Poll: The EU Referendum: What Will You Vote? (New Poll)

[D.P.]

Since you've just pulled rob apart for his unfounded claims, do you have anything to back that up?



Never said we were, just saying his fear is rational!

https://www.freemovement.org.uk/why-do-the-migrants-in-calais-want-to-come-to-the-uk/

The research found that most of those questioned believed they would be allowed to work, wanted to work and thought they would have to work:

Many of the respondents had worked in the country of origin (and acquired skills and had careers there), and wanted to do so again when they arrived in the country where they claimed asylum. Finding a job was important because it enabled people to rebuild their lives after what had often been traumatic and disruptive experiences. It helped refugees to regain their self-respect and confidence, and to focus upon the future…

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...is-jungle-refugee-camp-feel-like-dying-slowly

I don’t want to be an illegal immigrant. I want to come and work as a nurse. I am waiting for the government of England to take me.”

People left in fear of theirs or their families lives for reasons completely out of their control.


http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/08/calais-migrant-camp-uk-syria/401459/


http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/aug/01/calais-illegal-immigrant-uk-facts

 

[D.P.]

?

http://www.bradford.gov.uk/bmdc/community_and_living/population

What has that got to do with immigration?

http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/10480591.Bradford_immigrant_figures_revealed_in_report/

There were 55,258 non-UK born individuals in 2001 compared to 89,601 in 2011, accounting for 17.2 per cent of the district’s total population.

 

[Kmodo]

What has that got to do with immigration?

http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/10480591.Bradford_immigrant_figures_revealed_in_report/

What does it have to do with immigration? Fill up a place with immigrants, they have lots of kids and it turns into somewhere like Bradford. That simple really and not somewhere I'd like to live.

 

[FoxEye]

Rob continuously makes posts that show an unfounded fear of foreigners, even when presented with evidence to the contrary. He continually spreads lies about immigrants, e.g. that "over half of Bradford are immigrants" when the real value is 17%.

"In all honestly, i don't trust our own police force to protect us when it comes to gimmigants"

Comments like that are the very definition of xenophobia. Its an irrational fear of foreigners, nothing more, nothing less.

But, playing devil's advocate, there's actually not always a good reason to let people in even if they're peaceful, law-abiding (essentially would be good neighbours, etc).

Especially those of us in unskilled work work, who have real, tangible fear about importing cheap labourers. If the people in Calais aren't refugees, weren't fleeing from danger, and aren't filling a skills shortage... then being nice people isn't enough.

Because otherwise you open door to all the nice people around the world, who happen to live/were born in less prosperous nations.

That's without considering the government's current obsession with down-sizing public services and reducing public spending, and services which are already stretched to breaking point.

It does seem that there are people here who think if you have any opposition to immigration you are leaning towards xenophobia. Perhaps that's my mis-perception, but it's the impression some people give.

On the other hand, as cold as it sounds, I'd rather we used only logic, and fully costed every non-refugee migrant before allowing them in.

Especially low-skilled immigrants. I suspect many corporations would love as many of these people to come here as possible (as would Labour), because it keeps wages for unskilled jobs at rock bottom.

And property magnates and developers would love this also. The bigger the gap between supply and demand, the greater the profit.

Some people don't care about the social problems that would inevitably result.

 

[D.P.]

But, playing devil's advocate, there's actually not always a good reason to let people in even if they're peaceful, law-abiding (essentially would be good neighbours, etc).

Especially those of us in unskilled work work, who have real, tangible fear about importing cheap labourers.

But it is an unfounded fear with plenty of empirical evidence to that indicates that immigration doesn't affect your salary. Besides which, there are lot of people in Calais that are skilled.

If the people in Calais aren't refugees, weren't fleeing from danger

But they are. Which is why they are putting their lives on the lien to escape the atrocities of their home country.


Will reply to the rest later.

 

[estebanrey]

But, playing devil's advocate, there's actually not always a good reason to let people in even if they're peaceful, law-abiding (essentially would be good neighbours, etc).

Especially those of us in unskilled work work, who have real, tangible fear about importing cheap labourers. If the people in Calais aren't refugees, weren't fleeing from danger, and aren't filling a skills shortage... then being nice people isn't enough.

Because otherwise you open door to all the nice people around the world, who happen to live/were born in less prosperous nations.

That's without considering the government's current obsession with down-sizing public services and reducing public spending, and services which are already stretched to breaking point.

It does seem that there are people here who think if you have any opposition to immigration you are leaning towards xenophobia. Perhaps that's my mis-perception, but it's the impression some people give.

On the other hand, as cold as it sounds, I'd rather we used only logic, and fully costed every non-refugee migrant before allowing them in.

Especially low-skilled immigrants. I suspect many corporations would love as many of these people to come here as possible (as would Labour), because it keeps wages for unskilled jobs at rock bottom.

And property magnates and developers would love this also. The bigger the gap between supply and demand, the greater the profit.

Some people don't care about the social problems that would inevitably result.

The difference is you've made a rational and logical arguments against unfettered immigration and possible controls on immigration for certain job roles where there are no shortage and hence not based on a fear of something just because it's foreign.

That doesn't fit anyone but the extreme left's definition of a Xenophobe and a big contrast to tarring everyone with the same brush as "***********", cherry picking and posting stories where immigrants have committed crimes whilst not acknowledging any positive stories or trying to provide any kind of balance whatsoever.

 

[FoxEye]

But they are. Which is why they are putting their lives on the lien to escape the atrocities of their home country.

Will reply to the rest later.

All of them? Pretty sure that's not true.

If a migrant makes it to UK territory and applies for asylum their claim is considered by UK Visas and Immigration. Distinguishing between economic migrants and asylum seekers is a challenging and time-consuming task for the agency. In 2014, out of 25,870 applications for asylum in 2014, 15,820, or 61.2% were rejected.

If 61% of asylum claims are rejected, then there are obviously a lot of people coming here that aren't refugees. I'd be surprised if everybody in Calais was a refugee.

 

[estebanrey]

But it is an unfounded fear with plenty of empirical evidence to that indicates that immigration doesn't affect your salary.

This is where we part, I do not accept those studies on the basis they directly contradict supply and demand theory which in my opinion is far more proven.

 

[FoxEye]

But it is an unfounded fear with plenty of empirical evidence to that indicates that immigration doesn't affect your salary. Besides which, there are lot of people in Calais that are skilled.

Do you think that would hold true in a no-holds-barred immigration scenario? If we did a Germany, and just let everybody in, do you think we'd somehow create jobs for all of them; housing for all of them; and not strain services or have /any/ impact on wages?

Because it seems that even the most pro-immigration viewpoint would have to acknowledge that you can have too many immigrants.

I've not really heard anyone (aside from Corbyn) say we should open ourselves up to as many people as wanted to come. And frankly, even if I don't dislike Corbyn especially, I think that policy in itself is pure insanity.

This is where we part, I do not accept those studies on the basis they directly contradict supply and demand theory which in my opinion is far more proven.

This.

 

[D.P.]

This is where we part, I do not accept those studies on the basis they directly contradict supply and demand theory which in my opinion is far more proven.

What you are ignoring norm supply and demand is the word demand, oh, and the fact that economics is much more complex than that. For starters there is a national minimum wage which makes a tight lower bound on salaries.


Moreover, if this is a primary concern then it is easily dealt with by making it illegal to spay immigrants a salary below the local area average for that job. This is done in the US for example. people with concern about immigration should then be chasing the government down to put in place such legislation that protects them, rather than going after the immigrants who are net positive contributors.


This also ignores the fact that European migrants have a bimodal distribution of skills, there are both low skilled workers and highly educated highly skilled professionals. An immigrant is just as likely to be earning 70K a year working for an investment bank in London as they are picking fruit for minimum wage. On average, European migrants are more highly educated and skilled than British workers.

 

[D.P.]

Do you think that would hold true in a no-holds-barred immigration scenario? If we did a Germany, and just let everybody in, do you think we'd somehow create jobs for all of them; housing for all of them; and not strain services or have /any/ impact on wages?

Under extreme immigration scenarios there is certainly goign to be significant economic changes and challenges. but Germany doesn't have that problem despite taking on many, many times the number of refugees as the UK's shameful amount.

Because it seems that even the most pro-immigration viewpoint would have to acknowledge that you can have too many immigrants.

Its possible, but that hasn't happened to the UK and isn't going to happen any time soon.

I've not really heard anyone (aside from Corbyn) say we should open ourselves up to as many people as wanted to come. And frankly, even if I don't dislike Corbyn especially, I think that policy in itself is pure insanity.

Who has said that the border should be completely open?

The UK has a very low level of immigration

 

[Dis86]

https://www.freemovement.org.uk/why-do-the-migrants-in-calais-want-to-come-to-the-uk/



http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...is-jungle-refugee-camp-feel-like-dying-slowly


People left in fear of theirs or their families lives for reasons completely out of their control.


http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/08/calais-migrant-camp-uk-syria/401459/


http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/aug/01/calais-illegal-immigrant-uk-facts

Now do you honestly think they're going to say, when interviewed 'nah mate, I just want to come and leech off your system?'

If they want to do those things then why not do them in France? Or any of the other countries they've passed through on the way?

 

[D.P.]

Now do you honestly think they're going to say, when interviewed 'nah mate, I just want to come and leech off your system?'

If they want to do those things then why not do them in France? Or any of the other countries they've passed through on the way?

Read the links to find out why a minority of refugees seek the UK. The biggest reason is they are liekly to speak English, and not German, Swedish or French.
And then there is the fact that many of them come from countries that used to be the British empire for starters.

 

[Dis86]

Read the links to find out why a minority of refugees seek the UK. The biggest reason is they are liekly to speak English, and not German, Swedish or French.
And then there is the fact that many of them come from countries that used to be the British empire for starters.

Now I happen to have spent a lot of time in France, Germany and Norway...which has a very similar language to Sweden. And guess what...they all speak english too!
Many aren't from former empire countries at all, a lot of the Africans for example are more likely to be from former German, French or Dutch colonies.

 

[FoxEye]

What you are ignoring norm supply and demand is the word demand, oh, and the fact that economics is much more complex than that. For starters there is a national minimum wage which makes a tight lower bound on salaries.


Moreover, if this is a primary concern then it is easily dealt with by making it illegal to spay immigrants a salary below the local area average for that job. This is done in the US for example. people with concern about immigration should then be chasing the government down to put in place such legislation that protects them, rather than going after the immigrants who are net positive contributors.


This also ignores the fact that European migrants have a bimodal distribution of skills, there are both low skilled workers and highly educated highly skilled professionals. An immigrant is just as likely to be earning 70K a year working for an investment bank in London as they are picking fruit for minimum wage. On average, European migrants are more highly educated and skilled than British workers.

I think, with respect, that you probably don't really know the situation of low paid workers. A lot of it is cash in hand (esp here in Cornwall). Min wage? It's a nice idea.

And a lot of people, like the Polish (who I have nothing against), are more prepared to opt out of the Working Time Directive, or make other concessions to their employers, in order to get work.

There are all sorts of ways that importing too many workers can be detrimental to the jobs market.

 

[estebanrey]

What you are ignoring norm supply and demand is the word demand, oh, and the fact that economics is much more complex than that. For starters there is a national minimum wage which makes a tight lower bound on salaries.


Moreover, if this is a primary concern then it is easily dealt with by making it illegal to spay immigrants a salary below the local area average for that job. This is done in the US for example. people with concern about immigration should then be chasing the government down to put in place such legislation that protects them, rather than going after the immigrants who are net positive contributors.

I am fully aware of the 'lump of labour' fallacy (which you are hinting at) and accept that an immigrant can also create demand, but I do not believe that when it comes specifically to low paid workers they create the demand on a 1 to 1 basis of the supply they fulfill.

As for strengthening minimum pay laws, this (inside an EU style system where free movement is guaranteed) only increases the draw for people from countries who's average wage is much lower.

I could equally argue another way to remove this worry about free movement would be to have an EU wide minimum wage. This would remove the attraction of purely economic migration whilst not affecting skills-based migration. But I rarely hear this proposed by the pro-EU left.

This also ignores the fact that European migrants have a bimodal distribution of skills, there are both low skilled workers and highly educated highly skilled professionals. An immigrant is just as likely to be earning 70K a year working for an investment bank in London as they are picking fruit for minimum wage. On average, European migrants are more highly educated and skilled than British workers.

This is largely irrelevant unless someone is proposing a total ban on immigration. Most people support controlled immigration which would allow highly skilled workers to continue to move and work here.

 

[Woden]

Immigrants area not coming over, stealing low paid jobs. They take the jobs others don't want to do.

Frankly anyone that loses out on a job to someone that barely speaks English needs to look at themselves more and immigration less.

 

[FoxEye]

Immigrants area not coming over, stealing low paid jobs. They take the jobs others don't want to do.

Frankly anyone that loses out on a job to someone that barely speaks English needs to look at themselves more and immigration less.

Ask yourself what happens if nobody wants to do a low-paid job, and there isn't a vast supply of foreign labour...

I think you find the answer is that the pay rises until the job is more desirable.

But if you have a supply of labour for whom UK min wage is a fortune, then it doesn't matter how awful the job is, they'll take it.

As usual, the "lazy British" type comments assume that people should be grateful to work at all. And that a job is only worth what a North Korean or poor Indian would do it for.

Do you also think that Brits on these awful, min-wage jobs should be prepared to share a tiny little flat with 7 other people? Like the foreign workers are prepared to?

I love how the middle and upper classes are happy for everything to be a race to the bottom, so long as a) their own jobs are well paid and b) the goods they want to buy are cheap. **** everyone below you.

Well, that's how capitalism works, at the end of the day.

 

[Woden]

Ask yourself what happens if nobody wants to do a low-paid job, and there isn't a vast supply of foreign labour...

I think you find the answer is that the pay rises until the job is more desirable.

That would only hold true if there were more vacancies than unemployed, and when was the last time you saw that?

There are more unemployed Brits than jobs, so the jobs will be filled, even at minimum wage. It's not like the Job centre will go "fair enough" and hand over JSA when told "minimum wage, init".

If you've seen my past posts, you would see I'm pretty far into Socialist territory. But too many are unwilling to work for minimum wage.

I don't even like the minimum wage, I think all our does is allow companies to have a subsidised workforce, since the minimum isn't nearly enough and the government had to top it up. But minimum wage is better than no wage.

 

[FoxEye]

That would only hold true if there were more vacancies than unemployed, and when was the last time you saw that?

There are more unemployed Brits than jobs, so the jobs will be filled, even at minimum wage. It's not like the Job centre will go "fair enough" and hand over JSA when told "minimum wage, init".

Nope. It just requires that none of the existing unemployed want the job at the wages offered. Eventually if the job needs to be done, they'll offer more until someone takes it.

But all bets are off if you have an almost unlimited supply of foreign labour who will work for min wage because it's decent money for their country; will happily live 8 to a house to keep rent down; will accept mal treatment that Brits would report (seriously, look at all the undercover reports that have been done in places like Sports Direct. That is maltreatment. Brits wouldn't accept it, for some reason the Poles do.)

If you've seen my past posts, you would see I'm pretty far into Socialist territory. But too many are unwilling to work for minimum wage.

I don't even like the minimum wage, I think all our does is allow companies to have a subsidised workforce, since the minimum isn't nearly enough and the government had to top it up. But minimum wage is better than no wage.

Min wage is very easy to get around anyhow. Just make all your jobs apprenticeships.

The system as we all know is absurdly broken, but I'm not sure min wage itself is a bad idea. Topping up wages with govt money certainly is, I'll agree with that.