I'll stop quoting you when you stop posting.
But until then I am perfectly within my rights to quote you, especially when you wilfully ignore or misrepresent what I write.
You said "
absolutely no reason to suggest post brexit the UK wouldn't allow inward migration as it needs to fill these positions"
I pointed out that there were indeed - the combination of the #1 reason people had for voting leave, i.e. the #1 thing that 17.4M people wanted, and this in the Tory manifesto:
View attachment 158294
Those really are very good reasons to suggest that post Brexit the UK wouldn't allow inward migration as it needs to fill these positions.
You then tried to make out I was claiming that the views of leave voters meant that all immigration should stop. [Word of advice - don't judge everybody by your own standards when deciding what nonsense you think other people will swallow.]
So I asked you to try and make
a case that when people's biggest reason for voting to leave was "immigration", and there were promises by the party that kept getting voted for to bring net migration down to the tens of thousands,
there wasn't a desire to drastically curtail immigration.
And you thought you'd be clever (hint - you were the opposite) by ignoring that request and trying to make out that as I agreed that the voting motives didn't equate to
stopping all migration that the matter was closed.
I challenged you about the way you hadn't even tried to make a case showing no desire to drastically curtail immigration, and all you did was to repeat.
"So could you provide anything that says there's no possibility of offering a visa to people applying to fill positions where there is a skill or labour void regardless of 'proposed' starting salary?"
And whether you think people here will accept your prevarication as true and honest or not, that really is
not a case which shows that there was no desire in leave voters to drastically curtail immigration.