Over 80% of 16 to 24-year-olds would vote to rejoin the EU

https://www.itv.com/news/2026-02-19/over-80-of-16-to-24-year-olds-would-vote-to-rejoin-the-eu-itv-poll-finds

by saubeidl • 5 months ago

134 172 5 months ago

No surprise, you had to be over the age of 39 before you were more likely to vote for Brexit.

By the time we got around to implementing it enough old people had died off that the vote would have gone the other way already.

jjgreen• 5 months ago

The Brexit-induced impoverishment of UK will inevitably lead to a reduction in the scope of the NHS and so kill off its supporters. So Brexit is kind-of self healing.

saubeidl4• 5 months ago

It's only self-healing if they actually manage to rejoin...

citrin_ru2• 5 months ago

Generation of boomers accumulated lots of wealth, mostly thanks to house prices skyrocketing during their lifetime. Not all but many old people can afford private healthcare. Younger people need NHS more.

irl_zebra• 5 months ago

Covid in the USA was a bit like this.

tetris112• 5 months ago

I went to George's hospital the other day and saw a punchy flyer talking about the lack of NHS services, with the kicker "Privatise now!"

That's what we're dealing with. Underinvestment only enriches their camp.

mcc1ane• 5 months ago

The cohort least likely to vote.

Schmerika4• 5 months ago

And the cohort most likely to vote well when they do.

The 18 year olds who vote less but vote for good parties are doing good, overall. The 60 year olds voting Tory their whole lives - not so much.

It's very easy to blame the young for all the problems earlier generations created and exacerbated. Not too wise though.

JumpCrisscross• 5 months ago

And the cohort most likely to vote well when they do

Eh, this is far from a given. Mao's Red Guards were passionate idiots. And America's young men are in thrall of Clavicular.

The most powerful empires in history have had large rebublics at their cores for good reason. The wisdom of a crowd greatly increases with its diversity.

tirant2• 5 months ago

Who defines what voting well is? Or what a good party is?

The observed damage that the UK has inflicted to itself has been caused so far by all the parties that have been in power.

nicoburns• 5 months ago

Yes, although there was notably a much higher turnout from this cohort in the elections when Jeremy Corbyn was labour party leader (although still lower turnout than other age demographics). I'd expect a similar effect for Zack Polanski in the next election.

cedws6• 5 months ago

I was too young to vote in the referendum. I’m incredibly angry about having lost freedom of movement. If the UK by some miracle rejoins the EU I will make the jump to Europe the very same day. Still looking for a way out in the meantime.

The UK just keeps kicking young people down. The boomers voting against our interests are whipping us into working to pay for their triple locked pensions.

casenmgreen• 5 months ago

I tried to vote, by post, as I lived in the EU.

The ballot paper arrived the day before the vote.

It was impossible to return it in time, and indeed, when I checked, my vote had arrived too late and was not counted.

cedws6• 5 months ago

This kind of thing makes me so cynical about democracy.

teamonkey• 5 months ago

Worth mentioning that 16-year-olds will be able to vote in the next general election. Hopefully they will use that vote.

darreninthenet• 5 months ago

You have a way out... you are allowed to live and work in Ireland. Stay there for a few years (I forget how many) and apply for an Irish ( = EU) passport

cedws6• 5 months ago

Yes, it’s a path I have considered/am considering, but it’s a 5 year commitment. I’m in my mid 20s and want to be able to travel without worrying if my residency application will be jeopardised.

The years where I want the freedom of movement the most will have passed by then.

peyton• 5 months ago

Freedom of movement applies to the territory of a country [1]. Sorry you learned the hard way. Historically you get rights when you pick up a service weapon. Everything else is privilege granted by others.

[1]: Gilbert, Nomadic Peoples and Human Rights (2014), p. 73: "Freedom of movement within a country encompasses both the right to travel freely within the territory of the State and the right to relocate oneself and to choose one's place of residence".

roysting3• 5 months ago

What makes you believe you have lost freedom of movement, I’ve met British people all over Europe. If I can meet a Russian living in Switzerland in Amsterdam and a British couple that took the ferry from the island, why are you not free to “move”?

On a related note; do you enjoy what America is right now? Because centralizing power and handing your country’s (American states are/were/should be essentially countries) sovereignty and self/determination to Brussels is how you get this, become the US of Europe, the next iteration in the centralized war machine of the psychopathic, narcissistic parasitic ruling class. When you lack diversity through separate, unique, district, and sovereign countries where people have oversight and control and can push back against horrible ideas and actions, you end up like us.

I’ve always found it unfortunate that the EU did not become a legitimate, constitutional form of the USA like it was before the Civil War that created this centralized authoritarian fake federal state that we know today. It would have been awe inspiring and really could have become the example for the rest of the world. Instead, the current version of the EU is strangling the whole continent.

The EU is right now talking about becoming a great military force to fight Russia. That’s the kind of movement you’re advocating for, my friend.

You think young people are kept down now, wait till they’re laying in some muddy battlefield as chopped meat or hiding from drone swarm or hypersonic missile attacks on their cities due to the belligerence of the EU aristocrats with no clothes.

saubeidl4• 5 months ago

separate, unique, district, and sovereign countries that can push back against horrible ideas and actions, you end up like us.

The separate, unique sovereign countries are the ones with the horrible ideas and actions. See Victor Orban's Hungary. The whole point is to not let some goulash mussolini control European affairs.

The EU is right now talking about becoming a great military force to fight Russia. That’s the kind of movement you’re advocating for, my friend.

Would you rather... not be able to fight Russia? It's not like the EU is the one with the invasion plans and threats, they're just preparing for the changing world order.

hermanzegerman• 5 months ago

That is one of the most idiotic things I have read. Obviously it's not impossible to travel for them anymore, but freedom of movement referred clearly to the rights of free movement between EU States as a citizen for Work, Education, Travel and Business

Obviously they can still travel to Europe, but they will need an ETIAS Visa Waiver in the future, instead of just going, they can't move for work and studying just as easy without applying for Visa/Permits and they don't have the same rights and access to services as Citizens of a country.

cedws6• 5 months ago

What makes you believe you have lost freedom of movement

Uh, the fact that I cannot stay in Europe for more than 90 days in a 180 day period without a visa? As for all that other rubbish, every European city I’ve been to lives better than the people where I live in London. That’s proof enough for me that the EU is working.

geoka92• 5 months ago

The EU is right now talking about becoming a great military force _to fight Russia_ (emphasis mine)

Correction: to not have to fight Russia. The EU falling apart is Putin's wet dream because he's very afraid of a confrontation with the whole bloc, and wants to subjugate the small European countries piecemeal (and yes, on their own, they would have to submit or face missiles/drones or, even worse, human meatwave attacks by a foe that has been whipping its populace into a death cult for decades for exactly that eventuality).

neRok• 5 months ago

Still looking for a way out in the meantime.

Have you got an ancestor that was born in Canada? [1]

It sounds like that a child of a "red coat" born on the lands that would become Canada is sufficient... [2]

[1]: [Heads Up: Canadian Genealogy is about to get VERY popular!](https://old.reddit.com/r/Genealogy/comments/1qqkzte/heads_up...)

On December 15, 2025 Canada enacted "Bill C-3", granting citizenship to people born before Dec. 15, 2025 with ANY level of Canadian ancestry they can document. (It used to be a "first generation limit")

[2] https://old.reddit.com/r/Genealogy/comments/1qqkzte/heads_up...

ancestors domiciled in the former colony of Newfoundland are still considered as Canadian born or naturalized for the purpose of citizenship by descent.

cedws6• 5 months ago

Unfortunately not, but thank you.

smspillaz2• 5 months ago

December 15, 2025 Canada enacted "Bill C-3", granting citizenship to people born before Dec. 15, 2025 with ANY level of Canadian ancestry they can document. (It used to be a "first generation limit")

This is misleading.

Outside the first generation, the Canadian parent must have spent 3 years cumulatively in Canada prior to the birth, otherwise the child will not be a citizen. That's not a threshold you're likely to meet with a few holiday trips here and there.

https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/ne...

swat535• 5 months ago

I’m not sure Canada is doing well right now. Young people are really struggling and we are dealing with housing crisis. There is also trade conflicts with the United States.

An anti immigration sentiment has also taken over half the country due to rising costs and shortages, which is trickling down to various aspects of the life here.

The harsh weather is not pleasant either. Ironically, young Canadians are looking to move elsewhere.

dingaling• 5 months ago

I'm incredibly angry about having lost freedom of movement.

I think this was indicative of much of the thinking on both sides of the debate though; focusing tightly on a single, subjective aspect for or against.

"Why the EU is important / abhorrent to me right now?" rather than something like "What is the anticipated future nature of the EU and what does that mean for the UK?"

cedws6• 5 months ago

I agree with you but the other side's arguments were pretty weak.

The Leave side was for immigration control (which has not materially changed, we still have an influx of small boats, but have made it harder for educated, hard working people to get in), and mythical funding for the NHS to the tune of £350m a week which never happened.

jemmyw2• 5 months ago

I feel for you. I moved away to New Zealand long before brexit and then did move to Europe for awhile and freedom of movement made that easier than otherwise. However, if you're mid 20s now you don't need it to move places, you can easily get working visas for EU countries or Australia or NZ or Canada, and there are paths then to citizenship. Everywhere has it's troubles of one kind or another. I grew up in the UK and while I have plenty of good memories, I feel like it's a miserable place when you're trying to get on in the world. And the pay for IT professional is atrocious.

disgruntledphd2• 5 months ago

Move to Ireland, work for five years and get citizenship. Congratulations, you're now an EU citizen.

jimmydoe• 5 months ago

Many may change position when they grow up

Also young people always blame last gen for whatever, so expects -8 ~ 0 years old would vote for exit again…

Upvoter33• 5 months ago

Pretty dismissive ("when they grow up") of the group of people in the 16-24 year old range. These are not children; most of that group is 18 and over. You imply noise but there is clearly some signal in this result.

mikkupikku• 5 months ago

How old are you now, and how much of what you believe now is the same as when you were 16-24? It shouldn't be controversial to say that young people are brimming with idealism while being low on experience.

FWIW I think Brexit was dumb but I never felt strongly about any of it because it doesn't effect me in any way. I'm not saying their views on Brexit specifically are likely to change.

raincole2• 5 months ago

Read it as "when they get older" if that makes you feel better. It's known that people are more likely to switch from liberal to conservatives when they get older than vice versa.

mrweasel2• 5 months ago

Brexit was six years ago, well ten if you go by the date of the referendum, it's hardly a generation. The negative affect has been felt pretty much instantly after the UK left and the benefits are mostly either a bit fluffy, scheduled for the future or down right lies.

The article also says nothing about how the same age group votes at the time, but the numbers I can find suggests that over 70% votes remain. The leave side was pretty much fueled by an age group that has felt a decline in British industry and employment, much of which would have happened regardless of the EU. Immigration and Eastern European workers was just a convenient scape goat for the right, but it was believable for those who had suffered through the UKs decline in areas such as manufacturing. The younger demographics never saw this, they primarily saw the benefits the EU provided.

rsynnott• 5 months ago

While support _is_ higher amongst young people, most polling, when asked as a yes/no question, shows majority support in most or all age cohorts for rejoining.

For instance: https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/brits-would-overw...

citrin_ru2• 5 months ago

65+ is the only age group in which >50% still believe Brexit was a good choice.

HPsquared4• 5 months ago

The UK is such a trap for professionals. It's one of the worst places in the developed world for living standards of white-collar professionals, except a tiny slice of finance workers in London. Especially bad for engineers, and has been for a long time.

0_____02• 5 months ago

I was reading about UK housing and had to look up "rising damp." We don't have that here, or at least not to the level we need a word for it.

Smaug123• 5 months ago

The UK climate never really stops being moist, and our houses are routinely at least a hundred years old and made of brick, built before we knew how to deal with damp and built without AC. If we rebuilt everything we'd fix it, but we can't.

tetris112• 5 months ago

DPC is pretty routine these days, and a lot of old houses get the treatment before they're flipped (as is the custom of our times)

oliwarner2• 5 months ago

Your criteria for "living standards" being pay?

HPsquared4• 5 months ago

I mean living standards. The size and quality of housing, quality of food, public spaces, infrastructure, healthcare, social conditions and so on that is available and affordable to the average working professional.

preommr• 5 months ago

Regardless of the value of Brexit, people tend to be biased against things that have happened or are around them when things are bad.

Like when people are against a president if the economy isn't doing well, regardless of if the alternative candidate would've been better.

This also isn't an issue thats being campaigned on. If there was another vote to join the EU, and people got flooded with anti-eu messaging specifically targeted at the demographic, I'd bet that number would drop.

spiderfarmer2• 5 months ago

The EU always has been a scapegoat for incompetent politicians. Now the EU is out of the picture, there’s no-one left to blame. And we can clearly see that the EU, for all its faults, is a very beneficial institution for all involved.

ksec• 5 months ago

People may agree or disagree on Brexit. But my god your sentence sums up what is happening in the UK, without anyone to blame, whether it is Russia, China, US or EU, UK have simply failed to strategically plan or execute on anything.

And there are plenty of people on HN would say otherwise and say UK is fine.

microtonal• 5 months ago

The EU always has been a scapegoat for incompetent politicians.

You also see this in countries still in the EU and it will happen as long as we will not have true integration, it is always easier to blame the EU for your own failings, since it is harder for the EU to fend for itself in national politics.

One recent example in my country is nitrogen deposition. Long ago, countries have committed to keeping certain nature reserves in good health (or improving them when necessary). Then many subsequent governments always chose the side of the farmers at the detriment of nature. Now many reserves' soil quality is in a terrible state and the courts have told the government to stop and fix the problem. Then we got a bunch of right-wing populist countries that have wasted many more years by blaming the EU and questioning scientific methods for measuring deposits - while it has been abundantly for a long time what actually needs to be done, buy out farmers.

At any rate, this constant undermining and blaming of the EU has the effect you'd expect it to - it destroys trust in the EU. Ironically, the saving grace now seems to be the agressor and the lost ally. More people realize that we can't act in an increasingly hostile world as small and mid-sized countries.

ignoramous• 5 months ago

when people are against a president if the economy isn't doing well, regardless

Sortez les sortants...

Havoc• 5 months ago

It was pretty stacked by age even during the vote to leave.

Unfortunately the UK has a voting cohort that is both large and willing to screw over subsequent generations.

Smalltalker-80• 5 months ago

Yep, there's a lot of (continuing) economical damage and still a lot of new immigrants every week. I think some time still needs to pass before Brexit politicians dare to change their stance, now confronted with the results of their choice. In the mean time, Brexit rules are quietly being undone without losing face too much. See the EU-UK trade deals from May 2025.

soderfoo• 5 months ago

What's the "pull" that keeps people migrating to the UK despite the economic gloom?

jemmyw2• 5 months ago

English language is probably a factor

tim333• 5 months ago

While Brits may be gloomy the wages are higher here than many places like India, the Philippines or Somalia so we have people wanting to come in.

pseudohadamard• 5 months ago

I don't think they can. The UK got a lot, and I mean a lot, of special privileges when they joined the EU, even more so than the French. When they come back again with their tail between their legs, they won't get the same treatment a second time. This will make rejoining much, much harder than just clicking "Undo".

StopDisinfo910• 5 months ago

I think the idea I see here that young = modern = pro-EU and old = anti-EU by ignorance is a gross oversimplification which doesn't stand.

I personally was very pro-EU in my youth and deeply soured as I knew more and more to the point I'm staunchly against nowadays.

It started in 2005 with the referendum result being ignored. Then 2012 came with the shambolic management of the Greek crisis, something even the IMF points as ineffective. Then I was paid to put in place the Green Taxonomy and I saw how unready and dumb the whole thing was. Then there was the rejection of the Draghi report which made lose hope.

I find the mix of the euro being a deeply unfair currency union strongly advantaging Germany at the expense of the periphery, the fact that Germany keeps playing on it and amplifying the effect in direct violation of the treaty and yet always get a hall pass and their holier than though attitude despite being basically free loaders completely impossible to tolerate.

The 2019 CEP study showed it well. The union costs billions of GDP to France and Italy to give a minor advantage to the German. It's a dogmatic straight jacket managed by priests with zero actual economic understanding and serving the interests of a big mercantilist using development funds to shore up its tributaries in the east and still managing to gradually lose relevance as it can't even manage having a proper strategy despite the advantages, and a few fiscal parasites around it.

At 36, I deeply wish from my country to be free of the monster than the union has become and deeply ressent being a prisoner of a monetary union which intentionally didn't plan an exit path. And for what? Surrendering the ability to make law to the citizen of other countries who share neither my language, nor my culture, clearly don't have the same vision of the future than us and wants to force us into their ineffective model? No, thanks. No GDP gains or alleged diplomatic weight is worth this debasement.

I don't understand Brexiters because being out of the euros they had the best of both worlds but I respect their desire to be truly sovereign and free from the constant Germanic hegemonic push.

Edit:Lots of downvotes, very few counterarguments. I'm guessing facing the tensions at the heart of the project makes some of you frankly uncomfortable.

blfr3• 5 months ago

It is constantly shocking to me that no matter how many times and where in the west people vote against immigration (which is what most of these votes boil down to), they can never get it.

It's truly a crown in the gutter moment where you can be completely off-the-wall nuts (vide AfD) and, if you're just willing to campaign on anti-immigration, your ranks will instantly swell. Yet the establishment is somehow completely incapable or unwilling to capitalize/capture this.

varispeed• 5 months ago

This is because of massive unchecked corruption. In the UK this has become multibillion per year industry where connected landlords / agencies get lucrative contracts from Home Office for keeping immigrants in their properties and then you have complete supply chains developed around this where each entity skims money.

There are billboards where offers of guaranteed rents are advertised etc.

ForHackernews5• 5 months ago

I assume it's economically catastrophic to cut off the supply of young, low-wage labour and that's why no responsible government will ever do it.

blfr3• 5 months ago

This would be a good explanation but most of these immigrants, especially from outside the EU, are not net contributors.

vide https://www.economist.com/sites/default/files/images/print-e...

from https://www.economist.com/europe/2021/12/18/why-have-danes-t...

And I highly doubt other governments don't have similar calculations or aren't aware of them.

breakyerself8• 5 months ago

Bingo. Just like wanting to leave the EU was self destructive cutting off immigration is as well. The US is in the process of trying to hobble its own economy right now.

canadiantim• 5 months ago

That’s funny in light of one of our Canadian governments (Alberta) recently calling for a referendum on immigration levels, with the government claiming immigration levels are too high to support the housing, economic and social needs of the sheer quantity of people coming in. Seems like the government is trying to be responsible by making sure the social welfare system can still support people as it was designed

tirant2• 5 months ago

If that’s indeed the case, how do you explain the lack of catastrophe in Japans economy ?

Japans big catastrophe happened in 1990 with the bubble bursting, but that was years before the peak in working age population. Since then, the economy has not improved much but also has remained somehow stable.

jgb1984• 5 months ago

Numbers from Denmark and the Netherlands (the only two European countries where it's allowed to gather such statistics) show that non-EU immigration is a net cost to the society (and economy). In the Netherlands a non-western asylumseeker comes to about 800.000 € to 1.300.000 € net cost to the state over the persons lifetime, depending on what you take into account. And that's purely the financial part, we're not even talking about the increase in crime and the ghettoisation of most western European cities. It's a tragedy, for everyone involved (because most 2nd and 3rd generation non-western immigrants still live a life of poverty in Belgium/Netherlands).

breakyerself8• 5 months ago

Because the establishment knows how integral to the economy immigration is and because it isn't that easy to stop even for an island. Unless you want to shut down tourism and trade.

davidguetta3• 5 months ago

Stopping is a long way from "actively encouraging it and calling racist everybody who disagree" (and actively hide horrific stuff like the rape gangs).

kjksf6• 5 months ago

Based on what data?

The immigration we're talking about, the one of Africans etc. immigrants flooding west, is destructive to the economies based on pretty much every statistic I've seen.

Those immigrants are on welfare in disproportional numbers compared to native population.

E.g. in US 72% Somalis are on welfare and the same stats are in West Europe.

They cost the state gigantic amount of money.

And per-capita crime stats are so bad that governments are hiding them from public.

This is all documented by government's own statistics and reasonably well reported.

Immigration COULD be a net positive to the economy IF it was managed properly but it isn't and it isn't.

Tourism isn't immigration and I don't see what trade has to do with it.

alecco2• 5 months ago

Because the establishment

Let me fix that for you: because the establishment is owned by the corporations who want to suppress wages, rise demand, pump gross GDP, and pump real estate.

And because governments running on deficits are slaves to the banking cartel, too.

gnufied• 5 months ago

Nicholas Taleb has a great article about this - https://medium.com/@nntaleb/the-world-in-which-we-live-7255a...

smspillaz2• 5 months ago

But they do meaningfully try to address this.

Almost every country in the west is tightening it's system. In the UK claiming ILR will take a significantly longer period of lawful residence, and a shorter time will require you to meet a high income threshold. It is nearly impossible to get PR in Canada now unless you are fluent in both English and French and have a PhD or several years of canadian work experience. The bar has also gone up in Australia too.

The reason why this doesn't seem to move the needle on the anti-immigration vote is because the folks on that side can always just move the goalposts and be the "true" anti-immigrant party. I believe these days Reform UK wants cancel all ILRs and start actively deporting long term residents who don't meet an ever raising bar. Its madness.

kjksf6• 5 months ago

The only meaningful action would be to stop well fare for immigrants. You don't work, you don't have money.

Madness is for UK government to tax UK citizens to pay for housing and food of immigrants.

Incentives drive behavior. If you're African and see you can live for free in England, of course you'll try to get that deal. And in age of social media, they know.

Denmark did that and saw dramatic drop in number of people trying to immigrate there.

What you desperately try to paint as racism is just immune response from UK citizens.

They can see their taxes are raising, gov services are getting worse but gov finds the money to pay for housing for 110 thousand immigrants.

They connect the dots and that's why Reform UK would win the elections (if the elections were done today).

Because Labour, which won election recently with good majority, is not, in fact, ignoring voters and not doing anything meaningful.

Reform UK promises drastic changes because that's what majority of UK votes are demanding now.

It's how democracy is supposed to work. The politicians are supposed to be responsive to demands of voters.

JCattheATM9• 5 months ago

The real problem is the uneducated masses who buy the propaganda that immigration is the issue they should care about the most.

spwa44• 5 months ago

The real problem is that for >10 years the a green-left coalition was in power, at least in most of Europe and immigration was greatly encouraged because it would provide clear economic benefits for everyone.

There's many stories, but let's call this the average story: "Immigration brings growth, growth advances everyone".

Well, it doesn't, at least not at the moment. Oops.

Now we can argue why, of course, but a certain amount of backlash was to be expected. It was clear for 20 years or more exactly what would happen when "the alternative" to the prevailing "left+green" coalitions gains power. To an extent I don't understand how anybody can claim to be surprised.

Also, in a democracy I would think that arguing that "the uneducated masses" are wrong is a quick path to irrelevancy. That, by the way, is exactly how we want the system to work. The system needs to work well for the uneducated masses. Figure it out, or accept that the other guys are going to win the election.

NullCascade• 5 months ago

the anti-immigration right in Denmark was successful because they were data-driven and could show that unskilled non-Western immigration was a net negative even by 3rd generation.

the American and German far-right by contrast seem to be the polar opposite of data-driven. No the lazy 'IQ by country' maps don't count.

ffsm8• 5 months ago

the anti-immigration right in Denmark was successful because they were data-driven and could show that unskilled non-Western immigration was a net negative even by 3rd generation.

That is very true however you're misunderstanding why the German (where I'm from) and Americans parties aren't publishing this data. It's not because they're lazy, but because they can't.

And before you're now thinking: "aha! So they're not net negative!" ...well, these statistics aren't available either.

The reality is that the data to create these graphs aren't public, or never created. The likely reason for that being labeled 'nazi' for even considering gathering such data.

I personally suspect that they're net negative, in total but net positive on average (so numerically, most immigrants being positive). At least that would reflect my personal experience with with immigrants. However, you only need a very small percentage of immigrants to game the system in order to make the whole sample size negative because of the insane amount of money a bad actor can drain.

tolerance• 5 months ago

The transition from Nationalism to Globalism and back to Nationalism (rather, a more broad iteration of it) cannot be achieved with micro revolutions like what we see in the US.

thisisit• 5 months ago

Most of the politics comes down to tribalism. And within this tribalism nothing works better than Us vs Them. Immigration is one of the best "us vs them" debates. It rallies lot of support.

But then often immigration isn't the problem. It is a solution preying on the fear of people that "outsiders" are harming their opportunities, housing, way of life etc. The real problem is that people are not making living wages and wages are not catching up to cost of living.

As politicians pushing anti-immigration come to power they also realize this problem. They'd rather not solve immigration because then they need to face up to the actual living wage crisis issue. It also helps keeping the immigration talking point open so that it can be used in next election.

znzjzjsj• 5 months ago

But then often immigration isn't the problem

There has never been a successful multiracial democracy in history. There are many books on this - one was even on Obamas summer reading list awhile back.

The real problem is that people are not making living wages and wages are not catching up to cost of living

Importing labor devalues native labor. This is outside of the cultural change, etc. These are real problems.

They'd rather not solve immigration

Because they serve the rich and the rich benefit from immigration at the expense of natives. Immigration is a solved problem. Do it only when needed or when it benefits the people, not a select few.

haizhung• 5 months ago

Please. The establishment is dying to capitalize on it, and puts out one ridiculous anti-immigration measure after the next. And all it does is that it simply boosts far right parties even more.

It’s completely obvious to me (and often supported by exit polls) that people who are voting far right aren’t actually against immigration - only on the surface. Once you dig just a little bit deeper, often socioeconomic struggles surface. The working class has been taking a beating since the what, 1980s now? And it’s not like there’s any sort of legislature on the horizon that would fix their predicament.

So people look for a scapegoat. The far right gives them a scapegoat goat, and the enlightened center doesn’t know how to handle it.

demosito666• 5 months ago

In countries with functional democracy it actually is happening. In Sweden anti-immigration sentiments allowed for right party to gain significant share in the parliament and now immigration rules are changing and immigration rates are lowering. One may argue that this is 20 years too late, but in the past the majority of the population public actually didn’t actively oppose the policies. They do now, the situation is changing. No swexit required.

crims0n4• 5 months ago

Been reading a lot of novels set during the golden years of the British Empire. It is both amazing and terrifying how far a country can fall in less than a century… which for some lucky people is a single lifetime.

ido• 5 months ago

Both the average and mean UK citizen is unambiguously better off today than whenever the golden age of the empire was.

crims0n4• 5 months ago

I don’t doubt that, it’s just crazy for me to think that less than 100 years ago they were six times the size of the Roman Empire, and the dominant superpower on earth.

kingleopold• 5 months ago

this is a flawed logic. Because almost any country is better than decades ago. you need to compare BE to top countries now and places in ranking, to see if it's better. UK, is it better than Norway, Switzerland or Japan? No. Not even top 10 in any metric, cleearly huge fall. Only top level thing left is universities and scientific research.

alecco2• 5 months ago

In totally unrelated news, "16 to 24-year-olds" is the group with majority migrant background.

akmarinov2• 5 months ago

Well they don’t vote, so it doesn’t matter. And by the time they get around to voting usually the older you get the more conservative you get, so it’ll change.

tim-tday• 5 months ago

Wait, that’s an option?

Over 80% of 16 to 24-year-olds would vote to rejoin the EU

Related Stories