Referendum finale: Immigration vs Economy

[Infinite Chaos]

Watching Andrew Marr Show today, the political commentators of various newspapers are reflecting that the last four months of both campaigns will focus on the economy vs immigration

Brexit: spectre of uncontrolled muslim Turk immigration. Right now Penelope Mordaunt is talking about the highly likely picture of Turkey being a member of the EU in 7 years and using Turkey's axis as the hub of the route to blackmail other EU members to force membership. Marr did say we (and others) would vote no but she finished by saying we wouldn't be able to vote no. I'm not pro-EU enough to call her bluff but I do know approval of membership depends on unanimous voting and Turkey doesn't meet the requirements for membership.

On the other hand - video of Boris Johnson in a BBC program a few years ago talking about why we should let Turkey join.

Also on the other hand - the NHS has been invoked by Brexit while NHS bosses have said many posts in the NHS are staffed by EU workers and there would be serious problems if we couldn't keep attracting medical specialists from Europe (and the rest of the world)

Bremain: spectre of economic collapse and war if we leave the EU. Various figures have said that we would lose jobs and there would be various apocalyptic scenarios if we leave. However, various Eurozone nations are indebted to Germany and powering her economic growth - Germany does export to us and would not want to have an economic trade war if we left. The picture of economic collapse of the world's 5th biggest economy is not likely.

On the other hand - George Osborne's claim house prices would take an immediate tumble would be good for young first time buyers who have for the last few years been frozen out of homes. We are otherwise at the silly stage where you could sell a moderate house in the UK and buy a really nice property and have lots of money left over if you bought in Spain / France / Crete etc.

Also on the other hand - the financial districts in Europe's powerhouse nations are physically and in terms of workforce - tiny in comparison to ours. It could be argued that our status as an independent financial centre set aside from EU rules would mean we become even more powerful as a centre for global trade and financial dealings. Those jobs and that industry are pretty powerful and could set deals and ensure its own survival whether inside or outside the EU.

 

[PeteEU]

Brexit: spectre of uncontrolled muslim Turk immigration.

Yes saw this on the newspaper review... utter bull**** as usual from anti-Europe English newspapers. What they have done, is take a poll asking 2000ish people in Turkeys 27 districts the question if they wanted to come to the UK if Turkey joined the EU. 16% said yes, and from this the newspaper has claimed that 10+ million Turks would flood into the UK.

Now first off the question was stupid and leading, and secondly Turks dont want to go to the UK.. they would head to Germany where many have family. So another bull**** story from the leave campaign. This is fearmongering pure and simple.

Plus it is not hard to get access to the EU by Turks as it is. Yes they need a visa, it costs a bit of money, but only 4% of all applications are rejected.. so there is defacto already free access.

Right now Penelope Mordaunt is talking about the highly likely picture of Turkey being a member of the EU in 7 years

The main country that is for a Turkish membership is the freaking UK. France and Germany both have serious valid questions about it, and it is irrelevant because Turkey is moving further and further away from the basic requirements of becoming a member. This is fearmongering not based on fact.

On the other hand - video of Boris Johnson in a BBC program a few years ago talking about why we should let Turkey join.

Of course he would... only way his family can get into the UK.. Well not really.

Also on the other hand - the NHS has been invoked by Brexit while NHS bosses have said many posts in the NHS are staffed by EU workers and there would be serious problems if we couldn't keep attracting medical specialists from Europe (and the rest of the world)

Yes never understood this argument by Brexit. They are all over the place on this one. Some say "then we can get nurses from the Philippines".. nothing is preventing that atm.. and are they seriously saying they should replace Spanish, German and Polish nurses that are trained in the NHS with untrained nurses from the Philippines? Makes no sense.

Bremain: spectre of economic collapse and war if we leave the EU. Various figures have said that we would lose jobs and there would be various apocalyptic scenarios if we leave. However, various Eurozone nations are indebted to Germany and powering her economic growth - Germany does export to us and would not want to have an economic trade war if we left. The picture of economic collapse of the world's 5th biggest economy is not likely.

No it is not likely, but that does not mean there wont be a massive hit. This massive hit is something the Brexit people deny and actually promote that it would get better. There is zero evidence that it will be become better, but plenty of evidence that it will be worse. How worse is the question. Partly fearmongering but based on actual facts.

On the other hand - George Osborne's claim house prices would take an immediate tumble would be good for young first time buyers who have for the last few years been frozen out of homes. We are otherwise at the silly stage where you could sell a moderate house in the UK and buy a really nice property and have lots of money left over if you bought in Spain / France / Crete etc.

Well this is a bit silly also. Falling house prices is bad. Yes young first time people will be able on paper to get into the market, but because of falling prices then lots of people will be under water. This means defaults, this means less loans by banks, which means young people cant get into the market because they cant get a loan. So on one point Osborne is correct.. collapse/falling house prices is bad.. but will it happen due to Brexit.. well that I dont know, as there is no real evidence that it could. It could go both ways. Partial fearmongering based on logic and facts.

Also on the other hand - the financial districts in Europe's powerhouse nations are physically and in terms of workforce - tiny in comparison to ours. It could be argued that our status as an independent financial centre set aside from EU rules would mean we become even more powerful as a centre for global trade and financial dealings. Those jobs and that industry are pretty powerful and could set deals and ensure its own survival whether inside or outside the EU.

One could also argue that the only reason that you are a powerful financial centre is because of being in the EU. Like it or not there are "independent financial centres" out there, that have even less regulation than the City of London. Dubai and Hong Kong come to mind. So those that want to go to such areas, have done so already... so why is the City of London so big? One conclusion can be .. it is historical and another.. the EU.

 

[joG]

Yes saw this on the newspaper review... utter bull**** as usual from anti-Europe English ........

That is where I stopped reading your aggressive, invective tirade.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

~utter bull**** ~ bull**** ~freaking

Leave that kind of rubbish out please. It adds nothing.

~ No it is not likely, but that does not mean there wont be a massive hit.

There's no evidence either way at yet Pete...

~ Well this is a bit silly also. Falling house prices is bad.

Firstly, I don't think house prices will take the hit projected and I think any fall will be lower than Osborne predicts. But - leaving your inevitable "should have built more houses" comment - we have had problems in the market because they have become an investment rather than a living space and prices are over-inflated and have been for years.

~ One could also argue that the only reason that you are a powerful financial centre is because of being in the EU. Like it or not there are "independent financial centres" out there, that have even less regulation than the City of London. Dubai and Hong Kong come to mind. So those that want to go to such areas, have done so already... so why is the City of London so big? One conclusion can be .. it is historical and another.. the EU.

London has always been a trade centre, that is not going to change. You also need to add the reason for London becoming so big is that the American counterbalance stopped any idea of Russian tanks just continuing their journey at Berlin in 1945. The reason there is a free Europe to have a free market and a strong free London is partly also the US. London was (including Pax Americana) a major trade centre before the EU.

That is where I stopped reading your aggressive, invective tirade.

Afraid I have to agree with you on this; when the discussion stops being a discussion and all we get is the insults we attract bottom feeders.

 

[PeteEU]

Leave that kind of rubbish out please. It adds nothing.

It is not rubbish.. it is a fact. The Express where this "poll" was in, is a know anti-EU/Europe newspaper. It is Brexit newspaper.

There's no evidence either way at yet Pete...

Yes and no. First off, it will take years to negotiate any sort of deal. The limit set in the Treaty is 2 years, but it aint gonna happen in that time frame. It took Greenland 7 years to negotiate to leave the EEC/EU. Trade deals and such take time... especially if one party (the EU) are not exactly happy about the situation.

Secondly time means uncertainty and that will cause problems.. it is already doing so and you have not even voted yet. If you vote to leave, then what? Massive uncertainty. The Brexit people have not put forward any plan what so ever to what they are going to do, or how it is going to happen. This creates massive uncertainty and that is not good for the economy.

Like it or not, there is a hell of a bigger chance of problems like the remain campaign claim, than the fantasy view the Brexit people have been pushing.

Firstly, I don't think house prices will take the hit projected and I think any fall will be lower than Osborne predicts. But - leaving your inevitable "should have built more houses" comment - we have had problems in the market because they have become an investment rather than a living space and prices are over-inflated and have been for years.

Yes prices have been over-inflated for years, and that has little to do with the EU or immigration since most of the "wealth" who have pushed up price in that segment come from outside the EU.

But my point is based on logic and facts. Lower house prices means less wealth in the economy and more people underwater and that means higher default rates, which means the banks will restrict lending because they need to compensate for the higher default rate.

Everything has a consequence, and with lower house prices, people, the UK in general will become poorer since most peoples "wealth" is sitting in the value of their home.

London has always been a trade centre, that is not going to change. You also need to add the reason for London becoming so big is that the American counterbalance stopped any idea of Russian tanks just continuing their journey at Berlin in 1945. The reason there is a free Europe to have a free market and a strong free London is partly also the US. London was (including Pax Americana) a major trade centre before the EU.

Yes I dont deny this. But lets be realistic here. London was the centre because of the British Empire. That is gone now. Even before the empire was gone, the importance of London as a trading hub was threatened by especially New York and Hong Kong. This decline was stopped because of the common market, and London has managed to maintain a considerable power base. However in the mean time, the world has opened up and more centres of wealth have come into the frame. Dubai, Hong Kong, Tokyo, Frankfurt, Paris and so on. Now the question is, is London powerful today because of history or its access to a 500 million market? Will it be able to compensate for the 500 million market place by being independent with already established independent trade centres out there?

What I would like to know (not looked it up tbh), is how much of the City of Londons "trade" is actually related to the continent, either directly or indirectly.

Afraid I have to agree with you on this; when the discussion stops being a discussion and all we get is the insults we attract bottom feeders.

How is it an insult to call bull**** for bull****? The Express poll is an absolute partisan crap-pile that the Brexit campaign are using as fact. Just think of it.. there are 80+ million Turks. They have the same ability to get to the UK atm as they have to Germany... but a huge portion choose Germany over the UK, and yet we are to expect that 15 million out of 80 would want to go to the UK over Germany if they became members of the EU? Makes no sense...

 

[Infinite Chaos]

It is not rubbish.. ~ How is it an insult to call bull**** for bull****? ~

I tried. I hope someone else can engage with you on this thread.

 

[Camlon]

Plus it is not hard to get access to the EU by Turks as it is. Yes they need a visa, it costs a bit of money, but only 4% of all applications are rejected.. so there is defacto already free access.

You don´t know what you are talking about. Just because 4% got rejected, then it doesn't mean that 96% of the people who want to go to the EU, can go to the EU. People only apply for a visa if they think they can get a visa.

Secondly, your figure is for tourist visa. If you want to live in the UK, then you need a family or work visa.

 

[Camlon]

I took a look at the actual visa figures.

If you look at all visa types (Tourist, Work, Study, Family) then 8% of Turkish applicants got refused in 2015. This is an increase from 2005, when it was 6%.

Source 2.1 Visas
https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...stics-october-to-december-2015/list-of-tables

 

[Infinite Chaos]

~ Penelope Mordaunt is talking about the highly likely picture of Turkey being a member of the EU in 7 years and using Turkey's axis as the hub of the route to blackmail other EU members to force membership. ~

This has become quite the story today: after all the referendum civil war; I think a realignment of positions and appointments may need to be done.

David Cameron has said claims the UK would not be able to block Turkey joining the EU are "very misleading", insisting the UK retains a veto.

~

But the prime minister said this was "absolutely wrong" and raised questions about the Leave campaign's judgement.
It would be "literally decades" before Turkey was deemed ready to join, Mr Cameron said, pointing out that the UK and every other EU member must agree - as well as 28 national Parliaments - to this happening.

That "judgement" is by members of cameron's own party. Even then though - an early speech by Cameron promising to be the champion of Turkey's membership hopes has emerged from a visit to Turkey in the last Parliament.

 

[PeteEU]

You don´t know what you are talking about. Just because 4% got rejected, then it doesn't mean that 96% of the people who want to go to the EU, can go to the EU. People only apply for a visa if they think they can get a visa.

And does that change what I said? no... not in the slightest. What I said, was that Turks already have a damn easy time of getting into Europe.

Secondly, your figure is for tourist visa. If you want to live in the UK, then you need a family or work visa.

And so what? Any EU citizen moving to another EU country has to have work or the means to support him and his family to be able to settle legally.

 

[Chagos]

You don´t know what you are talking about.

Look who's saying that.

Just because 4% got rejected, then it doesn't mean that 96% of the people who want to go to the EU, can go to the EU. People only apply for a visa if they think they can get a visa.

What are YOU talking about here? If 4 pct of applications get rejected that means that 96 pct of applications don't. Those are the figures, period.

Your speculations of who wants a visa and who doesn't even bother applying serve no purpose whatsoever.

Secondly, your figure is for tourist visa. If you want to live in the UK, then you need a family or work visa.

Nobody is talking about giving residence permits, the issue at hand here is visas. Try and understand the difference.

 

[Chagos]

I took a look at the actual visa figures.

If you look at all visa types (Tourist, Work, Study, Family) then 8% of Turkish applicants got refused in 2015. This is an increase from 2005, when it was 6%.

Source 2.1 Visas
https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...stics-october-to-december-2015/list-of-tables

And?

A rejection increase of 1.33 pct in 10 years is relevant how?

To what?

 

[Chagos]

This has become quite the story today: after all the referendum civil war; I think a realignment of positions and appointments may need to be done.



That "judgement" is by members of cameron's own party. Even then though - an early speech by Cameron promising to be the champion of Turkey's membership hopes has emerged from a visit to Turkey in the last Parliament.

With the current shenanigans in Ankara we can prepare ourselves for the whole Visa talks to fall flat anyway. Which would also mean the "refugee return" deal that brought the whole thing up.

And Cameron may sham around in his usual manner (champion of Turkey's EU membership, my bloody foot), he knows he can afford to sound off towards Turkey in this manner without any consequences arising.

Turkey will not be accepted in the medium to long distant future, simply because it meets none of the required standards. In fact now things are as bad (if not worse) as under the military.

But it's not just Cameron wallowing in his own hypocrisy, Merkel and Hollande (and others) are dangling the carrot just as much with just as little intention of letting the mule eat it.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

Key to the election seems to be female voters - 1 million more women eligible to vote than men and these are the majority of undecideds among us.

They are less likely to turn up and vote however so whichever side wants to win will not only have to persuade them of their argument but get them out to vote. What is clear from this morning's article - the pestilence, famine and war messages both sides are putting out are not helping them.

With the current shenanigans in Ankara we can prepare ourselves for the whole Visa talks to fall flat anyway. Which would also mean the "refugee return" deal that brought the whole thing up.

And Cameron may sham around in his usual manner (champion of Turkey's EU membership, my bloody foot), he knows he can afford to sound off towards Turkey in this manner without any consequences arising.

Turkey will not be accepted in the medium to long distant future, simply because it meets none of the required standards. In fact now things are as bad (if not worse) as under the military.

But it's not just Cameron wallowing in his own hypocrisy, Merkel and Hollande (and others) are dangling the carrot just as much with just as little intention of letting the mule eat it.

Oh I agree all that - it's the mud being slung that may have a long term affect. A junior minister of the government basically misrepresenting truth on one side and then this morning Duncan-Smith saying treasury reports are hopelessly wrong. I'm not looking to believe anything or anyone in politics in future but it doesn't give much confidence in those we elect to govern us.

 

[Camlon]

And does that change what I said? no... not in the slightest. What I said, was that Turks already have a damn easy time of getting into Europe.

You claimed it is easy because only a minority fail, but that only show you never applied for a visa.

Let me tell you what my wife parents needed to apply for tourist visa, from a country that has about the same failure rate as Turkey. They needed to provide a letter from their boss, bank statements, ownership of their house, flight and hotel reservations and much
more. They also need documents from me as a sponsor, or else they would need an interview. In total we had to give them 100 pages per person. Any person who is unemployed would be adviced to not apply.

Its not just to hand in the application and pay some money and hope you are among the majority. Many will see the documents you need to hand in and then just give up. That is why it is meaningless to just look at the failure rate.

And so what? Any EU citizen moving to another EU country has to have work or the means to support him and his family to be able to settle legally.

As a EU citizen you can go to another country, apply for the jobs like a local and then settle down.

As a non-EU citizen you need the employer to show that he tried to find a eu citizen first. It is hard enough for eu citizens to get work, hence very few non-European citizens can get a work visa in the UK.

 

[Chagos]

~.............. I'm not looking to believe anything or anyone in politics in future but it doesn't give much confidence in those we elect to govern us.

With age comes wisdom, with wisdom comes disgust.

Neither necessarily wrt everything or everyone, yet where the political class is concerned I'm getting to be more and more in favour of having the whole lot publicly flogged on each and every Saturday.

 

[Chagos]

~..........As a EU citizen you can go to another country, apply for the jobs like a local and then settle down.

As a non-EU citizen you need the employer to show that he tried to find a eu citizen first. It is hard enough for eu citizens to get work, hence very few non-European citizens can get a work visa in the UK.

What confusion leads you to ignore completely (still) is that the issue under discussion has nothing to do with granting rights of settling, work, residence.

What is scheduled to be discussed is visiting rights, nothing more.

 

[Camlon]

What confusion leads you to ignore completely (still) is that the issue under discussion has nothing to do with granting rights of settling, work, residence.

What is scheduled to be discussed is visiting rights, nothing more.

You are wrong. PeteEU was talking about people settling in the UK, not visiting rights.

Yes saw this on the newspaper review... utter bull**** as usual from anti-Europe English newspapers. What they have done, is take a poll asking 2000ish people in Turkeys 27 districts the question if they wanted to come to the UK if Turkey joined the EU. 16% said yes, and from this the newspaper has claimed that 10+ million Turks would flood into the UK.

Now first off the question was stupid and leading, and secondly Turks dont want to go to the UK.. they would head to Germany where many have family. So another bull**** story from the leave campaign. This is fearmongering pure and simple.

Plus it is not hard to get access to the EU by Turks as it is. Yes they need a visa, it costs a bit of money, but only 4% of all applications are rejected.. so there is defacto already free access.

 

[joG]

You claimed it is easy because only a minority fail, but that only show you never applied for a visa.

Let me tell you what my wife parents needed to apply for tourist visa, from a country that has about the same failure rate as Turkey. They needed to provide a letter from their boss, bank statements, ownership of their house, flight and hotel reservations and much
more. They also need documents from me as a sponsor, or else they would need an interview. In total we had to give them 100 pages per person. Any person who is unemployed would be adviced to not apply.

Its not just to hand in the application and pay some money and hope you are among the majority. Many will see the documents you need to hand in and then just give up. That is why it is meaningless to just look at the failure rate.



As a EU citizen you can go to another country, apply for the jobs like a local and then settle down.

As a non-EU citizen you need the employer to show that he tried to find a eu citizen first. It is hard enough for eu citizens to get work, hence very few non-European citizens can get a work visa in the UK.

I see you do not fall for the EU populist propaganda.

 

[Andalublue]

Watching Andrew Marr Show today, the political commentators of various newspapers are reflecting that the last four months of both campaigns will focus on the economy vs immigration

Brexit: spectre of uncontrolled muslim Turk immigration. Right now Penelope Mordaunt is talking about the highly likely picture of Turkey being a member of the EU in 7 years and using Turkey's axis as the hub of the route to blackmail other EU members to force membership. Marr did say we (and others) would vote no but she finished by saying we wouldn't be able to vote no. I'm not pro-EU enough to call her bluff but I do know approval of membership depends on unanimous voting and Turkey doesn't meet the requirements for membership.

What you say is true. Under current treaties the decision to allow Turkish entry would have to be unanimous. What she (Mordaunt) is saying is that EU rules change, constantly, and that it's not so far fetched to believe they could change to favour Turkish accession. She's right as far as that goes. What she ignores, of course, is that any change to unanimity decision-making has to be agreed using the current system, so to discard unanimity voting the member states would have to be unanimous. Not going to happen.

On the other hand - video of Boris Johnson in a BBC program a few years ago talking about why we should let Turkey join.

Yes. What a bastion of principled consistency he is! I guess when a bogeyman is really, really needed Johnson's as willing to throw the Turks under a bus as any other nationality or social grouping.

Also on the other hand - the NHS has been invoked by Brexit while NHS bosses have said many posts in the NHS are staffed by EU workers and there would be serious problems if we couldn't keep attracting medical specialists from Europe (and the rest of the world)

You don't have to consume the NHS services on a daily basis to understand how dependent it is on non-native staff, from top to bottom.

Bremain: spectre of economic collapse and war if we leave the EU. Various figures have said that we would lose jobs and there would be various apocalyptic scenarios if we leave. However, various Eurozone nations are indebted to Germany and powering her economic growth - Germany does export to us and would not want to have an economic trade war if we left. The picture of economic collapse of the world's 5th biggest economy is not likely.

True. I'm very critical of all these Treasury/City/EU finance figures weighing into the debate. I don't think they are believed, even if they may be correct. I don't think they have any credibility (look how great they were predicting the 2008 collapse) or impartiality (see how they fed Greece to the wolves just last year), so if they are worried about Brexit they'd be well advised to button it and simply provide the remain campaigners with funds and talking points.

On the other hand - George Osborne's claim house prices would take an immediate tumble would be good for young first time buyers who have for the last few years been frozen out of homes. We are otherwise at the silly stage where you could sell a moderate house in the UK and buy a really nice property and have lots of money left over if you bought in Spain / France / Crete etc.

Trouble is that older people, those WITH the properties already, are more likely to vote than those for whom falling property prices would be a boon. That's pretty much what happened in the general election last year.

Also on the other hand - the financial districts in Europe's powerhouse nations are physically and in terms of workforce - tiny in comparison to ours. It could be argued that our status as an independent financial centre set aside from EU rules would mean we become even more powerful as a centre for global trade and financial dealings. Those jobs and that industry are pretty powerful and could set deals and ensure its own survival whether inside or outside the EU.

Though the British sector might be much bigger than Zurich and Frankfurt etc, it is still an employer of a tiny number of admittedly influential players. The City sector really doesn't benefit the British economy or government finances very much at all. Corporation tax as a whole contributes just 6.3% to government income. I've never bought the argument that the financial sector is so crucial to national prosperity. If it doesn't create jobs and doesn't contribute to public finances, what does it do that is so indispensable?

 

[Chagos]

You are wrong. PeteEU was talking about people settling in the UK, not visiting rights.

No, you are either not paying proper attention or being intentionally obtuse. In either case misrepresenting what was said as seems to be the custom with you.

The issue at hand was started by you in stating the difficulty of Turks getting Visa. Your claim was refuted as usual.

You brought in work permits and started to conflate EU membership of Turkey with visiting rights.

 

[Camlon]

No, you are either not paying proper attention or being intentionally obtuse. In either case misrepresenting what was said as seems to be the custom with you.

The issue at hand was started by you in stating the difficulty of Turks getting Visa. Your claim was refuted as usual.

You brought in work permits and started to conflate EU membership of Turkey with visiting rights.

And once again you are lying and trying to decleare yourself a winner. If your arguments was not so pathetically weak, then you wouldn't feel the need to claim that you have refuted anyone.

The issue was not started by me, I responded to PeteEU who was talking about people settling in the UK, not visiting rights. You were wrong.

Yes saw this on the newspaper review... utter bull**** as usual from anti-Europe English newspapers. What they have done, is take a poll asking 2000ish people in Turkeys 27 districts the question if they wanted to come to the UK if Turkey joined the EU. 16% said yes, and from this the newspaper has claimed that 10+ million Turks would flood into the UK.

Now first off the question was stupid and leading, and secondly Turks dont want to go to the UK.. they would head to Germany where many have family. So another bull**** story from the leave campaign. This is fearmongering pure and simple.

Plus it is not hard to get access to the EU by Turks as it is. Yes they need a visa, it costs a bit of money, but only 4% of all applications are rejected.. so there is defacto already free access. .

You don´t know what you are talking about. Just because 4% got rejected, then it doesn't mean that 96% of the people who want to go to the EU, can go to the EU. People only apply for a visa if they think they can get a visa.

Secondly, your figure is for tourist visa. If you want to live in the UK, then you need a family or work visa.

 

[Chagos]

And once again you are lying and trying to decleare yourself a winner.

Your usual projection problems surfacing again, eh?

If your arguments was not so pathetically weak, then you wouldn't feel the need to claim that you have refuted anyone.

............as shown by the fact that it was Pete already refuting your OT deflections.

The issue was not started by me, I responded to PeteEU who was talking about people settling in the UK, not visiting rights. You were wrong.

....who then went on to show that it isn't impossible for Turks to visit the EU right now, i.e. obtain visiting Visas.

From where on you went onto telling him that he doesn't know what he's talking about, underlining it by your supposed knowledge of access to visiting Visas being nigh on impossible.

You simply don't appear to pay attention, make unsubstantiated claims over what wasn't said and then, when this weakness of yours is pointed out, resort to accusing the critic of lying and "wanting to win".

It's tiresome, especially when shown who's doing the actual lying here and was in similar cases in the past.

 

[Chagos]

In post #22 you even bold the part of Pete's post where he states wanted to come to the UK if Turkey joined the EU, only to then harp on about the difficulty in obtaining visiting (tourist) Visas in your answer that you also quote

You don´t know what you are talking about. Just because 4% got rejected, then it doesn't mean that 96% of the people who want to go to the EU, can go to the EU. People only apply for a visa if they think they can get a visa.

Secondly, your figure is for tourist visa. If you want to live in the UK, then you need a family or work visa..

Focus, eh!

 

[Camlon]

In post #22 you even bold the part of Pete's post where he states (16%) wanted to come to the UK if Turkey joined the EU, only to then harp on about the difficulty in obtaining visiting (tourist) Visas in your answer that you also quote Focus, eh!

So you think only 16% want to visit the UK, if they join the EU? That would only be dreadful news for the UK tourism industry. Or maybe he was talking about people settling in the UK, not visitors.

Its funny how you will take any position, so that you don't have to admit that you were wrong.