By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
More scaremongering from the guardian against the brexit.....yawn. Same scaremongering for the brexit in daily mail.....yawn. Are there any independent news anymore.
1
Should we have a second referendum? on 14:49 - Oct 16 with 1031 views
I was just about to post that this will be dismissed because of the source, but I see I've been beaten to it.
Who better to know if their regulations have been misrepresented than the EU itself? It 's all seems to be cross-referenced to the particular directive, so people can check the original source for themselves. If they want to.
1
Should we have a second referendum? on 15:07 - Oct 16 with 1003 views
Should we have a second referendum? on 13:16 - Oct 16 by krunchykarrot
Indeed they are all welcome and do a very good job i see it daily. As i said 20 years of incompetence by various governments and mass immigration which i concur put more into our economy than they take out. But that does not gloss over the facts that they are here putting a strain on our infrastructure which is the point i'm making and cannot continue. If we put a stop and put controls in place to take in what we require from all over the world and have no unlimited EU immigration how long before we recover?
If you concur that EU migrants contribute more than they take out, they are a net gain to the economy. They are relieving the strain on our public services and infrastructure not adding to it.
What sort of controls would you like to see, something like-
To stay longer than 3 months they need either a job, health insurance or sufficient assets so that they are not a burden on the state.
Should we have a second referendum? on 15:06 - Oct 16 by LeonWasGod
I was just about to post that this will be dismissed because of the source, but I see I've been beaten to it.
Who better to know if their regulations have been misrepresented than the EU itself? It 's all seems to be cross-referenced to the particular directive, so people can check the original source for themselves. If they want to.
Psychologically and intellectually the effect is very similar to medieval superstition:
EU fact based demolition of stories in the Express, Telegraph, etc = work of the devil.
Should we have a second referendum? on 15:07 - Oct 16 by sherpajacob
If you concur that EU migrants contribute more than they take out, they are a net gain to the economy. They are relieving the strain on our public services and infrastructure not adding to it.
What sort of controls would you like to see, something like-
To stay longer than 3 months they need either a job, health insurance or sufficient assets so that they are not a burden on the state.
Would that work?
The problem is the net gain doesn't relieve the strain where do you see a positive difference.
I think that we need an Australian type immigration policy that should do it.
-1
Should we have a second referendum? on 15:51 - Oct 16 with 946 views
Should we have a second referendum? on 13:50 - Oct 16 by londonlisa2001
No one down your pub understands enough about WTO rules to know the effect on the economy.
That’s not a criticism of your pub, no one in general knows enough about WTO rules to know the effect on the economy. People like Rees Mogg make them think they do, with vacuous statements, inaccurate generalisations and platitudes. It’s a complete con job. As is any thought that we are regaining sovereignty.
My local has a cross section of society but yes i agree they don't have an understanding but not many politicians do either and i don't see it as criticism just debate.
The point i was trying to make is they don't care what the outcome of WTO rules as they want to regain sovereignty how this is a con job?
0
Should we have a second referendum? on 16:05 - Oct 16 with 939 views
Should we have a second referendum? on 15:07 - Oct 16 by sherpajacob
If you concur that EU migrants contribute more than they take out, they are a net gain to the economy. They are relieving the strain on our public services and infrastructure not adding to it.
What sort of controls would you like to see, something like-
To stay longer than 3 months they need either a job, health insurance or sufficient assets so that they are not a burden on the state.
Would that work?
The net gains are in different areas to where the strain/overload is happening. In our schools, class sizes are growing but we don't have enough teachers or classrooms. In my sons school, the number of pupils has more than doubled in 6 years, the parents of the mostly foreign kids are mostly working (a large number are Polish with a few African....one is half Chinese, half Finnish!) so the parents are paying taxes but at the same time climing child benefit, working tax benefits and using our NHS etc. In hospitals we need foreign doctors and nurses because we haven't enough but the system that has faced billions in cuts still hasn't the resources for all the extra immigrants. The lack of homegrown staff is a failing of our governments which has cut trainig allowances/bursaries and made it so people can't afford to train as nurses or other much needed staff. Crime, we have imported many criminals most of whom we can't deport because of the use and interpretation of the Human Rights act. We don't have the police we need so as crime rises they stop investigating so called low level crime. A particular problem in some areas where burglaries, car crime or anti social behaviour are high.
Having a net gain in tax and service industries is fine but the positives don't always outweigh the negatives.
Should we have a second referendum? on 16:05 - Oct 16 by Catullus
The net gains are in different areas to where the strain/overload is happening. In our schools, class sizes are growing but we don't have enough teachers or classrooms. In my sons school, the number of pupils has more than doubled in 6 years, the parents of the mostly foreign kids are mostly working (a large number are Polish with a few African....one is half Chinese, half Finnish!) so the parents are paying taxes but at the same time climing child benefit, working tax benefits and using our NHS etc. In hospitals we need foreign doctors and nurses because we haven't enough but the system that has faced billions in cuts still hasn't the resources for all the extra immigrants. The lack of homegrown staff is a failing of our governments which has cut trainig allowances/bursaries and made it so people can't afford to train as nurses or other much needed staff. Crime, we have imported many criminals most of whom we can't deport because of the use and interpretation of the Human Rights act. We don't have the police we need so as crime rises they stop investigating so called low level crime. A particular problem in some areas where burglaries, car crime or anti social behaviour are high.
Having a net gain in tax and service industries is fine but the positives don't always outweigh the negatives.
so you agree the failings in the Uk system are down to how the Uk government allocates it's resources and is nothing to do with the EU.
Every issue you've highlighted is one that is the fault of the UK government. If EU migrants are net contributors, that's it. they are net contributors full stop. It's then up to the Uk government how it spends that net contribution.
without EU migrants the UK government would have even fewer resources to allocate to needy areas, and you can be sure the current government would cut social care, NHS, police and other services most consider essential before they consider raising taxes on their mates or divert spending from other areas
A quick look at the EU objective one funding areas tells you all you need to know. The UK has several areas that qualify, whilst Germany (excluding ex GDR), France, Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark and Sweden have none.
When you examine the facts its clear we would be better to take back control from Westminster and hand it to Brussels
Should we have a second referendum? on 08:49 - Oct 16 by krunchykarrot
We've had the vote and we are leaving, as stated people voted wanting to leave on WTO rules. "No deal is better than a bad deal" was the cry. This must be honored or there will be hell to pay.
Should we have a second referendum? on 16:22 - Oct 16 by sherpajacob
so you agree the failings in the Uk system are down to how the Uk government allocates it's resources and is nothing to do with the EU.
Every issue you've highlighted is one that is the fault of the UK government. If EU migrants are net contributors, that's it. they are net contributors full stop. It's then up to the Uk government how it spends that net contribution.
without EU migrants the UK government would have even fewer resources to allocate to needy areas, and you can be sure the current government would cut social care, NHS, police and other services most consider essential before they consider raising taxes on their mates or divert spending from other areas
A quick look at the EU objective one funding areas tells you all you need to know. The UK has several areas that qualify, whilst Germany (excluding ex GDR), France, Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark and Sweden have none.
When you examine the facts its clear we would be better to take back control from Westminster and hand it to Brussels
Ummm no, immigration is the EU policy on open borders. If the Uk had allocated resources better we wouldn't need so many immigrants but that's a seperate issue really.
Saying they are net contributors full stop is not good enough because those immigrants and their families use resources which cost money. The net gain in taxes is all well and good if the gain is enough to cover the costs incurred by the immigrant families, that little issue is yet to be proved one way or the other as far as I know but it drives perceptions about immigrants which causes hostility.
As for objective one funding, with the WAG in charge it won't matter how much we are given (yes it's the DM but, I believe, factually correct)
You can cherry pick countries to back your argument but you can't leave out parts of Germany and there are 20 other countries. France got quite a bit of O1 funding which went to it's overseas territories in the Caribbean.
Should we have a second referendum? on 16:51 - Oct 16 by Catullus
Ummm no, immigration is the EU policy on open borders. If the Uk had allocated resources better we wouldn't need so many immigrants but that's a seperate issue really.
Saying they are net contributors full stop is not good enough because those immigrants and their families use resources which cost money. The net gain in taxes is all well and good if the gain is enough to cover the costs incurred by the immigrant families, that little issue is yet to be proved one way or the other as far as I know but it drives perceptions about immigrants which causes hostility.
As for objective one funding, with the WAG in charge it won't matter how much we are given (yes it's the DM but, I believe, factually correct)
You can cherry pick countries to back your argument but you can't leave out parts of Germany and there are 20 other countries. France got quite a bit of O1 funding which went to it's overseas territories in the Caribbean.
"The net gain in taxes is all well and good if the gain is enough to cover the costs incurred by the immigrant families"
That's what a net gain is!
They contribute more than they take out. That means their contribution to services and infrastructure is more than their consumption of services and infrastructure. its really not that difficult a concept. So there is a net gain which can be spent elsewhere
The only bit of Germany, I left out is the bit that 30 years ago was under the control of the soviet union. So wales and Cornwall are now on a par with French Caribbean colonies and the former east Germany.
rather than the daily mail try reading something that's' been researched properly.
Public Finances EEA migrants, especially those from EU13+, pay more in taxes than they receive in welfare benefits and consume in public services. Public services: Health EEA migrants make a larger contribution both in terms of money and work to the NHS than they receive in health services. No evidence that migration has reduced the quality of healthcare. Public Services: Social Care EEA migrants are a small but increasing share of social care workforce. Very few EEA migrants receive social care.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
