Thoughts on the Brexit vote?

For me, it will be interesting to see how much of "Brexit" actually takes place.
Tons of scenarios swirling around about "special relationships" and such.
Plus the political fallout of many of the statements not actually being true (like that 350 million pound a week bus slogan that already won't go to the NHS).

I still think Scotland may push for independence.  What Spain and France stated was that they won't have separate talks at the moment with anything other than the legitimate government of the UK. If Scotland leaves the UK, it would be fair to assume that talks would start.  But everything must progress in its time.  Britain is up against it if it starts to fall apart from a less than United Kingdom...

We're all kibitiz'ing here methinks.

The £350 million was a total red herring.  It'll all get swallowed up in the melee.  UK has never to my knowledge had "funds" which relate to special sectors of the economy. Everything is pooled and then budgeted out. 

If I was the PM in waiting, I'd put the kibosh immediately on any thoughts of a UK breakup until well after the Brexit has been achieved and a measure of stability and settlement has ensued.  At least 5 to 7 years post-Brexit before any thoughts of even discussing it.  So the SNP will just have to wait.   Same for anyone else, i.e. Gibraltar. 

The Spanish are not going to discuss anything with Scotland. They've got their own separatist problems in Catalonia and there's no way they could endorse Scotland as that would muddy their unfounded claims to Gibraltar. Let's not even mention Morocco's interest in Ceuta and Melilla.

France could end up with problems in their backyard as well with Corsica.  And lets not forget Belgium with the Walloons.

And of course our local favourite, Hungarians and Erdély (Transylvania).

In fact, as many places there are in the EU has equally a number of separatists.

Current stuff in the news suggests the UK will adopt the "Norway" model.  That'll do nothing on immigration - also a red herring.

p.s. My American colleague from San Diego is better connected than me, he's just shown me there is plan and you can see it here: The Brexit Plan

fluffy2560 wrote:

p.s. My American colleague from San Diego is better connected than me, he's just shown me there is plan and you can see it here: The Brexit Plan

HILARIOUS!!

fluffy2560 wrote:

Current stuff in the news suggests the UK will adopt the "Norway" model.  That'll do nothing on immigration - also a red herring.

I have also read some bantering about using the "Swiss Model".

Did anyone else but me notice the Swiss immigration referendum in February 2014? Which was basically the Swexit?

Now maybe I missed it, and anyone who knows about it let me know, but as far as I can determine the Swiss and the EU have not been able come to terms on a new agreement because the EU insists on all four pillars -- including free movement of people (i.e. immigration). By February 2017 if there is no new agreement, as I understand it (?), Switzerland looses direct access to the EU single market.

klsallee wrote:

....anyone else but me notice the Swiss immigration referendum in February 2014? Which was basically the Swexit?

Now maybe I missed it, and anyone who knows about it let me know, but as far as I can determine the Swiss and the EU have not been able come to terms on a new agreement because the EU insists on all four pillars -- including free movement of people (i.e. immigration). By February 2017 if there is no new agreement, as I understand it (?), Switzerland looses direct access to the EU single market.

Yes I noticed it but as I've got it in for the Swiss for being very boring and hassling me 20 years ago over a work permit and my motorway vignette. I decided I couldn't care less!  But yes, you are correct, they withdrew from the free movement of labour and will be forced out of things like common science programmes etc.

But in my gloating, I failed to realise that maybe the shoe could be on the other foot sometime....

fluffy2560 wrote:

the Swiss for being very boring

Surly you have seen the Orson Wells "Cuckoo Clock" speech from The Third Man. 

klsallee wrote:

the EU insists on all four pillars -- including free movement of people (i.e. immigration). By February 2017 if there is no new agreement, as I understand it (?), Switzerland looses direct access to the EU single market.

That's what bugs me about the EU - No other country in the world demands free movement of all its people if you want to trade with them.

Whilst some see not wanting free movement as a racist thing, I see it as common sense.
They encourage poor countries to join, then insist all member countries accept bus loads of people from the poorer countries, even when the destination country has an unemployment problem - it's daft.

As far as free movement of people, I actually have little problem when people who share my ideals and freedoms join my country. There is far more variation of opinion between political parties than between some demographics of different countries.  My biggest issue is when the borders are not secure against those who do not share some similar vision of these ideals and freedoms.

The US has an issue with Mexicans coming into the States to "steal jobs". But if you look at the jobs they take, very few Americans are willing to do that kind of hard labor work in the fields, demeaning work in cleaning, long days in landscaping, that Hispanics do every day (among other immigrant minorities).  And when you think of this more in-depth, there are many economic surveys that show that since these migrants are paying taxes but ineligible for benefits, they actually pay into the system more than they take out for a net economic benefit to the US.

In Europe, I've heard about the Polish plumber coming into Britain stealing someone's job there. But if no native English people wanted to become a plumber, then no job is sacrificed.  However, a thousand economic migrants coming into a country with little transferable labor skills, language skills, cultural skills, etc., groups of people whose values do not share the hard-fought gains in equality, freedoms, and protection of individual rights, that is a problem.

Free movement within the union - understandable to me.
Secure the borders - YES!
Racism - No!

I  find it quite ridiculous to have these anti-immigrant policies going on at all.  Better to take people from anywhere if all things being equal they are useful economically. 

Nearly every Western country has a falling birth rate and population decline.  In order to keep their economies going, they need people.  And population movements have been going on for thousands of years.  The USA, Australia, NZ and everywhere are countries full of immigrants and their offspring. 

Who is actually an authentic native person? And when do you become an authentic native?  After 2 generations? 3 generations?

Even Trump is a essentially a 1st generation American.  His mother was from Scotland, father 1st generation ethnically German.  So much for being anti-immigrant.

There's an ethical issue over "stealing population" from somewhere else, particularly if a country takes the brightest and best. I won't say anything about importing 5th columnists.

Western countries would do better - if they want to be anti-immigrant - to have very high benefits for those with children to encourage increasing the birth rate of those they consider natives.

Many EU countries should be grateful for these immigrants. In HU, I myself have brought my money (ok, it wasn't large), had kids in the country (valuable longer term), contributed in some way to society (created wealth for someone by buying goods and services). On the other hand, relatives in HU have gone to the UK and Germany and taken their talent (yes, they were highly educated) there.  It's all good.

Fred wrote:

That's what bugs me about the EU - No other country in the world demands free movement of all its people if you want to trade with them.

1) The EU is not a country. It is more like a club. And like any venerable club, it has rules you have to follow if you want to join. And as per Article 50, if you want to, you may leave the club.

2) The EU does not demand free movement of all people to trade with the EU. The entire world trades with the EU without having to join. You seem to be confusing simply being able to "trade" with the EU with gaining unfettered access to the EU common market. A subtle but important difference.

Not sure what to say about immigration, my great grandmother, only going back 3 generations was a full blooded Mohawk.
I am sure my relations were a bit sorry they had the so called,
"Thanksgiving" with the Pilgrims. ( More of a let's give them the pox and a few worthless beads take over)
Let them in and see what happens when their numbers are larger then yours, reservations perhaps? Trail of Tears.
Once one group is a majority, the locals can take to the high country.Just saying, learn from history.
Unless you have experienced feeling like an outsider in your own country then there is really no way to explain how having large numbers of one kind coming in at once and not adapting to the local traditions  and customs can kill a culture.
It is not true that Mexicans are happy to take any old dirty job, maybe in the beginning but that is not their final goal, their goal is to reclaim old Mexican lands and to hang the Mexican flag up.
Anytime they have a gathering they are waving the Mexican flag screaming Via Mexico, all this while they are undocumented and guests.
I really hate to say this but honestly within 50 years hardly anyone will be speaking Hungarian inside of Hungary.
One world, one gov, just take the pill and don't ask any questions.
Sorry, just the ravings of a mad women.

Flags are funny thing to me. A piece of cloth. Yet stir up so much emotions.

- The President of the Hungarian parliament, Laszlo Kover, has tried to prevent anyone displaying an EU flag in parliament by opposition members. But the Hungarian flag is predominately displayed. Thus trying to suppress differences of opinion.

- Many people are displaying their nation's flag on their car recently, mostly just to support their national team in the European football matches. But then have had them removed by others thinking flag are just a nationalistic symbol. Which of course begs and leads to the conclusion that national football teams are potentially then also? Should we ban football? Or the Olympics? Since international sports certainly is "nationalistic".

- When my wife was mayor of our village, she got a complaint that someone was flying the rainbow flag. The flag was on private property. So much for some people respecting property rights and freedom of expression in small villages. (Of course my wife did nothing -- it was a silly complaint).

- I have recently read interesting, but somewhat conflicting, opinion pieces at the LA Times and the NY Times about what the US flag means to different people.

- My father in law displays the Hungarian flag, the Transylvania flag, and a Swiss flag. He says he does it to confuse people. He has suggested I fly the USA and Hungarian flag side by side (so far, I have declined -- flying the USA flag abroad in some places today is like putting a target on one's forehead). But I do admit, he has a deliciously wicked sense of humor.

klsallee wrote:

1) The EU is not a country. It is more like a club. And like any venerable club, it has rules you have to follow if you want to join.

Venerable? Opinions vary.

As for leaving, I'm sure two fingers a la Agincourt, will suffice.

klsallee wrote:

2) The EU does not demand free movement of all people to trade with the EU. The entire world trades with the EU without having to join..

True, it only demands freedom of movement if you want to trade without protectionist tariffs; a sort of protection racket.

Fred wrote:

As for leaving, I'm sure two fingers a la Agincourt, will suffice.

While I believe that history is very important, and we should learn from the past, as an American I do admit, and utterly profess, my complete lack of understanding about the European propensity to bring up issues that happened 500 years ago. As if they were recent wounds deserving, and needing, current retribution.

As if it really matters today what side your ancestors were on at the Battle of Hastings. Or even at the Battle of the Somme.

Or as we in California might rather think: "Just acknowledge and move on dude.....". But that is, of course, just me. 

klsallee wrote:

.... He has suggested I fly the USA and Hungarian flag side by side (so far, I have declined -- flying the USA flag abroad in some places today is like putting a target on one's forehead)....

What about flying your state flag? 

I've thought about flying the English flag myself on St George's Day.

On my travels I've heard of US folks displaying the Canadian flag to avoid unnecessary attention but also having a mechanism to deflect criticism.

I've also heard about Irish people getting sympathy from nationals of now independent, for British empire outposts while Brits get it in the neck.

Maybe the answer is no flag is a good flag.

fluffy2560 wrote:

What about flying your state flag?

Wow. What a great idea. I never thought of that. Thanks for the suggestion.

fluffy2560 wrote:

I've thought about flying the English flag myself on St George's Day.

I live on the St George Hill here in Hungary, so I fully support this concept. 

fluffy2560 wrote:

On my travels I've heard of US folks displaying the Canadian flag to avoid unnecessary attention but also having a mechanism to deflect criticism.

Yes, i heard that too. But only as rumors. I do not seek out being confronted. But, IMHO, if anyone actually did that, it was cowardly. If I am abroad and am confronted I am "big enough" to say, "Yes, I am a US Citizen, and I (do / do not) agree with XYZ US policy.".

fluffy2560 wrote:

I've also heard about Irish people getting sympathy from nationals of now independent, for British empire outposts while Brits get it in the neck.

Some people will always try to find common cause and support against any perceived common "enemy" with anyone they can. It at times make for strange bed fellows.

fluffy2560 wrote:

Maybe the answer is no flag is a good flag.

That is basically my feeling. Or to be more specific, I just am not much of a flag waver. But if someone wants to be, that it is fine with me too (I support freedom of expression).

But I do think assuming that flags only represent nationalism is silly. It is more complicated than that. No one permanently owns a symbol. Anyone can move to redefine any symbol, any time. The rainbow flag, for example, represents no nation. In fact it is trans-national, and represents rather a point of solidarity.

klsallee wrote:

fluffy2560 wrote:

What about flying your state flag?

Wow. What a great idea. I never thought of that. Thanks for the suggestion.

That'll confuse everyone. 

A little bit of rebellion and a touch of anarchy has to be a good thing.

klsallee wrote:

The rainbow flag, for example, represents no nation. In fact it is trans-national, and represents rather a point of solidarity.

Yes, represent the LGBTI community but yes, certainly international but origin in California I think.

I suppose that's why the village bigot in your location was complaining to your Mrs.

I'm amused by all this flag stuff, and how it's seen in the UK against how things are in Asia.
I recall a story (assuming the newspaper wasn't lying) about a man who had been told to remove a St George's flag due to health and safety concerns. I was in Malaysia at the time, thinking how if anyone was told to remove a Malaysian flag they'd probably smack the offender in the mouth and send him on his way. The same applies here.
Whilst there is a level of xenophobia, the flag is seen as a symbol to unite the nation, not a racist thing.
I was in support of Brexit but not of Farage because I dislike his attitude to everything I've seen him react to, but most don't seem to understand you can support one whilst disliking the other.

The UK needs to get on with life, dumping all the bad things about the EU, keeping the better ideas, then unite behind the flag, not as a racist or xenophobic symbol, but a flag of unity to be seen as a rallying point to make Britain the best it can be.
A mate who I still chat with from time to time once went crackers because a show we were at were doing a mini last night at the proms.
His error was thinking it was flag waving little England stuff, never giving the slightest thought a guy from an Indian family would have been just as welcome as anyone else to join in.  No one was being racist, just trying to be English.

If the Scottish vote to leave the UK, so be it, but no return should ever be considered and the cross of St Andrew should be removed from the flag without delay.
Unity is the way out of the problem so anyone who can't play nice should be ditched. Allow a Scottish referendum as soon as 50 is signed.
The Scottish independence lot are rather one sided in so much as they complained they are being forced out of Europe, but never gave a thought to the minor detail they could have forced England to remain. Without Scotland, the vote would have been far greater to exit than it was, hence I have no objection to a Scottish referendum.

As with England and Europe, the thinking is too far apart for there to be real unity, so allow them to leave if they wish.
Sadly, all their previous budgets were based on oil money and the price has collapsed so they'll go bust very quickly. However, that's up to Scottish voters to decide.

The likely best way forward for England is without Scotland.

After 911 the flag waving everywhere in the states was ok for about the first week afterwards, after that is was a bit too much.
My son left for a western  bound flight from Logan International Airport about 5 hours before the c*** went down.
His flight from Budapest/New York/Vegas was changed to Budapest/Paris/ Boston/Vegas.Last min. makes me wonder why that happened as well as the whole 911 thing.
If anyone should be waving a flag, it might just be me, but not my way, I dislike flag waving even though my relations have given allot to the states in many ways.
I don't believe in flags but then again I do not believe in freebies to newbies either.

Marilyn Tassy wrote:

After 911 the flag waving everywhere in the states was ok for about the first week afterwards, after that is was a bit too much.

Yes, too much.

In fact the USA flag code states:

§176. Respect for flag:
    (d) The flag should never be used as wearing apparel, bedding, or drapery.

Yet many self declared "patriots" in the USA now seem to wear the flag on everything from t-shirts to diapers.

I do not so much mind patriots. But I do not suffer fools gladly.

klsallee wrote:

....
§176. Respect for flag:
    (d) The flag should never be used as wearing apparel, bedding, or drapery. ....

Same goes on with the UK flag but we do not have a code for it.Now, it's a fashion accessory.

But just to put a cat amongst some pigeons and stir it up a bit:

My own feeling is that the UK flag is considered a symbol of "cool" and "hip" by many...

... but wearing the US flag is considered "patriotic".

I've actually seen a photo of a model using the EU flag as fashion too. Is that totally unhip? Inflammatory?

I've got an EU flag on my car number plates. I wonder if I should  take it off.

fluffy2560 wrote:

Same goes on with the UK flag but we do not have a code for it.Now, it's a fashion accessory.

Fashion has an excuse: it does not need to make sense. 

Flags are what a political group wants them to be.

Some groups say the flag is a symbol of unity for a nation, so pulls the people together to be the best they can be. Moderate groups of all types tend to use that version.

The extreme right tend to see a flag as a racist thing, there to pander to the idea no one except a given group should be allowed to live in 'their'  country.

The left tend to assume the right's version is correct, so condemn a flag as such, then try to ban it.

The exit/escape will amplify both sets of extremists but the moderate majority will be ignored.

Basically, no change.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-europ … SKCN0ZL0QW

Hungary is trying to force the EU to scrap the forced relocation of migrants order by holding a referendum on the subject.
If that gets the expected result, there is another crisis likely to be on the way.

Fred wrote:

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-migrants-hungary-referendum-idUSKCN0ZL0QW

Hungary is trying to force the EU to scrap the forced relocation of migrants order by holding a referendum on the subject.
If that gets the expected result, there is another crisis likely to be on the way.

Been on the cards for sometime. Unfortunately, the result might be used as a mechanism to create other laws which would be counter productive in the longer term to satisfy a very right leaning coalition on power (e.g. Jobbik).

Austrians are also doing some stuff on their borders:

Big Traffic Jam

The way around it might be to peel off into Slovakia, curve back into Austria or go via Sopron as that the main border there does not allow trucks.  We used to do this previously before Schengen when the Austrians were checking motorway vignettes and generally messing about on illegal cigarette checks and causing huge queues.  Quicker than waiting.

Imagine the wasted fuel and productivity in that 25km, 8h queue.

Just to be clear, there is a difference between refugees and economic migrants, just like there is a difference between free movement of labor in the EU and border control.

I believe that most Europeans are in favor of free movement of labor, but they are against immigration from undesirable regions.

I certainly hope the EU stays economically together and allows the free (tariff/quota) free movement of labor, goods, and services. I also hope that the EU is able to defend and maintain its borders.  Yes, I am in favor of controlled immigration policies but what we saw last year because of Merkel was a farce.  You cannot force people to live where they do not want to live.

For Americans, it would be like forcing refugees to live in West Virginia and telling them not to move to New York (making the assumption that NY would have much higher benefits).  It's impossible.

Pro-EU, Pro-Border Control, Pro-Immigration Policy
I think they can all be under the same banner.

Vicces1 wrote:

....

I believe that most Europeans are in favor of free movement of labor, but they are against immigration from undesirable regions.

Undesirable regions. 

Not entirely sure what that means.  Or are we talking about specific countries.

If we mean Turkey or Syria, I can imagine but even then it's possibly half-undesirable or somewhere in between.  Erdogan is moving Turkey away from the norms of Western society and more in the direction of restrictive thinking. Under the UN conventions, Syria, at least, is universally accepted as being at war and there's an obligation to look after the refugees.  The response of UN refugee convention signatories (yes, you EU countries) is utterly pathetic.

In the current climate, many people would rather have inter-EU movements or those in the "free world" rather than those from further afield who would seek to import less than liberal.  But one or two generations and integration and normalisation should be complete.

I suppose regionally the USA is desirable, certainly Canada, New Zealand and Australia and depending on who you are, South America, South Africa (but not Zimbabwe), Ukraine but probably not Russia.

klsallee wrote:

fluffy2560 wrote:

the Swiss for being very boring

Surly you have seen the Orson Wells "Cuckoo Clock" speech from The Third Man. 

LOL Good one.
Actually the Cuckoo Clock is made AFAIK only in the Black Forest of Germany. I'm certain Switzerland doesn't make any. Watches yes, we invented direct democracy and the trains run on time, but not Cuckoo Clocks.

We were also so 'boring' we couldn't decide to join the EU. 

El_Jost wrote:

klsallee wrote:

fluffy2560 wrote:

the Swiss for being very boring

Surly you have seen the Orson Wells "Cuckoo Clock" speech from The Third Man. 

LOL Good one.
Actually the Cuckoo Clock is made AFAIK only in the Black Forest of Germany. I'm certain Switzerland doesn't make any. Watches yes, we invented direct democracy and the trains run on time, but not Cuckoo Clocks.

We were also so 'boring' we couldn't decide to join the EU. 

I've got a "cuckoo"-like clock I bought in Switzerland.  Probably it was actually made in China. I shall check it for Black Forest authenticity.

Direct democracy - hmmm not exactly democracy - those Alpenzellers did not even give women the vote until 1991 !!!

Trains - ok yes, give you that.  And Zurich airport is not bad.

Still got it in for the Swiss. I've never forgiven them over my work permit, hassled over my motorway vignette and a ludicrously expensive pizzas in Geneva. I might add the clock to that list if it is found to be Chinese.

Just to be clear on my use of the term "undesirables".  It is honestly not for me alone to define. It depends on who you are, what region you come from, the conditions affecting the country.  In the beginning of the EU expansion, Polish workers were "undesirable" to Britain, while in the US, many Mexicans are.
Also, it can be defined not in terms of nationality, but "desirability" of professions -- Indian doctors and Filipino nurses (as examples for Britain) might be very desirable because of their skillsets, although some would not hope for greater immigration from those countries in general -- but then they are usually referring to unskilled labor.

Vicces1 wrote:

....Polish workers were "undesirable" to Britain, while in the US, many Mexicans are. ....Also, it can be defined not in terms of nationality, but "desirability" of professions......ome but then they are usually referring to unskilled labor.

That's still dodgy.  USA relies on all those Mexican workers to pick vegetables and work on farms. Same sort of thing goes on everywhere.  Most Polish I believe are not washing cars but doing more skilled jobs. You might mean the Albanians in the UK and the Bangladeshis in UAE...etc etc.

Undesirable but necessary?

Besides UK has had a reasonably visible Polish population for years - ever since the 2nd Word War.  We (the British) went to war for them in 1939.  I am of an age where we were brought up to be grateful for the Polish fighting units (soldiers, airmen etc). They were really needed for the war effort.   My mother told me she nearly married a Polish airman.

Quite a change in attitude now for Poles out.  How quickly people forget.

Contrast that with de Gaulle's attitude to the British while he ran the French government in exile from the UK, and what he did afterwards, stitching us and others up.

Vicces1 wrote:

Just to be clear on my use of the term "undesirables".... but then they are usually referring to unskilled labor.

Being from the USA, a nation of immigrants, I find this notion simplistic and flawed. Many immigrants to the USA were unskilled laborers, but worked hard cleaning toilets, picking vegetables, etc. to give their children a better future. And their children became today's doctors, lawyers, teachers, etc. Thinking only of today illogically dismisses such positive contribution for tomorrows futures. Business 101: simply think of unskilled migrants as a long term investment.

But more to the point, many of those in the wave of immigrants last year were using cell phones and social media to plan their journey. So not unskilled. And according to one report I read recently, Hungary has a deficit of 100,000 IT positions. A potentially grateful work force dismissed for political and nativist reasons. What a pity.

Some seem to be determined to take the worst out of my comments.
I am not making a judgment on the merits of immigration from particular countries, only how certain people are perceived and whether or not citizens perceive those immigrants as desirable or not.

I would wholeheartedly agree that the EU and the US need to give more time and attention to their immigration policies and strengthen their borders.  After that, we'd need a new discussion topic in this forum since this post is about the Brexit.

Vicces1 wrote:

Some seem to be determined to take the worst out of my comments.

Yes I did.

But I do hold myself to this same standard: If you said it, you own it. 

Vicces1 wrote:

Some seem to be determined to take the worst out of my comments.
I am not making a judgment on the merits of immigration from particular countries, only how certain people are perceived and whether or not citizens perceive those immigrants as desirable or not...

Nah, don't take it personally, it's just healthy discussion. 

I am quite shocked anyone  in the UK is worried they might be kicked out.  That would be utterly reprehensible.  Politicians have a lot to answer for.  They should speak up for them asap to put their minds at ease.  There's a bit of a thing developing over there in the UK.   People are searching their ancestry to try and claim an EU passport to keep their EU rights.  The hot favourite is apparently Irish.  Huge numbers of people in the UK ave Irish roots.  Passport/citizenship is possible even if only one grandparent was Irish.

I think most ordinary people in the UK are very biased in one regard.  They actually want on certain parts of the population out, i.e. they'd rather have say, a Hungarian, than a Syrian or a Turk if given the choice.  To say otherwise would not be calling a spade a spade.  I think possibly they were voting against the Turks, Bangaldeshi, Syrians and whatever rather than against EU migrants.

klsallee wrote:

....But more to the point, many of those in the wave of immigrants last year were using cell phones and social media to plan their journey. So not unskilled. And according to one report I read recently, Hungary has a deficit of 100,000 IT positions. A potentially grateful work force dismissed for political and nativist reasons. What a pity.

Not surprised there's a shortage of skills. 

Why work in IT in HU for EUR 1000 a month when you can work in the UK for EUR 5000?

I made up the numbers but I bet it's some ratio of 2 to 3 or even 5 for HU:UK.

A lot of people are pussyfooting around the truth here.

The extreme right want anyone non white out of the country, along with anyone who can't speak English, especially if they don't stick their pinky out whilst drinking tea.
Whilst the leadership of these 'political' parties are generally bright, they rely on total morons as their foot soldiers because hardly anyone believes their rubbish.

The more mainstream voters are worried by mass immigration, especially from countries totally alien to British cultural norms, but they're also worried about their jobs.
I think you'll also find some politicians love foster hate, that hate being needed to justify political decisions that make them cash.
The newspapers love a good hate story, to they join in.

The migrants aren't what they're painted as either.

Some are evil, out to use the situation for their own ends, either sexual abuse, other crime, terrorism and/or getting benefits from the new host country if possible.
These are the nasties the papers often describe as the majority.

Some are just trying to get into a host country in the hope of a better life, but can't do so legally so they try as economic migrants.
Understandable, but illegal and unwise.

Most of the rest are fleeing wars started by politicians with no care about who gets hurt. These are the victims of both powerful bent politicians, and the first two groups above.

Fred wrote:

A lot of people are pussyfooting around the truth here.

The extreme right want anyone non white out of the country, along with anyone who can't speak English, especially if they don't stick their pinky out whilst drinking tea.
Whilst the leadership of these 'political' parties are generally bright, they rely on total morons as their foot soldiers because hardly anyone believes their rubbish.

Lot in your post there Fred.

I am not entirely sure you can label politicians as bright.  In the past, those well-to-do with no direction generally had to consider going into the army, the priesthood or......politics.

You can see how deluded the politicians are just listening to Tony Blair defending himself over Chilcot.  Even worse, Corbyn's general plans for his version of governance.   I must be living in a parallel universe where people do not have common sense.  I find it surprising that the privileged  classes generate so many people with socialist thinking. 

Anyone who drinks tea out of  a porcelain cup with handles you cannot get your digits in isn't reflecting practical needs.  De rigueur these days is for real tea drinkers to have builders' tea in builders' sized mugs.  Or a $5 coffee in a Starbucks mug.  And these things have to fit in the dishwasher.

To put it simply, many in Hungary and most of Europe dislike seeing people of ,"color" mixing it up with "their women".
Skilled or unskilled, don't matter.
I see this as a simple case of race not who can fix the plumbing better.
On one hand I understand that these very tiny countries are afraid to lose their culture,language and social norms.
On the other hand as a child of a native American and a Polish immigrant from the US married for nearly 42 years to a Hungarian citizen, I see all sorts of sides to every issue.
I actually have "skilled" cousins living now in the UK who are from Hungary and have been living and working as doctors for 20 some years. I also have skilled relations in Poland who would never consider leaving Poland, their lives are sweet there.
My father who was a Polish born but US citizen by birth( complicated story with that one) fought in the medical corp. in WW11 trying to save lives knowing in his heart he hated all violence but went through with his duty to try to save his relations in Poland, people he had not seen since he was a small child. ( side note, he married a Japanese women while stationed in Japan post war, he was forced by the US military to come back to the US and leave her and their son, seriously, I have family everywhere we really are all related)

Maybe this is what it means to be an American, we except everyone on their own merit, if you come to live an honest life then your welcome, if not we have guns.
Funny how one group believes they are so much better and or worthy then another group of humans.
My mother who was only a small girl at the time used to be called horrible names and tossed out of shops whenever she was out with her Mohawk grandmother In their OWN country!
Those who hold the purse strings make the rules, it is all motivated by greed and trying to hold onto power by one group or another, really just base animal minded control over others.
Native Americans lost their country so easily because they never believed they owned anything, they believed in sharing, who's more foolish those who want to own everything or those who know it is all just a temp. situation no one leaves here alive, sharing and learning from others should be our goal but as long as money rules we all lose.
Don't mind me, I am just an old Hippie.What do peace and love have to do with making a buck off the back of someone else? It's all about the bottom line.