Jump to content
IGNORED

After Brexit complications.


Tipps69

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Roger Red Hat said:

I don't agree with any of that. One of the functions of government should be to ensure no citizen is exploited.

 

Was/is it?

What percentage of UK immigration is from the EU?
The EU born made up 5.5% of the total UK population in 2018, while non-EU born people made up 8.8%. The EU born thus made up 39% of the migrant population in 2018, up from 29% in 2000.30 Sep 2019

The total at 14.3% is very high.

So it's very good news imo that EU immigration will be curtailed.

Our population is clearly too high, the roads are terrible and everywhere you go is crowded to the extent it now effects quality of life.

We need, at the very least, to take measures to try and prevent our population constantly increasing and leaving the EU, while not the full answer, should be a good start in that direction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Roger Red Hat said:

MMT is about how money is created in the modern sovereign economy and how governments can utilise it to enable their citizens to enjoy a far more equitable and fulfilling existence.

 

Professor Richard Murphy's blog is very accessible and well worth reading on regular basis. http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/ 

The bloke is a Corbynista, a man who's policies have been completely rejected by the electorate.

'In the summer of 2015 Richard was widely credited with being the author of ‘Corbynomics’, which was the economic programme on the basis of which Jeremy Corbyn became leader of the UK Labour Party.'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

The bloke is a Corbynista, a man who's policies have been completely rejected by the electorate.

'In the summer of 2015 Richard was widely credited with being the author of ‘Corbynomics’, which was the economic programme on the basis of which Jeremy Corbyn became leader of the UK Labour Party.'

Murphy is no 'Corbynista', he's been given that label by others simply because some of his policy was used by Corbyn as a basis. If you followed Murphy's blog regularly you'd know he has been/is very critical of the Labour party, Corbyn, and McDonell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Roger Red Hat said:

MMT is about how money is created in the modern sovereign economy and how governments can utilise it to enable their citizens to enjoy a far more equitable and fulfilling existence.

 

Professor Richard Murphy's blog is very accessible and well worth reading on regular basis. http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/ 

I work for a financial services business,  I understand the fiat money system a bit and fractional reserve lending after putting a lot of effort into understanding it after the financial crisis.

The only thing I really know is that it is very complicated with different layers of money where some filter into the public and some don't, everything anyone seems to expect to happen something different happens!

I will continue reading but it does seem to think the magic money tree is alive and kicking without a full understanding of either how it workd the consequences let alone the unintended consequences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Pezo said:

I will continue reading but it does seem to think the magic money tree is alive and kicking without a full understanding of either how it workd the consequences let alone the unintended consequences.

The reality is that the 'magic money tree' as you refer to it, really does exist, in the form that any sovereign country that controls its own currency, can issue, spend and pay for anything it wants in its own currency. Steve Keen, Stephanie Kelton are also good sources of information on this subject. There's loads of good videos on youtube.

 

Anyway this is in the football chat section so I'll not say anymore! Enjoy the research, it's very interesting and eye opening. You wont hear or see much about it in the MSM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Roger Red Hat said:

The reality is that the 'magic money tree' as you refer to it, really does exist, in the form that any sovereign country that controls its own currency, can issue, spend and pay for anything it wants in its own currency. Steve Keen, Stephanie Kelton are also good sources of information on this subject. There's loads of good videos on youtube.

 

Anyway this is in the football chat section so I'll not say anymore! Enjoy the research, it's very interesting and eye opening. You wont hear or see much about it in the MSM.

You are of course correct the magic money tree exists to some extent, it's how much you want to shake it and be paying for it in the future or on foreign holidays.

You don't hear much about this in the MSM but you hear nothing about other things such as the lack of free market in setting of mortgage interest rates in the name of financial stability. I think some would be very surprised by the controls in place that are outside of government control but in reality through soft power are within government control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Roger Red Hat said:

I don't know what you mean by this.

You shake tree's to get something out of them that isn't quite mature/ready, things you should probably be waiting for. If you have it now you can't have it in the future. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Roger Red Hat said:

I think you would find the following blog interesting, https://gimms.org.uk/blogs/

It explains how money really works in a modern fiat economy. There is loads of interesting MMT stuff out there.

 

6 hours ago, Pezo said:

After a quick read I do appreciate the point of view but the solutions seem to about a social fixes and aiming for an ideology rather than individual people changing - the problem is identified correctly but the solution is too loose and top down, what do individuals need to do? - what are they going to get for what they do. IMO if you want to fix a society then you have to enable the individuals that make up that society, fix there own house's - if everyone does that then then everyone in the society is ready to move forward.

I will continue to read.


worth a watch re Fiat currency and fractional reserve lending. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

The total at 14.3% is very high.

So it's very good news imo that EU immigration will be curtailed.

Our population is clearly too high, the roads are terrible and everywhere you go is crowded to the extent it now effects quality of life.

We need, at the very least, to take measures to try and prevent our population constantly increasing and leaving the EU, while not the full answer, should be a good start in that direction.

With respect Nogbad, more people are coming into this country from outside the eu than within. Trade deals that get done will no doubt include other countries wanting their citizens to be able to come to the UK. Australia have reportedly turned down a UK deal that would of allowed free movement between the two countries, I wonder what India and the like will want...............

i personally think that the levels of immigration will actually go up in the future. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Portland Bill said:

With respect Nogbad, more people are coming into this country from outside the eu than within. Trade deals that get done will no doubt include other countries wanting their citizens to be able to come to the UK. Australia have reportedly turned down a UK deal that would of allowed free movement between the two countries, I wonder what India and the like will want...............

i personally think that the levels of immigration will actually go up in the future. 

This is certainly true if we extrapolate out the Australian points based system that they seem keen on, but importantly it should mean low skilled, low wage people can't come in and under cut the low end of the market. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Harry said:

 


worth a watch re Fiat currency and fractional reserve lending. 

It's just an advert for what they want, I assume they are gold bugs that want to go back to pegging to gold which would make them very rich. 

It's not really a scam and its not really a secret, it's designed to make all of our lives better by bringing future spending forward getting the benafits today but paying for it in the future. So what if some people get rich from it if we all get a bit better off from it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Bas's perfect hattrick said:

Brilliant. So the rich and powerful can do what they want, and ordinary people will get dicked over. Maybe you earn over 100k in which case, you'll be fine. But if you don't, I really don't understand how you can view this as a positive thing

They will still be free to seek unskilled work in their own country and other EU countries, Just not here. Surely more unskilled jobs for the unskilled British people is a good thing? The money they earn also stays right here in this country and spent in this country instead of being sent 'home'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Pezo said:

It's just an advert for what they want, I assume they are gold bugs that want to go back to pegging to gold which would make them very rich. 

It's not really a scam and its not really a secret, it's designed to make all of our lives better by bringing future spending forward getting the benafits today but paying for it in the future. So what if some people get rich from it if we all get a bit better off from it?

Was more in response to you post #35 where you said you only understood Fiat and Fractional Reserve a little bit. 
Well, that video explains it very well. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Pezo said:

IMO Brexit was never about getting rid of foreigners that were unique and provided high quality, surely we want the best and the brightest from around the world here earning millions and paying tax. It was about not allowing anyone in that wanted to use public service, get paid minimum wage and live in a tent and send money "home" and undercut the average worker.

Anyone that will earn over 100k will be allowed in the country with no problem IMO.

High quality, high wealth, high inequality (some very rich) will likely be our future. Which has got to be better than low quality, low wealth, low inequality (everyone poor) as the other option. 

At the moment high inequality is what we have - higher than at any point in recent history - which causes a large number of our financial problems. And I think it is a mistake to see our options as a binary choice between that one extreme on the other hand and everyone being poor on the other hand when, in reality, those are not the only options available to us.

What you may not realise is actually an exceptionally small number of people being exceptionally rich makes us all gradually become poorer over time. And this is what we've actually seen since the 1970s as the number of very rich people has grow smaller, the extent to which they are rich compared to rest of the population has become greater and this has had a massive impact on the cumulative wealth of the general population.

Fundamentally the problem is this: In order for society to work financially, you need money to move around the economy. In an an ideal society, what you really want is people to grow rich and those rich people then to spend that money within the society in which they live - for example hiring staff to work for them and buying luxury goods, products and services. Once you've got rich people buying luxury goods, products and services, this creates opportunities for people to set up businesses selling those goods, products and services. The rich people give their money to those businesses, those businesses then make their owners financially comfortable and those businesses also employ other people, in turn giving them a source of income. The business owners have money to spend, so people set up more businesses to sell things to them, thus making another group of people and so on until the fact that people are getting rich at the top of society means everyone else is gradually getting wealthier over time.

This is a good model but it does not happen in a high wealth, high inequality society which you describe (and I would argue is our present, not simply our future).

What happens instead in a high wealth, high inequality society - indeed the reasons why is a high wealth, high in equality society in the first place - is that, once people get rich beyond a certain point, they simply cannot spend a vast proportion of the money they have. Therefore - rather than going on products, goods and services and making everyone else wealthy - the money gets siloed in investment accounts or moved overseas. That money then is not going to the middle-class business owners, which in turns restricts their ability to run successful businesses and employ people, which in turns makes working class people poorer. Thus ending up with a society where you have a tiny number of people with a huge concentrated amount of wealth and everyone struggling.

I agree with you that inequality is the biggest problem we face as a society but a root cause of that inequality is allowing a small number of people to accumulate money that cannot spend. The way to reduce inequality - and to make everyone richer - is to find ways to incentivise the very rich to spend their money in society and ensure nobody gets to a point where they are earning so much money that it is impossible for it to recycle around the economy. 

I don't want to get loads further into this because there is a politics board for that, and this is a football discussion, but I did think this needed clarifying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The current rules on foreign (non-EU) players are pretty complex.

https://latitudelaw.com/news/the-fas-policy-on-non-eu-football-players-and-possible-implications-following-brexit/
 

I think it’s likely that the rules will be extended to treat EU players in the same way as non-EU players are currently treated.

Will that be a good thing? Depends on your view of foreigners I guess! 

From a football perspective though I think it’ll only widen the gap between the Premier League and the rest of English football. Man City and Liverpool will not struggle to get the players they want.

But lower league clubs? They are going to be competing for players from a much smaller pool. We’ll likely see a situation where there are far more English players, but the lower end Premier and Championship clubs will take the better British players and League One and Two will be taking the dregs.

It'll make little difference to the England team. The England squad will be made up of players from the top clubs the way it is now. Those top clubs will still be buying up international players from around the world.

So yeah I think that English players overall will obviously get more of a chance to play. But outside of the Premier League those English players will be of a much lower quality than the players currently playing. Which will make the lower leagues worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So anyway, Chelsea potentially getting rewarded with being allowed to sign more foreigners because they spent 5 months having to Blood their English talent due to a punishment, still doesn’t make any sense to me because they’ll sign this foreign talent, which means many many millions of pounds will leave the UK & this English talent & any further English talent they have in their youth system get pushed back down the list of players to potentially make it good here.

And then we’re back to losing this English talent relatively cheaply to clubs abroad so they can get game time before having to pay many millions abroad again to bring this English talent back to our shores (Jadon Sancho) & hence the country is sending lots more money away from England!

Just doesn’t make sense to me, let’s reward these clubs for playing their homegrown talent by encouraging them to replace their homegrown talent with talent from elsewhere? Only in England could such a plan be put in place!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, BS2 Red said:

The current rules on foreign (non-EU) players are pretty complex.

https://latitudelaw.com/news/the-fas-policy-on-non-eu-football-players-and-possible-implications-following-brexit/
 

I think it’s likely that the rules will be extended to treat EU players in the same way as non-EU players are currently treated.

Will that be a good thing? Depends on your view of foreigners I guess! 

From a football perspective though I think it’ll only widen the gap between the Premier League and the rest of English football. Man City and Liverpool will not struggle to get the players they want.

But lower league clubs? They are going to be competing for players from a much smaller pool. We’ll likely see a situation where there are far more English players, but the lower end Premier and Championship clubs will take the better British players and League One and Two will be taking the dregs.

It'll make little difference to the England team. The England squad will be made up of players from the top clubs the way it is now. Those top clubs will still be buying up international players from around the world.

So yeah I think that English players overall will obviously get more of a chance to play. But outside of the Premier League those English players will be of a much lower quality than the players currently playing. Which will make the lower leagues worse.

But on the plus side, English players will get the opportunity to play professional football in this country & those that aren’t deemed as the cream of the crop should filter down the leagues & still be able to earn a living instead of bringing in foreign talent like Rodri & Garita (just an example) but there are clubs throughout England & the UK that are stuffed with foreign players that aren’t any better than what we already have here but they aren’t given a proper chance because of their age so they miss out unless they are seen as very talented players.

Even clubs in the conference are using excessive amounts of foreign players, why? Maybe the loan system needs to be tweaked a bit to allow lower league clubs to play more English players on loan & this would encourage clubs to send out their English players to get first team football at a young age so they can get a better idea as to how good their talent pool is? Instead of these teams that maybe struggling financially going out & signing cheaper foreign players?

Maybe the loan system needs to be looked at with regards to how much the big clubs can charge to loan out a player, rather than it costing clubs millions for a season loan of a player that has played very little first team football before, the big clubs should be seeing it as an opportunity to enhance their players progression rather than another cash cow! It’s not like these big clubs are struggling financially so why should they charge excessively for a club to help their player improve? Clubs should be picked on where the parent best thinks their talent will improve more rather than by how much they are willing to pay to take them!

There is a lot wrong with our game & this seems like as good a time as any to try & put things right!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Harry said:

Was more in response to you post #35 where you said you only understood Fiat and Fractional Reserve a little bit. 
Well, that video explains it very well. 
 

Thanks, I understand that much its where it feeds into different money tranches such as M1, M2 and M3 and what happens with each tranche and the consequences that I haven't quite got my head around yet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Tipps69 said:

But on the plus side, English players will get the opportunity to play professional football in this country & those that aren’t deemed as the cream of the crop should filter down the leagues & still be able to earn a living instead of bringing in foreign talent like Rodri & Garita (just an example) but there are clubs throughout England & the UK that are stuffed with foreign players that aren’t any better than what we already have here but they aren’t given a proper chance because of their age so they miss out unless they are seen as very talented players.

Even clubs in the conference are using excessive amounts of foreign players, why? Maybe the loan system needs to be tweaked a bit to allow lower league clubs to play more English players on loan & this would encourage clubs to send out their English players to get first team football at a young age so they can get a better idea as to how good their talent pool is? Instead of these teams that maybe struggling financially going out & signing cheaper foreign players?

Maybe the loan system needs to be looked at with regards to how much the big clubs can charge to loan out a player, rather than it costing clubs millions for a season loan of a player that has played very little first team football before, the big clubs should be seeing it as an opportunity to enhance their players progression rather than another cash cow! It’s not like these big clubs are struggling financially so why should they charge excessively for a club to help their player improve? Clubs should be picked on where the parent best thinks their talent will improve more rather than by how much they are willing to pay to take them!

There is a lot wrong with our game & this seems like as good a time as any to try & put things right!

It's a lovely optimistic idea but I cannot for a moment see big clubs being so generous. We've seen time and time again that the big clubs see an opportunity to make cash and do so. When you've got Premier league clubs with millions to spend failing to meet basic standards of disabled access or failing to pay some of their staff a living wage, it is pretty inconceivable they are going to start doing favours for teams lower down the pecking order - especially once they know smaller clubs' options are limited.

So what I see happening is a scenario where big clubs go on as before - filling their team with internationals and restricting opportunities for English talent to come through. Meanwhile the big clubs will also continue to sign up all the promising English talent they can, partly on the off chance a player here or there becomes the next Kane, Abraham or Foden but mostly as a way of getting loan fees and hefty sales fees from Championship clubs.

For a club like us, we will most likely find we cannot sign players like Diedhiou, Kodjia, Eliasson or (probably) Massengo who would not qualify for work permits, find ourselves competing with the rest of the division for over-priced English talent and find it harder to recruit younger players as Premier league clubs will sign more and more of the best English youth talent. Brexit is a fantastic opportunity for the bigger clubs to get richer and further increase the gap between them and rest of the division. For a club like us, it means we'll probably end up watching a lot more English players but of a lower standard than the players we have already. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tipps69 said:

But on the plus side, English players will get the opportunity to play professional football in this country & those that aren’t deemed as the cream of the crop should filter down the leagues & still be able to earn a living instead of bringing in foreign talent like Rodri & Garita (just an example) but there are clubs throughout England & the UK that are stuffed with foreign players that aren’t any better than what we already have here but they aren’t given a proper chance because of their age so they miss out unless they are seen as very talented players.

Even clubs in the conference are using excessive amounts of foreign players, why? Maybe the loan system needs to be tweaked a bit to allow lower league clubs to play more English players on loan & this would encourage clubs to send out their English players to get first team football at a young age so they can get a better idea as to how good their talent pool is? Instead of these teams that maybe struggling financially going out & signing cheaper foreign players?

Maybe the loan system needs to be looked at with regards to how much the big clubs can charge to loan out a player, rather than it costing clubs millions for a season loan of a player that has played very little first team football before, the big clubs should be seeing it as an opportunity to enhance their players progression rather than another cash cow! It’s not like these big clubs are struggling financially so why should they charge excessively for a club to help their player improve? Clubs should be picked on where the parent best thinks their talent will improve more rather than by how much they are willing to pay to take them!

There is a lot wrong with our game & this seems like as good a time as any to try & put things right!

Why do clubs in the Conference use foreign players? Because they want good players and they don’t care where they were born.

It’ll be good for average and rubbish English players as there’ll be more spots available.

But it will be bad for the quality of football in the lower leagues. And it will only widen the gap between the top clubs and everybody else. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, BS2 Red said:

Why do clubs in the Conference use foreign players? Because they want good players and they don’t care where they were born.

It’ll be good for average and rubbish English players as there’ll be more spots available.

But it will be bad for the quality of football in the lower leagues. And it will only widen the gap between the top clubs and everybody else. 

I wouldn’t say the foreign players in the lower leagues or conference are any better than what’s available here, the problem is that as @LondonBristolian says, the big Premier League clubs will continue to stock pile the younger talent & charge smaller clubs for the privilege of enhancing these players progression until these youngsters realise they aren’t going to get a look in at their parent clubs & then move abroad on the cheap before coming back at an extortionate fee!! (Sancho).

If Premier League clubs allowed their young talent to aid their progression by going to the Championship on loan & the players filter down through the pyramid, it will allow English talent to progress throughout the football league but this is rarely happening as it all revolves around what a club is willing to pay for the privilege rather than what club would be best for that individual (Nketiah / Arsenal / Leeds).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Up The City! said:

They will still be free to seek unskilled work in their own country and other EU countries, Just not here. Surely more unskilled jobs for the unskilled British people is a good thing? The money they earn also stays right here in this country and spent in this country instead of being sent 'home'

I seriously doubt much will change on that front. Britain has a low unemployment rate and needs migrants for many sectors. You can guarantee there will be some intense lobbying post Brexit for various industries to keep migration flowing. Back to the football topic: I doubt much will change for the same reason. The premier League wants immigration of players as it boosts their profits abroad. They'll twist a few arms and that'll be that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tipps69 said:

I wouldn’t say the foreign players in the lower leagues or conference are any better than what’s available here, the problem is that as @LondonBristolian says, the big Premier League clubs will continue to stock pile the younger talent & charge smaller clubs for the privilege of enhancing these players progression until these youngsters realise they aren’t going to get a look in at their parent clubs & then move abroad on the cheap before coming back at an extortionate fee!! (Sancho).

If Premier League clubs allowed their young talent to aid their progression by going to the Championship on loan & the players filter down through the pyramid, it will allow English talent to progress throughout the football league but this is rarely happening as it all revolves around what a club is willing to pay for the privilege rather than what club would be best for that individual (Nketiah / Arsenal / Leeds).

It's arguable either way really, but I think you can- not always but often can- get more bang for your buck in foreign markets than UK ones, and in the case of the latter that may well mean that foreign players who have played in the UK system for a while are similarly inflated...

Maybe it's changing but it was certainly the case not that long ago.

I remember Swansea with Laudrup's contacts built on what had gone before brilliantly- him and his agent- players (UK or foreign) that surely would've cost more had they been in English market. Closer to home, how much would the English equivelant of Eliasson cost?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do we get the same value in europe?

Kodjia was a steal that il go along with.

Even elliasson and fam have not been nailed on starters this year.

We seem to get a lot of overpriced rubbish i think.

Steffen the german couldnt get near the team, the bosnian was always injured, the icelandic defender we got from juve, less said about him the better, rodri, waste of wages.

I could name more these are just recents.

Brownhill, flint, pack wilbraham, that is what id call bang for buck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 25/01/2020 at 15:34, Pezo said:

Yes EU immigration was always higher and I imagine still will be because of proximity. Under EU rules your not allowed to discriminate against EU nationals so if someone wanted the job and asked for 30k and someone wanted minimum wage - all things being equal as the employer you would choose the minimum wage employee of course and maximise profits for them and there investors.

The government can't and shouldn't put in controls against exploitative employers, it's for individuals to decide if they are being exploited or not and if they are they should do something about it (leave). Even if they wanted to how does the government put in controls against exploitative employers that are employing people that are willing to work for less than others?

Absolutely. I never really understood why people used to moan about shoving kids up chimneys and the total lack of workers rights before the unions came along that caused so many deaths in the workplace. I mean, if they didn't like risking their lives at work, why didn't they just get an office job selling financial services or something. Bloody plebs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...