I wasn't so impressed. Farron gave a surprisingly warm welcome to her, and she responded with a cheap shot. Not very classy.
Brexit thread - what happens next
- Thread starter Gilly
- Start date
- Status
I wasn't so impressed. Farron gave a surprisingly warm welcome to her, and she responded with a cheap shot. Not very classy.
My entire argument on the immigration issue.
By all means build as many houses, hospitals, roads, railways, airports and factories to cater for a nett 500k increase in population per year (current).
That is every 20 years, the UK population increases by 10 million.
2035 75 million
2055 85 million
2075 95 million
Now in your opinion will it be a better country with these levels of population, assuming that all the infrastructure is provided. Or will it be not as good with loss of amenity.
The UK population density is far higher than many other similar European countries excluding Germany, Netherlands and a few minnows.
This I believe is not a racist or xenophobic argument, merely common sense. 30% more people will require 30% more infrastructure and land take.
By all means build as many houses, hospitals, roads, railways, airports and factories to cater for a nett 500k increase in population per year (current).
That is every 20 years, the UK population increases by 10 million.
2035 75 million
2055 85 million
2075 95 million
Now in your opinion will it be a better country with these levels of population, assuming that all the infrastructure is provided. Or will it be not as good with loss of amenity.
The UK population density is far higher than many other similar European countries excluding Germany, Netherlands and a few minnows.
This I believe is not a racist or xenophobic argument, merely common sense. 30% more people will require 30% more infrastructure and land take.
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 13,598
Guess which story we peddle to the Chinese?Plus anyone with capital is always welcome, them rules are for the lower orders, domestic help and families you see. Still makes people who engage in such trade and diplomatic gymnastics look like complete tools when their jig is up and they have to face the media music.
Yes, no immigration ban on Russian or African gangsters with dosh to spend inflating London's housing market.
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2010
- Posts
- 6,316
You might want to check out a text on population dynamics, growth and economics published after Malthus. Just sayin'. Fertility rates are also not static across the developed world and decrease in both native and migrant populations over time, as a for instance.
'Plain common sense and intuition' doesn't go far in this field, particularly when probability is involved. Holding on to alarmist determinism will only make you ill and policy makers' jobs harder. Relax. There are challenges but they are not insurmountable nor apocalyptic.
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2010
- Posts
- 6,316
That's before they start on our companies, football teams and political funding. Oh wait.
The short answer as far as brickies are concerned is "no we don't", they are like hens teeth.
A couple of years ago the annual salary for bricklayers allegedly hit 100K in London because we have a shortage. Along with every other building trade, bricklaying is not deemed glamorous enough for X-Factor school leavers. Don't even get me started on Stone Masons!
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/bricklayers-earn-100000-salaries-uk-housing-market-booms-1443923
I know several bricklayers who questioned that 100K figure, it was getting up there though and some sites that we were working on simply had to stop because they couldn't get the workforce in.
Last edited:
You're living in a dream world if you think the PM is going to come out and say that people from the EU can still come here if they have "a reasonable chance of finding work"
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2010
- Posts
- 6,316
And they might trade it all away in the final deal two or so years down the line. Posturing means little. Everyone will be doing it atm.
She'll say whatever keeps situation stable at this moment. That doesn't mean anything will come out of it or if EU accepts any of her proposals.
Until the official talks begin there really isn't much point listening to what any politician says.
Not even a month ago Boris was offending countries around the world to further his career. Now he has to sit uncomfortably in the room with people from these countries and be nice to them.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Feb 2004
- Posts
- 14,315
- Location
- Peoples Republic of Histonia, Cambridge
Firstly, there is a questions of what "skills" are needed. It's not a static question, and the answer often depends on who you ask and when you ask them. Most people already only come to work in the UK because their skills are required. Why can't the decision be left between employer and employee?
Some skills are also needed in one part of the country but not others, a blanket rule is far too crude. Also, a system that precludes some manual skilled workers because those jobs could theoretically be carried by UK citizens is only beneficial if that actually happened. There is no indication that will be the case. What will actually happen is those companies reliant on migrant labour will go bust.
Secondly, a visa system is very sluggish, difficult and expensive to administer.
Lastly, an end to freedom of movement could come at a cost which results in a net loss to the UK e.g. an end to single market access, and/or us losing the right to travel and work abroad.
You're living in a dream world if you think any meaningful clamp down on EU immigration will be beneficial to the UK and its citizens. IT won't happen, as has been the case with immigration from outside the EU, despite the governments best efforts.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2010
- Posts
- 6,316
Let's put it even plainer for people who recoil from global capitalism yet oppose freedom of movement; would you like the following asymmetry to develop to its natural conclusion: global capital has that right, you as the worker do not -- who wins? I'm not sure such a strategy will be effective in 'sticking it to the man'.
Last edited:
I suppose if your definition of beneficial is increasing the GDP by X amount each year
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 13,598
Who decides what skills. Skills are actually quite elastic. It is a minefield, some would end up being refused while someone with the same skill could be admitted.
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 13,598
The Polish Govt have said they will not accept any ban on free movement. The British can whistle in the wind, the EU holds most of the cards. May cannot dictate anything.
Good lord it's so complicated how do Canada, Australia, US, and so many others cope with it?
We're leaving the EU, we can do as we want. They have zero say in our immigration policy.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Feb 2004
- Posts
- 14,315
- Location
- Peoples Republic of Histonia, Cambridge
This is a bad analogy.
The UK economy as grown in ways which is dependant on free movement. If that's revoked, those parts of the economy which have now grown accustom to a flexible immigration system will suffer. In the same way that US, Canadian and Australian states would suffer if a similar system were introduces.
Eastern Europe isn't the third word, in the main it's a well educated civilised part of the world, which is temporarily just marginally poorer than ourselves.
Possibly, but they have quite a large say on our trade policy.
Last edited:
Looks like you better U-turn and backtrack on your eternal spin....because in PMQs May just pledged to keep to the immigration commitment of 'tens of thousands'...
So is it still a joke and a lie?
And I look forward to us voting the Tories out in 2020 when they fail to keep to this pledge
I wonder if we will still have those thread with people complaining about how difficult it is to bring their partners over, that end up with everyone complaining about the immigration policy.
Like many things its a great idea until it starts to affect you or people you know.
That said 200,000 is only 20 tens of thousand so...
- Status