So long as there is no discrimination along the lines of race or religion (which certain members seem to be just fine with) within that subset, I have no issue. 

 

When you are coming from similar economic levels, immigrants tend to be self selecting anyway. 

 

Putting unelected bureaucrats in the way of the labour market sorting itself seems pointless. And I know how much your lot hate unelected bureaucrats...

 

As for finding my comparisons ‘silly’, funny isn’t it that things that probably benefit you, you have no issue with!

[rixalex]

7 minutes ago, samran said:

As I said, common market, I have no issues with the freedom of movement capital, labour, goods and services. Not a whit. 

 

So long as there is no discrimination along the lines of race or religion (which certain members seem to be just fine with) within that subset, I have no issue.

For me i would say i'm against ANY discrimination that is arbitrary, whether it be along the lines of race, religion OR nationality.

 

I find it strange that when it comes to nationality, you find discrimination no problem whatsoever.

[samran]

4 minutes ago, rixalex said:

For me i would say i'm against ANY discrimination that is arbitrary, whether it be along the lines of race, religion OR nationality.

 

I find it strange that when it comes to nationality, you find discrimination no problem whatsoever.

Genuinely curious to know why you think I have a problem with it. 

[Loiner]

You know very well that I have; and your squirming proves it.
 
And please don't call me 'pal.' I would not care for anyone to think that I could be pals with the likes of you.

Sorry darling. I’m not squirming, far from it, laughing at your last post to me. It simply reinforces my observations on your supportive agenda is specially selected - it all is for any poster. You attached something about Facebook ads and something from an outfit called ‘Centre for Social Investigations’. (Who are they?) The veracity of either of these is suspect.

The difference is that I don’t wail about your posts being all lies. I also don’t hurl abusive names at posters in an effort to shut them down. Eg calling them xenophobe and racists. I’m very comfortable with my own arguments and happily dismiss yours, without the histrionics

You do realise doncha, that ‘pal’ doesn’t necessarily mean we’re friends.


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[evadgib]

Tweaking his tail can be such fun ????

[dick dasterdly]

4 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

 

I’m not sure how you can assuredly assert ‘I’m nothing like him or his views’ without having listened to him.

I've never listened to his views either, but gather he is BNP etc. - and so realise (without listening to him) that I don't agree with his views.

[Spidey]

31 minutes ago, evadgib said:

Tweaking his tail can be such fun ????

AKA trolling.

[Spidey]

17 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

I've never listened to his views either, but gather he is BNP etc. - and so realise (without listening to him) that I don't agree with his views.

UKIP

[evadgib]

5 minutes ago, Spidey said:

AKA trolling.

Nothing more than Banter and would quite likely have earned a ???? had I been on the other side.

[wayned]

A scary thought!  Could you imagine  Nancy Pelosi on on side of Parliament and Donald Trump on the other and Nancy having to call Trump the "Right Honorable Gentleman"!  She'd crap her pants first!

[nauseus]

3 hours ago, samran said:

You implied in a previous post that support of free movement is racist. It isn’t. 

 

Is it discriminatory and preferential? Yep. That is the nature and the raisin d’etre of economic blocs at their most basic. I’ve got no great issue with that all things considered. 

 

It isn’t just economics that justifies it, though I’d argue that it a bigger factor than you give it credit for. Add this to the European project - a union where people can live and work beside each other rather than killing each other, then you have a wonderful argument for free movement. 

 

But back to discrimination. Just like over 50’s can come and live in Thailand just by chucking GBP 20K in the bank, it is discriminatory. 

 

Just like cinemas, utilities and public transport give pensioners discounts. It is discriminatory.

 

So I guess if you decide to rip up your pensioners discount card, and you go out to convince others here foregoe living in Thailand on a retirement visa, I’ll start listening to you about egalitarianism. 

EU free movement is not racist, as such. However, this broad right of large numbers of people to move to countries that afford better pay and benefits, at short notice, also produces great strain on that country's infrastructure, to the point that it breaks down. This is very evident in the UK today.

 

The peace that you imagine to be promoted by free movement is likely to be shattered if it continues in the UK to the point where enough native-born people can't access doctors, schools and homes etc. 

 

Your over 50’s in Thailand comment is not a valid comparison. There is no welfare for these non-immigrants.

 

[Nigel Garvie]

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

EU free movement is not racist, as such. However, this broad right of large numbers of people to move to countries that afford better pay and benefits, at short notice, also produces great strain on that country's infrastructure, to the point that it breaks down. This is very evident in the UK today.

 

The peace that you imagine to be promoted by free movement is likely to be shattered if it continues in the UK to the point where enough native-born people can't access doctors, schools and homes etc. 

 

Your over 50’s in Thailand comment is not a valid comparison. There is no welfare for these non-immigrants.

 

I think that even among remainers, the majority think that complete free movement can cause many problems. David Cameron had it agreed that EU immigrants could only stay here for a very limited time if they couldn't support themselves. Why can't people access doctors? Well a lot of them have gone back to the continent because they have progressively seen that there is something sick in the English Psyche, and feel their contribution is not valued.

[samran]

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

EU free movement is not racist, as such. However, this broad right of large numbers of people to move to countries that afford better pay and benefits, at short notice, also produces great strain on that country's infrastructure, to the point that it breaks down. This is very evident in the UK today.

 

The peace that you imagine to be promoted by free movement is likely to be shattered if it continues in the UK to the point where enough native-born people can't access doctors, schools and homes etc. 

 

Your over 50’s in Thailand comment is not a valid comparison. There is no welfare for these non-immigrants.

 

Or, you could argue that the creaking infrastructure is the result of decades of under investment which has little to do with migrants.

 

After all, in particular EU migrants, they work and pay tax for the most part, no? 

 

As for your last comment, not unusual for the TV mob to find themselves hot and bothered when it comes to being compared to ‘immigrants’.

 

‘Oh, I’m an expat, not an immigrant - by visa even says so!’ 

 

Wrong, your non-immigrant visa dies after 3 months, after which you are given an extension of stay. And where do you do that extension of stay? At the immigration department. 

 

But enough of the semantics. The Thai government offers very little in the way of decent welfare to its own people. So for the most part you are no different.

 

You can still come here, utilise public infrastructure - roads, rail, power which is either subsided or under written by the Thai tax payer and visit doctors who were trained at a massive subsidy by the Thai government which is why their fees are so comparatively low.

 

So don’t say you receive nothing. It’s disingenuous at best and wilful ingnorance at worst.