Brexit: Now What? Part II

[The Don]

Drambuie is like hair lacquer.

You say this like it's a bad thing..

 

[McHrozni]

Catsmate, yes there are more refugees this year, but not facilities in countries neighbouring those affected by war to provide asylum processing and safe passage to safe countries.

More patrols from EU states do not stop traffickers sticking people in dangerously unseaworthy vessels.

Action in the countries affected would. And that is what we should be moving towards. Obviously there's a little bit of that, but not enough.
Currently things are at "breaking point".

There shouldn't be one trafficker vessel crossing the Mediterranean.
All developed countries not torn apart by war need to get together with the UNHCR build camps in Jordan, in Lebanon, in Israel, to process asylum applications and transport safely, refugees to safe countries.

As usual, EU is waaaay ahead of you. This has been going on for years or decades. The thing is, many people still prefer the much quicker route of illegal immigration.

Apparently you really need to be clueless on every major issue to be a Brexit supporter.

McHrozni

 

[CoolSceptic]

Archie, I saw your reply last week and thought it was so misguided it simply wasn't worth answering. I still largely hold that view but I thought I should at least give you some pointers as to why you are so far off track.

Or the less curious explanation is that I missed your reply where you linked to the article. But it's behind a paywall anyway and the bit you quoted doesn't actually provide what Carney said about what would happen and when.

The predictions Carney made are extensively covered across the internet. Many news outlets covered it (the independent and the telegraph also covered it). I chose the FT because it is a quality pro-remain paper so there was no risk of claims of bias. Incidentally, I don't have a subscription to the FT and it is trivial to get to read their articles (just go via google).

The fact that Carney's predictions are trivial to find and locate yet you repeatedly insist you don't know what they are despite extensive news coverage simply shows you are unwilling to engage in an actual debate and just want to stick your head in the ground and claim you can't see anything. Such an approach is sadly not unusual at ISF but uninteresting from any other perspective.

The reason I ask is that every quote I have seen from Carney talked about what would happen post-Brexit and we haven't Brexited yet. Now he might well have made predictions about what would happen immediately after the vote but in that case I'd like to see exactly what he said and not what the press say he said or what you say he said because these things are often not the same.

Yes, his predictions were immediately post vote, and your insistence that you won't believe what is extensively covered in multiple quality press outlets make you sound a bit like a 9/11 truther.

I wasn't disputing that the bank dropped the base rate or that mortgage rates have dropped as a result.

... which goes against Carney's claims. QED.

If it's not an isolated incident then you should be able to provide say ... 4? ... examples?

Because it isn't worth it. I've provided one meticulously evidenced, linked and well known example with evidence of the failure and you put your head in the sand. That is a simple test on my part to see if you are engaging in a meaningful debate. Your insistence that you cannot find information that is widely available and won't believe what is published in the quality press shows that there is no point in me going to lengths to find more. You are in denial.

It seems its you who doesn't understand the concept of models. I used to build them for a living so I think I have some understanding.

I build models for a living today, and you are deeply confused.

Perhaps you are getting confused between the purpose of a scientific/mathematical model and a financial/economic model. They are not really the same. Prediction is not the main goal of those kind of models if by prediction you mean comparing say the interest rate in Dec 2025 with the forecast and expecting to be spot on.

Wow this is so very confused. Economics models are based on *mathematics*. To say they are not the same as a mathematical model is simply bizarre. They are usually based on some relatively simple differential equations. There is a separate distinction between stochastic models and deterministic models, which I think is what you are trying to get at, but these are a feature of both (say) physical science models AND economics models. And they both rely very much on mathematics!

To give a very simple illustration. If I quit my job then I can predict that in 2 years time my income from that job will be $0. And that, in the absence of other factors, my household income will be much lower than it would be if I didn't make that decision.

That 'prediction' is very reliable beyond 6 months.

I actually can't believe you wrote this. We are on a thread discussing Brexit and the UK economy, which are clearly macroeconomic issues. We are clearly talking about macroeconomic models, predictions and indicators. Yet you give a microeconomic analogy. I didn't spell out macroeconomic indicators because I thought it was blindingly obvious that we were on a thread discussing Brexit. But then your misunderstandings about economic models being built on mathematics tells me no matter how much I spell out the blindingly obvious it isn't going to bridge the gap between your understanding and reality.

Now if you look at my income in 2018 and I have a $1m a year job as the CEO of Economic Modelling Inc it doesn't make my original prediction wrong or useless.

Your prediction IS useless, in the context of Brexit and macroeconomics, because it is irrelevant.

Arguing over the results of a model is a pointless exercise. The only thing worth arguing about are the assumptions that go into it. And anyone who builds a model knows it's wrong from the start. It's not supposed to be right. It's supposed to inform decision making, be indicative of impacts and likely sensitivities etc.

What a strange paragraph. If you had understood what I originally wrote, this waffle above would not have been written. My original statement did not demand models be perfectly deterministic, I demanded they outperform a naive baseline by some reasonable measure. This is a *stochastic*, not deterministic measure. The point at which you no longer outperform a naive baseline means you have no predictive benefit, even from an "evaluate the impact" perspective.

None of what I say is controversial, it is well understood in the economics literature (and most other modelling literature). That you insist on arguing against it with slightly irrelevant claims is why I doubt that there is any merit in debating with you. We'll see if that prediction comes true or not!

Sorry but nobody makes economic decisions on a 3-6 month timeframe of impact assessment. It probably takes 3-6 months from building the model to actually implementing the decision and the effects are usually supposed to be long term.

It fascinates me that I've already given you an example of exactly that (the monetary policy committee uses predictive models to set interest rates with skill on this horizon). Their papers note the complete failure of the models to predict the recession in Q4 2008 even with data up to Q4 2007, quite consistent with my claims.

Incidentally it's you who is taking the ridiculously absolutist position that if you can't predict the economy in a years team precisely then all models are useless.

Considering I gave an explicit example of where models are used to great value (the monetary policy committee), you now say that I claim all models are useless? You are just taking a nuanced position that I put forward and turning it into a bizarre absolute. I linked to the bizarre absolute guy cartoon in the hope that you would realise what you are doing. Apparently, that's not enough. Oh.

So from your latest discussion we find:
That you think the differential equations in science / mathematics are somehow different from the differential equations in economics
You don't really understand the difference between stochastic and deterministic modelling nor do you understand these are both used in both science and economics
You can't locate claims extensively found in the press even after I link an example
You dishonestly misrepresent my nuanced arguments with bizarre absolutes

I could go on, but I hope you can realise why I think arguing with you is utterly pointless. But it doesn't stop there.

What information did you have prior to the vote to show that Carney was incorrect and should be ignored? Otherwise you are just arguing from hindsight.

Yes, I'm using hindsight to *test Carney's predictions*. That's how we usually test predictions. By waiting to see what the actual outcomes were and making comparisons.

Good grief.

Oh, and experts should know the limits of their ability to predict the future. When they are outside the predictable, they should acknowledge that and allow politicians to make subjective claims. That's how it works. So Carney's performance here is not good.

 

[CoolSceptic]

In my earlier discussion of Carney's failed predictions as part of project fear, I jokingly linked to Wikipedia's article on Leon Festinger's book "When Prophecy Fails". I'm sure most sceptics are familiar with his seminal work on cognitive dissonance.

However, I hadn't realised until afterwards quite how similar events between Mark Carney and "Marian Keech".

Carney made a sequence of predictions of what would happen after a Brexit vote. These were short-term predictions, so meangingful, within the time horizon of predictability, and testable. Which is good.

His reasoning was as follows. He predicted that post Brexit, the economy would falter, the pound would fall. He stated that he would reduce interest rates, but that banks would not be able to pass this on. His reasoning was that banks would struggle with falling asset prices, and would need to recapitalise, forcing them to increase their margins and not pass the reduced interest rates to homeowners.

In other words, he was playing out Brexit much like the financial crisis (do we really have a bank governor who can only see the next crisis through the lens of the last one? Worrying!), given the damage the financial crisis did, this was undoubtedly predicting another crisis.

So both Keech and Carney made predictions of doom, with claims of specific events and timescales over which things would happen. To be fair to Carney, the pound did fall - he got that right. The drop in interest rates isn't a prediction we should test him on (since he is in control of it), but his claims of falling asset value, recapitalising banks and mortgages were simply false. As we also know, Keech's claim of the end of the world was also wrong.

Both Keech and Carney had strong social support for their views - Keech backed by her cult, Carney backed by the strongly pro-remain establishment. Festinger identifies this as a key element in cognitive dissonance.

But the interesting bit is the reaction after the failed predictions. Keech went on to claim that her group essentially saved the world - that their actions prevented the doom that was about to come around.

So what did Carney do? Shortly after Brexit, he went on a whistlestop tour of banks to tell them not to do exactly what he said they should do prior to Brexit. Oops. Then about a week and a half ago, he sat before MPs and - no joke - insisted that it was his actions that averted a crisis from the Brexit vote.

In a further defence of the BoE’s actions, Mr Carney said that the “this financial system, under the supervision of the Bank of England, sailed through what was a surprise to the vast majority of financial market participants”.

There was no crisis despite Carney's predictions of falling asset values and banks needing to recapitalise. There was a fall in the pound and a bit of volatility in the markets, but there never was a crisis to avert. Carney's claims in front of MPs to have played a role in preventing problems having made ludicrous predictions of doom almost exactly fit Festinger's model of cognitive dissonance.

 

[Airfix]

As usual, EU is waaaay ahead of you.

I didn't realise they'd cleared 'the jungle' in Calais, ended human trafficking and brought the number of migrant deaths at sea down to zero.

This has been going on for years or decades.

Yes it has and Schengen has made it a doddle for them.

The thing is, many people still prefer the much quicker route of illegal immigration.

"Prefer" PREFER ?
Who prefers the risk of drowning to safe passage provided from a refugee camp direct to a safe country ?

You'd have to be stark raving mad to think the EU had got control of this mess, they've been letting it get worse and worse and worse.
They have at last recognised that there's a problem but they don't know what to do about it.
They're more strategically inept even than Will Straw, the former drug dealer who was executive director of the Britain Stronger in Europe Campaign.
There is even trafficking from EU member countries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_trafficking_in_Bulgaria

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/feb/06/sex-traffick-romania-britain

Take your blinkers off, recognise that the EU is not perfect, it is deeply flawed and it's Schengen system is making things worse.

 

[Airfix]

Coolskeptic, good posts.

 

[Aepervius]

I'd be surprised if there were nobody who did.

It is the internet. I would be surprised if somebody did not volunteer to maintain their head under the water. Although on this forum usually people don't go that far.

 

[Aepervius]

Sometimes you have to be callous to be kind.

Always said by everybody on the right side of the stick : the hand holding it, not the receiving one.

 

[CoolSceptic]

Coolskeptic, good posts.

Thanks, your comments on the disaster of EU immigration "policy" are spot on as well.

The EU policy on immigration is a hopeless, incoherent mess. You have wealthy western nations holding up refugee welcome signs - not doing anything about it, just encouraging the refugees to make dangerous journeys. At the same time, the Greek border is completely porous (to be fair, it is difficult to police, and Greece is pretty much broke since Merkel is too scared of what voters might think to give Greece the debt haircut it desperately needs) whilst countries like Hungary shut down Schengen and put up razor wire.

This isn't a "policy". It is nation states acting in a discordant way that makes an incoherent mess. The ONLY beneficiaries of this mess are the people traffickers.

And of course, freedom of movement of people is a fundamental human right in the EU, until the people holding placards saying "refugees welcome" suddenly realise what the consequences are, and demand quotas for refugees. Hold on, what about this precious freedom of movement that is an EU right? How do you even enforce quotas under those circumstances? The policy appears like it is just being made up as it goes along.

The worst thing is this myth that we have to let people in because conditions in the countries in the middle east are so bad. The conditions in the EU are just as bad, but we are only just starting to hear about it:

Greece kept child refugees in 'abusive' conditions
Conditions for Greece's migrant children shocking, says Human Rights Watch
Forgotten inside Greece’s notorious camp for child refugees

The solution? The EU will now have to pump money into these camps to solve a humanitarian crisis of their own making. Of course, they could have pumped money into the camps in Turkey, Lebanon etc. instead and cut out the human trafficking middle man, a lot of dangerous journeys and deaths, not to mention deep divisions within the EU itself, but that would have required actually thinking about the consequences of their actions, rather than jumping on the first feel good bandwagon that passes by.

 

[McHrozni]

I didn't realise they'd cleared 'the jungle' in Calais, ended human trafficking and brought the number of migrant deaths at sea down to zero.

Of course it didn't. They have, however, did the exact thing you said they should've done. It just didn't work as well as you thought it was.

You were wrong, again. This is getting repetitive.

Yes it has and Schengen has made it a doddle for them.

Shengen hasn't been relevant in this regard. You probably just weren't paying attention. Again, repetitive.

Who prefers the risk of drowning to safe passage provided from a refugee camp direct to a safe country ?

Tens of thousand of people each year, obviously. I'll let you figure out why that is. It's not that hard.

Take your blinkers off, recognise that the EU is not perfect, it is deeply flawed and it's Schengen system is making things worse.

EU is certainly not perfect, it is deeply flawed and Shengen system is one of the things that work quite well, unless when faced with extraordinary circumstances. In this case it was at least two countries - Turkey and Croatia - actively sabotaging it in order to reduce their own problems. No system can work perfectly well in those circumstances, and demanding it should makes you unreasonable.

McHrozni

 

[Airfix]

Ok genius, what new refugee camps has it built?
What camps has it attached airstrips to which are long enough for an airliner to take off from ?
What has it done to stop trafficker boats leaving ports in North Africa ?

What has it done to ensure that refugees go directly to the safe country they wish to have asylum in ?

What steps has it taken to ensure that terrorists cannot use legitimate refugees for cover ?

What steps has it taken (not counting the efforts of individual national governments), to crack down on the intra EU trafficking of EU citizens ?

Schengen has been relevant in this regard because Calais is full of illegal immigrants who exploited the Schengen system.

Lets not forget that people have died in lorries on the way from Calais to the UK. People have also died on land journeys to Calais.

Now I don't care really what some of these people would "prefer".
We need to make it as hard as possible for them to travel by trafficker.
Make trafficking unattractive unprofitable and in some cases consider the deportation of trafficked people.
That would stop the illegal trafficking industry.

Establish safe camps with airfields. Establish safe routes to safe countries including European countries and that must include BRITAIN.
Do it through the UNHCR. Get as many countries as possible on board. Get as many broad shoulders as possible supporting this.
Give contracts to airline companies to provide transport.

Take the traffickers out of the equation.
We should pay for the safe travel of refugees ourselves.

 

[McHrozni]

What steps has it taken (not counting the efforts of individual national governments), to crack down on the intra EU trafficking of EU citizens ?

How do you do that anyway? I don't mean how do you take steps against it, but how do you traffick EU citizens through EU?

Establish safe camps with airfields.

Because using existing airfields is too mainstream
And too cheap too, apparently. Brexitard economic in action

McHrozni

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Archie, I saw your reply last week and thought it was so misguided it simply wasn't worth answering. I still largely hold that view but I thought I should at least give you some pointers as to why you are so far off track.

The predictions Carney made are extensively covered across the internet. Many news outlets covered it (the independent and the telegraph also covered it). I chose the FT because it is a quality pro-remain paper so there was no risk of claims of bias. Incidentally, I don't have a subscription to the FT and it is trivial to get to read their articles (just go via google).

The fact that Carney's predictions are trivial to find and locate yet you repeatedly insist you don't know what they are despite extensive news coverage simply shows you are unwilling to engage in an actual debate and just want to stick your head in the ground and claim you can't see anything. Such an approach is sadly not unusual at ISF but uninteresting from any other perspective.

You know if things are so easy to find then just post them. Not links to paywalled stories. Just the actual quotes from the man. That you would rather post a screed about why you won't rather than just do it speaks volumes about you.

I'm 'unwilling to engage in an actual debate' because I am not debating, denying or arguing with what you have claimed. I'm asking you to provide the specific quote from Carney with which you are taking issue.

The man said a lot of things. I'm not a mind reader. I don't know which part of what he said you are taking issue with. But again all of this could be resolved very easily. You'd rather argue.

You will also note that immediately following your post another poster who read the article noted that the article doesn't say what you said it did.

As for the rest of your post ... an exercise in deliberate misunderstanding and bluster which seemingly ends in the same mysteriously physics denying conclusions that we should base our decisions on hindsight using knowledge we don't yet have or just decide things at random because we can't predict what will happen.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Thanks, your comments on the disaster of EU immigration "policy" are spot on as well.

The EU policy on immigration is a hopeless, incoherent mess. You have wealthy western nations holding up refugee welcome signs - not doing anything about it, just encouraging the refugees to make dangerous journeys. At the same time, the Greek border is completely porous (to be fair, it is difficult to police, and Greece is pretty much broke since Merkel is too scared of what voters might think to give Greece the debt haircut it desperately needs) whilst countries like Hungary shut down Schengen and put up razor wire.

This isn't a "policy". It is nation states acting in a discordant way that makes an incoherent mess. The ONLY beneficiaries of this mess are the people traffickers.

And of course, freedom of movement of people is a fundamental human right in the EU, until the people holding placards saying "refugees welcome" suddenly realise what the consequences are, and demand quotas for refugees. Hold on, what about this precious freedom of movement that is an EU right? How do you even enforce quotas under those circumstances? The policy appears like it is just being made up as it goes along.

The worst thing is this myth that we have to let people in because conditions in the countries in the middle east are so bad. The conditions in the EU are just as bad, but we are only just starting to hear about it:

Greece kept child refugees in 'abusive' conditions
Conditions for Greece's migrant children shocking, says Human Rights Watch
Forgotten inside Greece’s notorious camp for child refugees

The solution? The EU will now have to pump money into these camps to solve a humanitarian crisis of their own making. Of course, they could have pumped money into the camps in Turkey, Lebanon etc. instead and cut out the human trafficking middle man, a lot of dangerous journeys and deaths, not to mention deep divisions within the EU itself, but that would have required actually thinking about the consequences of their actions, rather than jumping on the first feel good bandwagon that passes by.

So lets vote for the racists and xenophobes to take Britain out of the EU because that will help?

Of course it isn't a 'policy' because each EU country has ultimate control of it's own immigration and borders - something the Leaver liars denied in their propaganda.

And again the selfish anti-immigration I'm alright jack keep em out loudmouths suggest that condemning people to years in atrocious camps is some kind of solution while doing NOTHING to help the people they claim to have concern for.

 

[Amazer]

Ok genius, what new refugee camps has it built?
What camps has it attached airstrips to which are long enough for an airliner to take off from ?
What has it done to stop trafficker boats leaving ports in North Africa ?

What has it done to ensure that refugees go directly to the safe country they wish to have asylum in ?

What steps has it taken to ensure that terrorists cannot use legitimate refugees for cover ?

What steps has it taken (not counting the efforts of individual national governments), to crack down on the intra EU trafficking of EU citizens ?

Schengen has been relevant in this regard because Calais is full of illegal immigrants who exploited the Schengen system.

Lets not forget that people have died in lorries on the way from Calais to the UK. People have also died on land journeys to Calais.

Now I don't care really what some of these people would "prefer".
We need to make it as hard as possible for them to travel by trafficker.
Make trafficking unattractive unprofitable and in some cases consider the deportation of trafficked people.
That would stop the illegal trafficking industry.

Establish safe camps with airfields. Establish safe routes to safe countries including European countries and that must include BRITAIN.
Do it through the UNHCR. Get as many countries as possible on board. Get as many broad shoulders as possible supporting this.
Give contracts to airline companies to provide transport.

Take the traffickers out of the equation.
We should pay for the safe travel of refugees ourselves.

Still don't see how Brexit helps this situation.

 

[McHrozni]

Still don't see how Brexit helps this situation.

Something is wrong with EU -> let's quit EU!

Good point. His entire premise is idiotic.

McHrozni

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Establish safe routes to safe countries including European countries and that must include BRITAIN.

So how does leaving the EU help achieve this?

The leavers and their anti-immigration rhetoric are a key reason why this isn't and won't happen.

The UK was a strong voice against this sort of thing.

I'm struggling to see exactly what you expected the EU to do here

 

[McHrozni]

I'm struggling to see exactly what you expected the EU to do here

Probably overrule the UK, so he could whine about the evil EU telling UK what to do.

McHrozni

 

[Airfix]

How do you do that anyway? I don't mean how do you take steps against it, but how do you traffick EU citizens through EU?

Didn't you know it was happening ?
You take steps against it firstly, by scrapping Schengen.

Returning to passport checks and preventing people who have past convictions for major criminal offences and links to organised crime from coming through.

Because using existing airfields is too mainstream

Because takeoff runs vary from plane to plane and an airfield that was only built with consideration for short takeoff jet fighters or STOL transports isn't going to be big enough.

It may be necessary to use 747s or Airbus A380's as the numbers of refugees are very large.

The typical takeoff runs of Boeing 747's and Airbus A380's with a full passenger compliment can be over 3km so a long runway is necessary and so, unless one is available, we should consider the construction of such runways.

And also, any such air strip needs to be smooth.

Airliners are not tolerant of debris on runways.

In comparison Hercules C130J transports can be operated from rough airfields but their passenger compliment is 92 people.

A Boeing 747 has a normal compliment of 416 passengers.

The Airbus A380 has a normal compliment of 644 seats in a 2 class configuration.
Both aircraft are certified to be able to carry more passengers if seating configurations are changed. The A380 is certified for a maximum of 868.

So unless there is a suitable top notch airfield to hand, construction of one has to be a consideration.

Safety has to be #1 priority.

 

[Airfix]

Human trafficking across the EU from Bulgaria to Italy:

In November 2012, 43-year-old Bulgarian Jemal Borovinov and 14 others were taken from their home country and soon found themselves trapped in a human trafficking ring operating in southern Italy. Fortunately, Jemal and his wife managed to escape their captors a few months into their bout of enforced slavery and make it back to Bulgaria. I met Jemal in a petrol station in his hometown of Razgrad to find out exactly what happened to him.

VICE: Hi Jemal. So how did you get yourself into this situation in the first place?
Jemal Borovinov: I was misled. My sister and her husband were working in Germany, picking strawberries and raspberries. A woman called my sister and told her they were recruiting people to work in Italy, paying €30 a day to pick tangerines and oranges. She said you just had to pay €150 euros for travel and another €100 commission to the person who recruits you. My sister and my wife persuaded my brother-in-law and me to take the job. There is a saying: “Never listen to a woman.” I listened to mine once and look at what happened.

I'm not sure that's a saying. When did you leave Bulgaria?
The four of us left on November the 1st, 2012 from the Central Bus Station in Razgrad. Ten others, who were all from different parts of the country, joined us in Sofia. We waited for an hour and half and then two buses turned up. The driver took our money. We stopped at a gas station just before getting on the ferry to Greece and a few guys came along, chatted to the bus driver and gave him a stack of fake IDs, passports and driving licenses. He gave them the money and they disappeared.

Did they give you fake IDs?
The driver asked if we had IDs on us and offered to give us fake ones if we didn't. He gave me the stack of fake documents and I saw they didn’t have an official stamp on them. I asked him what they were for and he said, “Don’t worry, they are for some guys that Interpol is looking for.” I said to him, “I hope our job isn't as fake as the documents.”

When did you start getting suspicious?
I realised we were trapped when we got on the ferry and they asked for more money. I started arguing with my wife and my sister. Where were these fraudsters taking us? I was sure they were going to screw us up and there was no way we could escape by this point.

Where did you get off the ferry?
In Brindisi, which is in the Apulia region of southern Italy. Then they took us to Neva Siri in the Basilicata region, drove us to the mountains and shoved us all in one house. There was nothing around us except for apricot trees. We were isolated and forgotten from God. There was no food, no water – the place was horrific. The only place we could get water from was 4km away. Thankfully, we had some food and tins with us. That’s how we survived.

Were there any other houses?
There was another house a kilometre away where they also tortured people. They would drug the women and convince them to become prostitutes. They made them stand on the motorway near bars that were run by Bulgarian and Italian gangsters. We men were forced to deal drugs. I wanted to kill each and every one of our captors because the situation was a matter of freedom or death. I found out that the Italian men who owned the bars also owned the houses, but under Bulgarian names. Apparently this had been going on for 12 years.

Who was actually holding you captive?
Well, the houses were constantly guarded by Bulgarians, who were the cousins of the main guys. The main guys were Turkish gypsies, but they said that they were Pomaks [a Slavic Muslim population native to areas of Bulgaria] and used fake Muslim names. I'm a Pomak myself, and when I spoke to them I noticed their accents, which were completely off, so that gave them away.

What did they make you do other than sell drugs?
I had to drive a bus that they'd stolen. They changed the Italian plates to Bulgarian ones. A bunch of them would come around every night at around 2AM, usually high, and beat us up before ordering us to steal gas from Italian gas stations. We never picked any strawberries. They also took our phones, money and IDs away, but luckily I had a second phone that we hid in our dirty socks.

Were you able to communicate with any of the other people being held captive?
Not really, no. Although there was one old sod with us who told us that he'd owed them money, so they went to his house and kidnapped him, his son and his daughter-in-law. He told me that there had been a lot more people there before, but that they'd managed to escape.

How did you eventually escape?
It was difficult. We managed to get in touch with Ramadan Atalay – a minister from the Movement for Rights and Freedoms party – with our hidden phone. I had also called Todor Dimitrov from Citizens for European Development of Bulgaria (GERB) [the party in power at the time], who I know personally, and he told me, “Don’t bother me with stupid **** like that, I'm at elections in America.”

That's not very helpful. So did someone come and pick you up?
No, five of us snuck out during the night when the armed guards were dozing off. The old guy helped us do that and I'm so thankful to him – without him we wouldn’t have succeeded. So we ran through the fields for about 4km until we reached the road, but no one wanted to pick us up and it turned out that they had caught and tortured my brother-in-law, who told them everything, so they blocked my phone and I couldn't call anyone. My wife and I were crying like babies. That's when I thought, 'This is the end; we are going to die." And then my wife remembered that she had €20 hidden in her bra, so we managed to get out of there.

Are you going after them now you're free?
Yeah, I'm suing them. I get threats over the phone and they try to stop me, but they can’t scare me after all I've been through. I also sent an official complaint against them to the main police body that deals with organised crime. I hope some of the other survivors will join us. Police warned me not to speak to any journalists, but I spoke to a lawyer, an ex-head of police, and he told me, “Don’t listen to them – it's better to get your story heard, otherwise a lot of other poor people will also get trapped.” I wouldn't wish the torture I went through on my worst enemy.

How are the rest of your family?
My wife is in a hospital in Varna. She got diabetes because of all the stress she went through and now needs to be under constant surveillance. My daughter is in second grade and had an anxiety attack when she found out we were trapped. The kid spent ten days in a hospital and she still stutters to this day. My sister and my brother-in-law are still being held by the fraudsters in Italy.

So what now?
I am never, ever leaving Bulgaria again. I'm going to continue my garlic business and I'm thinking of hiring fields and harvesting strawberries. I'm going to pay my rent for the next five years so I know I'm safe. I know I'll be in the **** for a while, but I'll earn my money back.

http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/human-trafficking-bulgaria-south-italy