So what restrictions should be placed on you and the rest of us? Because it does actually work both ways.

try it and see how far you get



in fact, try driving a Nissan Pathfinder through the tunnel and not getting stopped and searched both ends, and if you want to borrow one, PM me.



Europe is nowhere near as "open" as UKIP or others would suggest.



That is the problem, SOME of what UKIP want to do is quite right, as is SOME of Labour and SOME of the Conservatives.

I know, i'd like an end to it, not anti immigration just letting anyone in just because they're born in an EU country is daft. If it was such a good idea wouldn't countries like USA and Australia have open borders?



I was quite happy with the way it was before the open EU borders, if i want to live in Germany i have no issue with having to qualify via a system of entry other than and more complex than BORN IN UK.



I wanted to move to NZ (still could) but fell just short of the points needed, i'm currently in the process of making sure i have the few letters after my name to help that.



If everyone is scrutinised as much as this then i have a little more faith in the governance and quality of people entering.

I'm in the Quality not Quantity camp.



I'll reiterate i'm NOT anti immigration.

UKIP could be a monumental cockup, i'll not dispute that but both Labour and Tory have had their turn in my eyes, and i have faith in neither

1) I am not saying that you are anti-immigration, so let's put that one to bed.



2) What do you feel about someone moving to a different part of the UK for look for work? Should that depend on education, infrastructure being able to cope, work availablilty etc? If not, why not?

You are aware that although the USA is ostensibly a single nation, it is in reality a commonwealth of 50 individual States? There is a clue in the name.

We're all part of the same system though, tax, health, education, the standards are the same or in some case the targets are the same.

I moved to better myself from the North-West to the South-East, under micro scrutiny makes me look hypocritical but i'm still paying taxes to fund people in the North-West, their children, their education, their health.



An argument could be that if everything was centralised and all of the EU followed the same pattern/standards across the board then that would be exactly the same scenario as the question you posed but it's a pipedream, countries have their own economies and rely on different means to support themselves, small example is we can't market ourselves as a great summer hotspot like Spain/Portugal/Greece etc etc so tourism isn't as big and/or differently marketed in this country.



You can't create a catch all economic system and I'd love some great socialist world like a Star Trek ran Earth but the truth is in the real world we are corrupt and untrustworthy as a species, with a little bit of power we only look to feather our own nest.

And England is 48 individual counties

Not quite. There are substantial differences on a number of issues between, say, England and Wales. Prescription charges, for instance. In Scotland, tuition fees. In Northern Ireland, different laws on abortion.



We have regional tax variations via council tax.



Education has vast differences – and these are increasing – simply because not all schools are state schools, and many are run under a very different ethos with very different standards.







I'm not trying to 'micro scrutinise' you – or to make you look anything. I'm attempting to explore the issues.







We're a different sort of tourist destination – we score well for history and culture, for instance.



But then again, different parts of the UK (a federation of countries) have different tourist benefits. I suspect not everyone of the four nations has the same (pro-rata) levels of tourism – let alone all the constituent parts of England. The likes of London and Stratford and York will be helping subsidise other areas that see very few visitors.



But to go back, you made comments earlier about infrastructure, for instance. Now if you look at internal migration within England alone, then much of it has, over the last 30 or so years, been toward London and the south east for, in essence, the reasons that you – and I – moved in that direction.



That inevitably puts strains on the infrastructure – I think there are issues around precisely that, given all the new flats I see going up for all the people moving into my general area, which is getting particularly trendy with young professionals. These aren't your eastern Europeans. Some are from mainland Europe (it is worth noting that we are Europeans, whether we like it or not), but some are from the US/Canada and the majority are from the UK.



Should that be allowed to happen, if increasing stress on the infrastructure is an issue?

Counties that are not allowed to levy their own taxes, apart from rates etc nor allowed to pass laws particular to their specific geo-political area

Holding online conversations with Americans as I am want to do now and again, it never ceases to amaze me just how many of them are hyper-patriotic to an ethos of "USA" and yet often very anti-government to the point where part of the issue of wanting to own guns is almost as a warning to central government that they will not be controlled by their own armed forces if it ever came to a situation when the government decreed it so - I often get the feeling that (especially with Obama) they are just one wrong word away from another civil war and if it kicks off its going to start in Utah, a state that seems to have an above average mix of chip-on-shoulder, very far right republicans for whom central government is an unnecessary expense.



Ultra-patriotic but the patriotism being directed to the flag rather than the country, its a very strange mix and something that we cannot compare our union of countries to at all.

Ah right, just thought we were posting random facts.