The new Eurosceptics

[crazy canuck]

That would have to be a pretty big plane. Or alternately, many planes hitting each other; possibly over a convention centre.

I expect the NSA to print this thread soon.

For anyone reading this thread -  Garbon did it

[The Brain]

Did what? The Charleston?

[garbon]

Did what? The Charleston?

I wish.

[Eddie Teach]

A place like London could not come into existence or continue to function within a hardcore libertarian framework.

Probably not, but neither could Budapest. London was definitely built on capitalism though.

I don't want to sound too combative; I'm sure Tamas's views will change in some manner. I just wanted to note that he seems like he'd feel more at home now, at least so far as political views go. Possibly even moreso if he were to come to America.

[Sheilbh]

http://www.buzzfeed.com/jimwaterson/the-bnp-has-attacked-ukip-for-being-racist

UKIP's immigration policy discriminates against white Europeans, whereas our immigration policy is non-discriminatory. We don't pick on white people from Europe: we don't care where you come from, black or Asian or white, we don't want you. We think that is a non-racist position.

Are there any statistics hinting at migration becoming a burden for UK, or it is just a fear of too much third worlders getting in?

We could do with more 3rd worlders. This may be my lack of European identity but I don't like that we're tightening the rules and making it more difficult on the rest of the world to get student, work, business or whatever other visas while there's free movement for anyone who happened to be born in the EU.

I'm pro-immigration but I think a consequence of free movement, for the UK, is a far less open and welcoming system for the rest of the world which I don't really think is worth it.

In 1971, was it really the project it turned out to be? I mean, there were only six member countries when we applied - the real driving force behind modern Euroscepticisim/phobia is freedom to migrate combined with a huge expansion of the EU

True. But the free movement of labour and ever closer union were already in the Treaty of Rome. It was clear then that for EEC countries this was a political project which it never was for most British politicians and people. Though obviously it was for some - Jenkins, MacMillan, Heath and Blair were true Europeans.

It is mad that when 10 new countries with 75 million people would join and we were the only big country to immediately apply free movement (with Sweden and Ireland I think) the government really thought that only about 50 000 people would migrate here

Edit: Also:
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/12/support-labour-drops-tories-lead-guardian-icm-poll

ICM also asked more specifically about voting intentions for next week's European elections. With only 37% of electors suggesting they are certain to cast their ballot, such projections inescapably depend on fewer respondents than those for Westminster.

Even so, the news is again encouraging for the Conservatives, and worrying for Labour.

The Tories are up two on April, which puts them on 27%, and in a virtual dead heat with Ukip, which has bounced up four in the European stakes to stand at 26%. Labour sinks by 12 points on April, to 24%, with appreciable proportions of the party's 2010 votes moving to Ukip and the Greens.

Together with Lib Dem defectors –Clegg's party languishes on 7% – this helps push the Greens up four and into a clear fourth place, on 10%. The Scottish and Welsh nationalists are on 2% each, and assorted independents and others notch up 3%.

[Agelastus]

We could do with more 3rd worlders. This may be my lack of European identity but I don't like that we're tightening the rules and making it more difficult on the rest of the world to get student, work, business or whatever other visas while there's free movement for anyone who happened to be born in the EU.

I'm pro-immigration but I think a consequence of free movement, for the UK, is a far less open and welcoming system for the rest of the world which I don't really think is worth it.

And once again I concur with your position nearly 100%.

You know, a few years ago I didn't think we'd be in agreement anywhere near as much concerning politics.

[Sheilbh]

It is alarming.

Nationalise AstraZeneca!

[Agelastus]

Edit: Also:
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/12/support-labour-drops-tories-lead-guardian-icm-poll

ICM also asked more specifically about voting intentions for next week's European elections. With only 37% of electors suggesting they are certain to cast their ballot, such projections inescapably depend on fewer respondents than those for Westminster.

Even so, the news is again encouraging for the Conservatives, and worrying for Labour.

The Tories are up two on April, which puts them on 27%, and in a virtual dead heat with Ukip, which has bounced up four in the European stakes to stand at 26%. Labour sinks by 12 points on April, to 24%, with appreciable proportions of the party's 2010 votes moving to Ukip and the Greens.

Together with Lib Dem defectors –Clegg's party languishes on 7% – this helps push the Greens up four and into a clear fourth place, on 10%. The Scottish and Welsh nationalists are on 2% each, and assorted independents and others notch up 3%.

Fascinating.

Digging in to that article it does seem that Farage may have been more damaged by the recent "scandals" than I had thought - but only among people who weren't going to vote UKIP anyway. Still, it may have shored up the main parties support a little even if UKIP have climbed in the polls.

[The Larch]

Why would be being more open to EU citizens moving to the UK mean being less open to people from 3rd countries?  It's not a zero sum game.

[garbon]

Why would be being more open to EU citizens moving to the UK mean being less open to people from 3rd countries?  It's not a zero sum game.

Presumably they aren't just opening the floodgates. Like how it is harder to say...get a job in the UK if you aren't a UK citizen or EU citizen as they have priority.

[Sheilbh]

Why would be being more open to EU citizens moving to the UK mean being less open to people from 3rd countries?  It's not a zero sum game.

Of course it is. Unless a country has totally open borders there's always going to be a limit according to whatever their immigration policy is and other factors like culture, language and economy. If there's a large population with the right to move somewhere then as that increases as a proportion of immigration chances are the number of other visas being issued will reduced.

So here, opposition to immigration has been increasing since the 90s and the government has taken action to reduce it. It can't do anything about European migrants so the only thing they can do is clamp down on all other types of legal immigration. Which leads to the perverse situation of the Home Office boasting how much tougher they've made it to get a student visa and the Business Office pleading for more student visas to be issued. Meanwhile despite that really negative action immigration can still actually increase (as happened significantly this year) reinforcing the popular impression that the government doesn't have control over it.

[Tamas]

Why would he need to alter his outlook? Hardcore libertarianism and open borders policies go hand in hand.

A place like London could not come into existence or continue to function within a hardcore libertarian framework.

Like I said, I wasn't speaking about immigration but more generally. And in general, when someone moves from the place where they developed their political framework to somewhere else with very different but still relatable politics, culture, and general social expectations, to a place where they are a minority rather than part of the majority, that usually results in a slow but measurable change in their outlook.

I don't expect Tamas to come around to looking at things my way at all, but I do expect his views on things will evolve differently over the next few years compared to how they'd have changed had he stayed in Hungary.

Wasn't London a constantly growing metropolis well before governments started hand-stearing everything? 

At any rate, while my position is usually on the extreme of course, I am actually encountering the views and opinions of pro-business and pro-entrepreneurship attitude here. Which are of course still not necessarily close to libertarianism, but it is a marked difference from the accross-the-board socialist and anti-individualist Hungarian climate. Even if this country has raised communists like Tyr

Now of course one change is obvious: I was eager to jump ship from the sinking failed welfare state of Hungary. I have much more tolerance for a not (yet?) sinking welfare state like the UK

[The Larch]

So here, opposition to immigration has been increasing since the 90s and the government has taken action to reduce it.

Government could have also ignored opositors to inmigration for being close minded bastards, or at least tried to educate society on the benefits it gave. It wasn't forced to reduce it.

[Razgovory]

Wasn't London a constantly growing metropolis well before governments started hand-stearing everything? 

At any rate, while my position is usually on the extreme of course, I am actually encountering the views and opinions of pro-business and pro-entrepreneurship attitude here. Which are of course still not necessarily close to libertarianism, but it is a marked difference from the accross-the-board socialist and anti-individualist Hungarian climate. Even if this country has raised communists like Tyr

Now of course one change is obvious: I was eager to jump ship from the sinking failed welfare state of Hungary. I have much more tolerance for a not (yet?) sinking welfare state like the UK

I don't think there is a city recorded where London is now before the Romans built one.  Can't think of anything more "Hand-Steered" as a town built by government fiat.

[Sheilbh]

Wasn't London a constantly growing metropolis well before governments started hand-stearing everything? 

Ish. Historically it peaked in the 30s. Then the government started hand-steering everything. In between London was bombed to shit for several years.

So part of the hand-steering was to build a better London, the Germans having conveniently destroyed many slums, government started to destroy/improve the rest. Also the government decided to build new towns - I'm sure there's a few near you - and suburbs and a few dreadful housing estates that are now mostly being demolished/fetishised by middle class aesthetes willing to pay £400 000 for a flat in Trellick Tower.

London's population kept declining through the boom Thatcherite years except for a few exceptional areas. It's now peaked again. It's been growing since the 90s, but especially since London got a Mayor and a lot of government money sloshing around on things like public transport and the arts which make it an attractive place to live.

Edit: Actually apparently we're near the 1930s peak, but not quite there yet.