Who is in and who is out?

UKworkshop.co.uk

Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Jacob":qxpdf8bj said:
RobinBHM":qxpdf8bj said:
RogerS":qxpdf8bj said:
....
More realistic is that a healthy economy creates the best opportunities for people at all levels of income. A low tax economy coupled by a government that curtails public spending encoursges inward investment.
Exactly the opposite of the truth. High tax and high public spending generate wealth. Taxation drives economies. What goes around comes around. Low tax
economies - think "banana republic" :lol: All the wealthiest nations are high taxers.
If by "inward investment" you mean selling off our assets to foreign buyers, this has been a disaster. Funny how these daft notions hang about in spite of all the contrary evidence. Whatever happened to ICI?

High tax and high public spending generate wealth -thats an interesting concept.

The reality is that high public spending generates massive national debt which is like saying Im going to max out my credit cards as its going to make me more wealthy......

In theory high taxes on high earners is a good idea, why not make the very well off pay. The reality is that the wealthy then move abroad so no tax at all is generated. A low tax economy encourages businesses to set up and grow in this countty -which is why the economy is currently strong and interest rates low.
 
phil.p":1wafoj9v said:
Another from the Sunday Times -
"A Syrian refugee who recently arrived in Britain under David Cameron’s high-profile resettlement programme has been charged with sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl.
Plenty more to come ... and even more if we stay in.

If this had been a native white Newcastle man (unlikely to make national news) would you be advocating banning all Tyne and Wear residents from crossing the boarder?

Given one of your main arguments is that anyone with a 'vested interest' cannot have a valid opinion I'm disappointed you read the UK press at all.

iNewbie":1wafoj9v said:
They need a holiday in Russia...
Yes, perhaps once the brexiters have abolished the human rights act they could legalise vigilantes and set up local militia groups, may as well legalise gun ownership too.
 
If this had been a native white Newcastle man (unlikely to make national news) would you be advocating banning all Tyne and Wear residents from crossing the boarder?
Nor even the border. We can reasonably expect Newcastle people to live by our laws - we cannot expect the same of immigrants who have no intention of so doing, throw kindness back in our faces and laugh at our unwillingness to clamp down on them. Malmo per capita is second only to Lesotho in the number of rapes - you wish that in the UK? Would you feel the same if it were your wife or daughter? I presume that's OK with you?
We will of course need guns with night sights on the 24th if we leave as the sun will no long rise.

Ps - it's OK, Roger, he's safe - I surrendered mine. :D
 
"In theory high taxes on high earners is a good idea, why not make the very well off pay. The reality is that the wealthy then move abroad so no tax at all is generated. A low tax economy encourages businesses to set up and grow in this countty -which is why the economy is currently strong and interest rates low."
Interesting to see that the tax take goes up when the rates are lowered.
 
phil.p":epg72t95 said:
Nor even the border. We can reasonably expect Newcastle people to live by our laws - we cannot expect the same of immigrants who have no intention of so doing,
I do expect anyone in this country to live by our laws

phil.p":epg72t95 said:
throw kindness back in our faces and laugh at our unwillingness to clamp down on them.
They are currently awaiting trial

phil.p":epg72t95 said:
Malmo per capita is second only to Lesotho in the number of rapes - you wish that in the UK?
Ok, this is starting to address the point I was trying to make. One example does not make a case. I don't know the statistics comparing *** crime, or any crime between Muslims and white UK nationals, I do know that I can't draw any conclusions from a few newspaper reports.

phil.p":epg72t95 said:
Would you feel the same if it were your wife or daughter? I presume that's OK with you?
Were did I say it was okay ? It's not okay for anyone to behave like this.

phil.p":epg72t95 said:
We will of course need guns with night sights on the 24th if we leave as the sun will no long rise.
Ps - it's OK, Roger, he's safe - I surrendered mine. :D

I'll be safe as I'll be out of the country that day, I should perhaps pack a bigger bag in case I'm not allowed back in :)
 
mind_the_goat":1vygt7xa said:
......
phil.p":1vygt7xa said:
Malmo per capita is second only to Lesotho in the number of rapes - you wish that in the UK?
Ok, this is starting to address the point I was trying to make. One example does not make a case. I don't know the statistics comparing *** crime, or any crime between Muslims and white UK nationals, I do know that I can't draw any conclusions from a few newspaper reports.

.....

That is one of the difficulties because, in the UK at least, and precisely because the PC brigade wish to suppress this information just in case it supports the views of the anti-immigration lobby, as far as I am aware religion is not recorded as a demographic of criminals.

I have no view apart from wishing to know the metrics so that this can be put to bed once and for all.

The Guardian has reported that there has been an increase in Sweden linked to immigration. " The news that the Swedish authorities covered up widespread sexual assaults by immigrant gangs on teenage girls at a Stockholm music festival, and possibly other incidents too, is immensely damaging for race relations in Sweden because it conforms so precisely to two stereotypes." http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... c-festival

Typical hand-wringing by the Guardian, naturally, and best expressed by one of the comments there

Why is it so concerned with racism against alleged sexual predators but not at all concerned about those who've been abused? Have we entered some kind of strange, parallel universe???

Spot on with that comment, I say and why I despise the Guardian.
 
RobinBHM":36s1q6op said:
Jacob":36s1q6op said:
RobinBHM":36s1q6op said:
....
Our infrastructure is struggling and we have a considerable housing shortage.
This is government policy and you can't blame the immigrants. Blame is a popular game - convenient for the govt to shift the responsibility.
In fact the infrastructure would struggle even more if it were not for the immigrants employed therein.
They are a bit tired these anti immigrant arguments - I think almost everybody has realised they are grossly exaggerated and that the net benefit is highly positive. It's a drum which has been banged too often.
There is also a massive issue with the migration of refugees across Europe.
And a massive duty of care. Being in the EU means a better coordinated approach.

I do realise it is easy to blame immigrants for housing shortages, NHS problems etc. The opening up of Eastern Europe has certainly been a great benefit to the UK, our strong economy would be seriously held back without foreign workers.

But it is still true, the UK is very densely populated and infrastructure is seriously stretched. An open border policy cant continue forever.

The eu isnt dealing with the migrant crisis, if it was the problem at Calais would exist.

There is not and has NEVER been a situation (since we joined the EU) whereby it's made all but impossible for a foreign worker from any other nation on earth to take a job in the UK. I live in a shared house of 6 rooms, and half of them have at one time or another been taken by foreign nationals working at HP, Rolls Royce and the MoD sites nearby and of the couple of dozen of those I have personally met in the 11 years I have lived here, not a single one has ever ever complained bitterly that getting access to the UK for work was so ridiculously hard, so as to give them pause to consider accepting the job.

And of the dozens and dozens of those I would say quite easily 95% of them were NON EU NATIONALS. Asians (the majority being Indian), South Africa (3), Sri Lankan's (2), Uganda (1), Brazilian (1), Egyptian (1), Rumanian (3), Bulgarian (1 or was it two).... Shall I go on? (I could even give you the names if so prompted)

So claiming that it's just the freedom of movement within the EU that's bolstering the UK economy is utter BS - and I'm guessing the ONLY reason why there are not more non EU nationals working here is because it's always the well paid technical type jobs that are advertised overseas or otherwise considered so desirable to warrant such a relocation. However I'm also willing to guess that if so moved a great deal more "ordinary" employers could also employ those who require work visa's to enter the country; one's with salaries sub £25k, probably even sub £20k for some of the poorer countries. It's just easier for them not to have to go through that hoop and is what's behind the whole "our economy will collapse if we leave" BS.

They will just have to work a bit harder and take a bit less profits or..... maybe increase their pay a bit and give the jobs to UK citizens.... now there's a thought.

Oh and here's another thing that the majority know to be a truth, but that I've personally witnessed; every single one of those foreign nationals sent a significant portion of their wages back to their home country (one of whom even clamied he should be exempt from paying for the house extras like broadband because he was sending money home and couldn't afford to pay for it - but happily used it regardless - Bulgarian that was), quite a few claimed back PAYE paid upon leaving, and lived as meagre lifestyle as they could get away with during their time at the house.

And I'm betting a lot of the EU based nationals working here are also not spending 100% of their income in the UK either, so that isn't an economy boost but the equivalent of a slightly left on tap, slowly pouring UK pounds out of the economy.
 
RogerS":3g4w7n4p said:
mind_the_goat":3g4w7n4p said:
......
phil.p":3g4w7n4p said:
Malmo per capita is second only to Lesotho in the number of rapes - you wish that in the UK?
Ok, this is starting to address the point I was trying to make. One example does not make a case. I don't know the statistics comparing *** crime, or any crime between Muslims and white UK nationals, I do know that I can't draw any conclusions from a few newspaper reports.

.....

That is one of the difficulties because, in the UK at least, and precisely because the PC brigade wish to suppress this information just in case it supports the views of the anti-immigration lobby, as far as I am aware religion is not recorded as a demographic of criminals.

I have no view apart from wishing to know the metrics so that this can be put to bed once and for all.

The Guardian has reported that there has been an increase in Sweden linked to immigration. " The news that the Swedish authorities covered up widespread sexual assaults by immigrant gangs on teenage girls at a Stockholm music festival, and possibly other incidents too, is immensely damaging for race relations in Sweden because it conforms so precisely to two stereotypes." http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... c-festival

Typical hand-wringing by the Guardian, naturally, and best expressed by one of the comments there

Why is it so concerned with racism against alleged sexual predators but not at all concerned about those who've been abused? Have we entered some kind of strange, parallel universe???

Spot on with that comment, I say and why I despise the Guardian.

I worked in prisons for years and have relatives that still do.

I can't quote any exact statistics, but in my experience the proportion of criminals in for *** crimes who were immigrants or from minority groups mirrored the proportion of immigrants and minorities in the prison system as a whole. As with most crimes except maybe offenses related to terrorism, white British men far outweighed every other group. I can't say that I saw an increase in immigrant offenders coming in to the system while I was there.

I did definitely see an increase in offenders from outside Britain being deported. Unfortunately, I felt like this increase focused on young men without a support system in place to help them. In short they went for the easy targets first. I saw several former child soldiers sent back to Africa, for example, where they would probably face certain death at the hands of whichever warlord they deserted in the first place.

In addition, religion is definitely recorded as a demographic for criminals.
 
Jacob":27oudnde said:
DiscoStu":27oudnde said:
I wasn't really answering that question, but to answer it.

You can't, you can't have people without a roof over their head. So if your supply can't cope then you have to reduce the demand. ...
Or increase the supply.
It's a very artificial problem - given the acceptance that a solution is urgent (say it was a natural catastrophe and no-one could be blamed) then a solution would quickly be found. There's a good deal of inertia on this and deliberate foot dragging. Council house building more or less stopped in 1979 and there are vast numbers of empty properties, let alone 2nd homes etc.
Underlying the supposed immigration problem is the fact that we actually need these people and the country benefits. It's simple - if there's work to be done you need people to do the work.
The anti immigration propaganda is a serious shot in the foot for the country - it's the blame game.

http://www.cornishpastyassociation.co.u ... on-europe/

Jacob.... words fail me. You HAVE to be trolling, there can be no other reason for such a post from any otherwise semi intelligent person.

The UK has ALWAYS had the population to have 100% of jobs filled - that's why there has been such a thing as "unemployment", maybe you've heard of it. It's a situation whereby there is a surplus of population > jobs available ratio.

The UK has had it my entire lifetime of 46 years - and probably before that.

Since then we have had untold millions MORE people both born in the UK and enter it before the immigration situation became serious these last 15 years or so, and having up to several millions unemployed has never disappeared.

Between 1971 > 2016 the highest rate was 12%, with the current low of 5% (and that figure does not include those considered "economically inactive" of whom there are 8.9 million (students, registered disabled or otherwise not working but not claiming either)

In order for the UK to require even MORE immigrants to "benefit our growing economy" it would have to be 0%

If you honestly think the UK's economy is so robust as to have become BIGGER than before the 2008 collapse then you are seriously deluding yourself, and if you still think that's true, check out the national debt to see whether adding even more mouths to feed, all able to claim benefits is a good thing.

It seems as though you are that optimistic guy standing in a lifeboat telling everyone to get in, right up to the point it's swamped and all hands therein are lost.
 
What we have accept of course is that -
1/ If you disagree with unlimited immigration you are an evil xenophobe.
2/ If you disagree with wind farms you are an evil climate change denier.
3/ If you disagree with homosexual marriage you are an evil homophobe.
4/ If you disagree with socialism you are an evil nazi.
5/ If you read right wing press you are an evil fool.

there are many more in the eyes of left wing virtue signallers. All are non sequiturs, of course, but logic doesn't come into these things.
 
rafezetter":1vflzli9 said:
.....because he was sending money home and couldn't afford to pay for it - but happily used it regardless - Bulgarian that was), quite a few claimed back PAYE paid upon leaving, and lived as meagre lifestyle as they could get away with during their time at the house.

And I'm betting a lot of the EU based nationals working here are also not spending 100% of their income in the UK either, so that isn't an economy boost but the equivalent of a slightly left on tap, slowly pouring UK pounds out of the economy.

So more a "trickle away" policy then rather than Jacob's "trickle up" policy !!

I think that you are more accurate than he is.
 
OK,.. here's a short list of financial and industrial FUBARs from the EU then,.. (it was longer, much longer, but really tough reading. I have however edited this slightly due to those who have asked me to clarify some points. All of it has been fact-checked not only by myself but also many others.)

Cadbury moved production of several brands to a factory in Poland 2011 with EU grant. Despite promising the workforce they would not.
Ford Transit moved to Turkey 2013 with EU grant.
Jaguar Land Rover has recently agreed to build a new plant in Slovakia with EU grant, owned by Tata, the same company who have trashed our steel works and emptied the workers pension funds. They have not yet said what UK plants will lose out.
Peugeot closed its Ryton (was Rootes Group) plant and moved production to Slovakia with EU grant. That move was not wanted by Peugeot, it was forced on them by EU blundering and cost then dearly.
British Army's new Ajax fighting vehicles to be built in Spain using Swedish steel at the request of the EU to support jobs in Spain with EU grant, rather than Wales. (Just assembly. They could have been built entirely in Wales with British steel, ah Tata, maybe not then.)
Dyson gone to Malaysia, after an EU loan blunder. (I didn't believe this till I checked Financial Times)
Crown Closures, Bournemouth (Was METAL BOX), gone to Poland with EU grant, once employed 1,200.
M&S manufacturing gone to far east with EU loan.
Hornby models gone. In fact all toys and models now gone from UK along with the patents all with with EU grants.
Gillette gone to eastern Europe with EU grant.
Texas Instruments Greenock gone to Germany with EU grant.
Indesit at Bodelwyddan Wales gone with EU grant.
Sekisui Alveo said production at its Merthyr Tydfil Industrial Park foam plant will relocate production to Roermond in the Netherlands, with EU funding.
Hoover Merthyr factory moved out of UK to Czech Republic and the Far East by Italian company Candy with EU backing.
ICI integration into Holland’s AkzoNobel with EU bank loan and within days of the merger, several factories in the UK, were closed, eliminating 3,500 jobs
Boots sold to Italians Stefano Pessina who have based their HQ in Switzerland to avoid tax to the tune of £80 million a year, using an EU loan for the purchase. (Now sold on again)
JDS Uniphase run by two Dutch men, bought up companies in the UK with £20 million in EU 'regeneration' grants, created a pollution nightmare and just closed it all down leaving 1,200 out of work and an environmental clean-up paid for by the UK tax-payer. They also raided the pension fund and drained it dry. (Joint CEOs charged with financial trading fraud, insider trading)
UK airports are owned by a Spanish company.
Scottish Power is owned by a Spanish company.
Most London buses are run by Spanish and German companies.
The Hinkley Point C nuclear power station to be built by French company EDF, part owned by the French government, using cheap Chinese steel that has catastrophically failed in other nuclear installations. Now EDF say the costs will be double or more and it will be very late even if it does come online.
Swindon was once our producer of rail locomotives and rolling stock. Not any more, it's Bombardier in Derby and due to their losses in the aviation market, that could see the end of the British railways manufacturing altogether even though Bombardier had EU grants to keep Derby going which they diverted to their loss-making aviation side in Canada. New trains contract awarded to German company.
39% of British invention patents have been passed to foreign companies, many of them in the EU
The Mini cars that Cameron stood in front of as an example of British engineering, are built by BMW mostly in Holland and Austria and those parts assembled in the UK. His campaign bus was made in Germany even though we have Plaxton, Optare, Bluebird, Dennis etc., in the UK. The bicycle for the Greens was made in the far east, not by Raleigh UK but then they are probably going to move to the Netherlands too as they have said recently.

Anyone who thinks the EU is good for British industry or any other business simply hasn't paid attention to what has been systematically asset-stripped from the UK. Name me one major technology company still running in the UK, I used to contract out to many, then the work just dried up as they were sold off to companies from France, Germany, Holland, Belgium, etc., and now we don't even teach electronic technology for technicians any more, due to EU regulations.

Yes some companies are in the UK with EU funding, but have you noticed that many, like Tata, are planning to shift the production away again, as soon as they will not have to pay a penalty to the EU for doing so. Hundreds already did, just using British skills to develop products and then opt for lower labour costs, often with a serious loss in quality too like Bosch alternators. Many employ staff only on a part-time basis, minimum wage and even those sent by DWP to work for nothing, those get just their benefits.

I haven't detailed our non-existent fishing industry the EU paid to destroy, nor the farmers being paid NOT to produce food they could sell for more than they get paid to do nothing, don't even go there.
I haven't mentioned what it costs us to be asset-stripped like this, nor have I mentioned immigration, nor the risk to our security if control of our armed forces is passed to Brussels or Germany.

The way companies abuse the EU commercial assistance system is not doing the EU, Britain or any other country any favours. It has massive loopholes that are simply exploited and no-one in Brussels has the wit nor sense to change it. Change in the EU is slow at best and in most cases, next to impossible due to the intense lobbying by companies with a vested interest in abusing this very broken system. I know Margaret Thatcher was not many people's favourite person, but she did get a number of measures agreed that have now been completely eroded and sadly, by her own party. Mr Junker has said that any more 'special status' for Britain will be difficult and will face legal challenges. In other words, we will not get most of them, if any.

If the EU may break up in the event of Britain voting to leave as suggested by both leaders of the Bundesbank and European Central Bank, then in all honesty, we have as a nation been propping up a failed system for too long, It will probably fail anyway, taking anyone still 'in' with it. Thus, this vote you have is not exactly 'remain' or 'leave', it is more an issue of jumping off the sinking ship while we have a chance to swim ashore now, or waiting till it is in really deep water and going down with it. Either way, being brutally honest, we get wet and will have a struggle. Question is, do you want to survive or not?

Find something that's gone the other way, I've looked and I just can't. If you think the EU is a good idea,
1/ You haven't read the party manifesto of The European Peoples' Party.
2/ You haven't had to deal with EU petty bureaucracy tearing your business down.
3/ You don't think it matters.
 
An ineresting article cribbed from a post in the S.T. -
The recent comments of the man who implemented the Single Market as Trade Minister, Peter Lilley, might interest you:

Is our net £10 billion contribution to the EU 'a small price to pay for tariff free access to the EU market'? If we left the EU with no trade deal – inconceivable given the tariff free zone from Iceland to Turkey – our exports would face EU tariffs averaging just 2.4% . But our net contribution to the EU budget is equivalent to a 7% tariff. Paying 7% to avoid 2-3% is miss-selling that dwarfs the PPI scandal!
So if we left before finalising a trade deal we could use our contribution to ensure our exporters are no worse off and still have several billion £s left over for the NHS. Our partners will not delay a deal once they realise British exporters will not suffer, whereas theirs would face tariffs to enter the UK – their biggest market, bigger than the USA.

Does 'EU membership help us negotiate free trade deals with the rest of the world'? Tariff free access to the fast growing, protected markets of Asia, Africa and Latin America would be worthwhile. Unfortunately, EU membership prevents us negotiating free trade deals – and the EU has negotiated few deals for us: none with China, India, Brazil.
Does the EU's size mean it gets better deals than we could alone? From my experience that is the reverse of the truth. The more countries involved in a trade deal the harder, slower and worse the result. All 28 EU members have a veto on their negotiations which is why EU deals take so long and exclude so much. Bilateral deals are simpler, quicker and more comprehensive.
 
The UK has operated a points based system for non-EU nationals similar to the Aussie approach since 2008. Only Tier 1 and 2 (skilled, filling job shortages, high value, expert) are currently getting entry with points also awarded for ability to be self financing and speak English. From April 2016 Tier 2 migrants have to earn £35k+ to qualify to stay.

EU migrants can be split into two camps. Those from the accession states - Poland, Roumania etc typically do lower paid unskilled jobs, those from the EU15 (mostly western Europe longstanding members - Germany, France, Austria, Italy etc ) who are typically doing a higher proportion of professional, skilled and managerial roles than UK nationals generally.

Leaving the EU will not stop the demand for the skilled, expert and professional - possibly more will come from India or Bangladesh than Germany or France - even if this is the case the difference is of no consequence. Low skilled jobs may be available to UK nationals if we leave - but it is also totally plausible they lack the education, motivation and skill to do even those jobs. UK unemployment is close to what most economists regard as full employment - 0% is an unrealistic expectation, but 3-5% would be considered full.

The Leave argument based on the improving job opportunities for Brits is, in short, completely flawed.
 
Is our net £10 billion contribution to the EU 'a small price to pay for tariff free access to the EU market'? If we left the EU with no trade deal – inconceivable given the tariff free zone from Iceland to Turkey
This comment is (I assume) a reference to EFTA which wikipedia defines as:

The European Free Trade Association (EFTA) is an intergovernmental trade organisation and free trade area consisting of four European states: Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, and Switzerland.[1] The organisation operates in parallel with the European Union (EU), and all four member states participate in the EU's single market.[2]

I don't think this has any impact on the Leave/Remain debate - Switzerland and Norway have signed up to free movement and pay for single market excess, Iceland and Lichtenstein (with respect) are trivial and unimportant in this context.

Yer another piece of spin from the Leave camp - you may trust them but I don't.
 
rafezetter":1tndwqxt said:
I live in a shared house of 6 rooms, and half of them have at one time or another been taken by foreign nationals working at HP, Rolls Royce and the MoD sites nearby and of the couple of dozen of those I have personally met in the 11 years I have lived here, not a single one has ever ever complained bitterly that getting access to the UK for work was so ridiculously hard, so as to give them pause to consider accepting the job.

And of the dozens and dozens of those I would say quite easily 95% of them were NON EU NATIONALS.

And I'm betting a lot of the EU based nationals working here are also not spending 100% of their income in the UK either, so that isn't an economy boost but the equivalent of a slightly left on tap, slowly pouring UK pounds out of the economy.

There is a good reason you have seen dozens and dozens of these workers pass through your shared accommodation. The multinational corporations that employee these skilled people will often bring them to the UK on fixed length visas so they can be trained on UK methods and get to know fellow team members, before being sent back to their home countries to continue the same job on a much reduced salary. They are generally not employed by the companies when they come to the UK but are already employed by them in another location. The value if this to our economy is a whole different issue.
I'm sure you are right that if we deported our European workforce we could quickly replace many of them with people from other places, but I fail to see how that solves any of the migration issues people seem concerned about. It just replaces one set of migrants with another, and may result in an even higher proportion of locally earned salary to be sent out of the country.

If you work out the per capita funds sent out of the UK by offshore workers it looks to me as if a significant proportion stays in the UK, the 5.5K per person figure I mentioned earlier is actually too high as I assumed the 11Bn sent 'home' was just by EU workers.
 
Terry - Yet another piece of spin from the Leave camp - you may trust them but I don't? What part of this is wrong -
"If we left the EU with no trade deal – inconceivable given the tariff free zone from Iceland to Turkey – our exports would face EU tariffs averaging just 2.4% . But our net contribution to the EU budget is equivalent to a 7% tariff. Paying 7% to avoid 2-3% is miss-selling that dwarfs the PPI scandal!" Peter Lilley.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top