Will we stay or will we go?

[OldCarlos]

Because maybe we won't save £15 billion a year?
I don't know whether we would, and with the greatest of respect I don't think you do either.

I don't profess to know, hence asking questions, but some on here seem to think they do & aren't open to opposing views.

There's too many snide comments as usual on these kind of threads & a total lack of good manners.

 

[Mr Bump]

@OldCarlos yep and its the same folk again

 

[big soft moose]

let he who is without sin cast the first stone..

which is to say that as usual both sides of the debate have at times resorted to name calling and pettiness, it is not limited to one or the other

 

[MWHCVT]

So you know for a fact every OAP retiree to spain is some skint freeloader looking to freeload off the Spanish economy and every EU national that comes here is some skilled/educated/wealthy person we couldn't possibly do without.

Until you back this up with actual date I shall consider what you spout to be ignorant lies and b******t.

BTW. I think the last line is an accurate portrayal of what goes on. You might not like it but hey, I am trying to help you see the bigger picture.

The difference is that I'm not the one spouting spurious facts as statements of truth or reality to support my bigoted viewpoint on the situation...

Though here's an interesting line from a study from CEP at the LSE and I quote "Immigrants are, on average, more educated than their UK-born counterparts" says a lot really, lets not forget while the UK has some of the very best educational establishments in the world, only a small number of the populous will ever attend those establishments the reality is that education in the UK on the whole is sadly lacking...

http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/pa014.pdf

 

[big soft moose]

that's because it is the intelligent, hard working, ones who are willing to shift for themselves and actually get here - the lazy indolent f***wits are still sat on their arse in poland/syria or wherever expecting someone else to take responsibility for improving their lot in life.

whereas the average in the native population is dragged down by the indigenous indolent shiftless f***wit quotient

 

[Phil V]

What I am saying is some immigrants are net contributors but not all are. Many probably aren't and many imported labourers probably aren't strictly needed. A system that allows us to separate the wheat from the chaff that comes in from the EU can surely only be a good thing. Afterall, we apply that system for people coming from outwith the EU and if we left the EU we could do that with EU nationals. Why would that be a problem?

Why is that a hard thing to understand that having such a system can only be of benefit.

Benefits come after a period of time and if they get knocked up or father a sprog, they can get all sorts.

I thought you worked in banking:
Have I dreamt the meaning of what a net gain means?

 

[Phil V]

I don't profess to know, hence asking questions, but some on here seem to think they do & aren't open to opposing views.

There's too many snide comments as usual on these kind of threads & a total lack of good manners.

So why did you ask 'why are we spending...' As if it was a fact that we were?

The question is clearly 'what is the cost?'

Ivan give you lots of 'facts', but as per the point above, people say things like 'people come here to claim benefits' and when challenged because it's simply not true, reply with yet more conjecture from a shifted position.

 

[SFTPhotography]

The difference is that I'm not the one spouting spurious facts as statements of truth or reality to support my bigoted viewpoint on the situation...

Though here's an interesting line from a study from CEP at the LSE and I quote "Immigrants are, on average, more educated than their UK-born counterparts" says a lot really, lets not forget while the UK has some of the very best educational establishments in the world, only a small number of the populous will ever attend those establishments the reality is that education in the UK on the whole is sadly lacking...

http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/pa014.pdf

Statistics can be used to skew almost anything. On average. We have a few highly educated ones and that's great but what about the unskilled masses.

Can you please just answer one thing. Why would you object to a points based system being implemented for EU nationals if we left the EU.

I'll ignore your comments about bigotry. I don't take them seriously.

 

[big soft moose]

Statistics can be used to skew almost anything. On average. We have a few highly educated ones and that's great but what about the unskilled masses.
y.

what unskilled masses ? - by and large the unskilled polish masses are still in poland. - we are back to Ruth's earlier point that you seem to think manual trades = unskilled when it really doesn't + my previous point that being willing to do an honest days work for an honest days pay is in itself a skill , and one thats missing from some of our indigenous unemployed

 

[SFTPhotography]

t that being willing to do an honest days work for an honest days pay is in itself a skill , and one thats missing from some of our indigenous unemployed

No. Being able to do an honest days work is an expectation and British people can do this and can be made to do this. I resent the assertion that British people are lazy and incapable, they are not and they just need to be given the chance to shine.

 

[SFTPhotography]

that's because it is the intelligent, hard working, ones who are willing to shift for themselves and actually get here -

Why not work hard in the country to which they were born?

 

[big soft moose]

No. Being able to do an honest days work is an expectation and British people can do this and can be made to do this. I resent the assertion that British people are lazy and incapable, they are not and they just need to be given the chance to shine.

Experience suggest otherwise - but like i said above its not that poles (for example) are any more hard working than brits per se - every nationality has those willing to graft and those who aren't, but in the case of the Poles (and most other immigrants - refugees possibly excepted) only those willing to shift for themselves are here - the indolent, CBA sector are still in Poland , wheras from our own population we have the full gamut.

Also in areas where there is work available , those brits willing and able to graft are working - so the unemployed are made up of those who can't work and those who don't want to ... and the latter sector don't just need a chance to shine.

 

[OldCarlos]

So why did you ask 'why are we spending...' As if it was a fact that we were?

Where?

I said "So why don't we leave & save £15 billion per year + we can decide to have a points system." (if that's what you are `quoting`?)

I don't know the exact figure & didn't quote as fact, but it could actually be more. Even the `experts` don't agree. (& I'm not talking about the ones on here )

As we all know, there are lies, damned lies & statistics.

 

[big soft moose]

Why not work hard in the country to which they were born?

may because there aren't any jobs that suit their skills ? (in the ex communist bloc the communists practiced the falsehood that they had no unemploymernt so there were loads more people trained than real jobs exist for...) , also jobs here probably pay better

Its no different in principal to a british doctor going to work in australia

 

[Cobra]

There's too many snide comments as usual on these kind of threads & a total lack of good manners.

@OldCarlos yep and its the same folk again

which is to say that as usual both sides of the debate have at times resorted to name calling and pettiness, it is not limited to one or the other

I was just catching up on this thread and was about to post something similar, but as "your peers" have already noted, there is far too much sniping on both sides.
Its not big and its not clever
And please no jokes about one of the 7 dwarf's just back on track would be good

 

[Phil V]

Where?

I said "So why don't we leave & save £15 billion per year + we can decide to have a points system." (if that's what you are `quoting`?)

I don't know the exact figure & didn't quote as fact, but it could actually be more. Even the `experts` don't agree. (& I'm not talking about the ones on here )

As we all know, there are lies, damned lies & statistics.

I'm being really thick then, because that 'question' definitely assumes that there's a £15 billion per year saving to be made every way that I read it.

Not quoting it as fact would have been done by adding a qualification, or being vague about the number; like this:
"So why don't we leave & save a supposed £15 billion per year + we can decide to have a points system."

"So why don't we leave & save £X billions per year + we can decide to have a points system."

None of that would have required much effort and would have achieved what you say you meant. But you chose not to, you quoted it as fact, whether you think you did or not or whether you intended to or not, is conjecture, the words are there for everyone to read and they lack any shred of ambiguity.

 

[cambsno]

and as is usual for the torygraph its mostly a mix of hyperbole and outright untruths , e,g we have a trade deficit with many other countries such as 22.1 billion with china , and deregulation will not be a good thing for anyone except those at the very top. And without the common agriculture policy food prices will rise rather than fall as farmers have to make money to live , and if you take away the subsidy they will have to charge more for food... and so forth

Would it? The CAP removal would see prices drop for households, and we use some of the billions saved to subsidise farmers.

 

[big soft moose]

Would it? The CAP removal would see prices drop for households, and we use some of the billions saved to subsidise farmers.

nope - there's no evidence at all that the CAP removal would see the price drop for households - as i said an honest price for food to enable farmers to live with no subsidy would see food costing considerably more , not less, and there is even less evidence that the govt would use the 'billions saved' (if they actually exist) to subsidise farming - the current govt would probably use it to pay off more national debt , wheras lib/lab would probably spend it on restoring cuts to public services.

 

[cambsno]

nope - there's no evidence at all that the CAP removal would see the price drop for households - as i said an honest price for food to enable farmers to live with no subsidy would see food costing considerably more , not less, and there is even less evidence that the govt would use the 'billions saved' (if they actually exist) to subsidise farming - the current govt would probably use it to pay off more national debt , wheras lib/lab would probably spend it on restoring cuts to public services.

So whats all this "the cap costs the average family £1200 pa"? Ok, maybe food would cost more, but we would be £1200 better off in the first place.

 

[big soft moose]

So whats all this "the cap costs the average family £1200 pa"? Ok, maybe food would cost more, but we would be £1200 better off in the first place.

nope - thats just ill thought out telegraph hyperbole , which assumes taxation would reduce if we weren't paying into europe - however they can't have it both ways , if the govt is going to use the 'billions saved' for other purposes , the level of taxation will have to remain unchanged (which is likely as why would the govt willingly give money back to the populace)

so what you actually wind up with is food costing more but the average family being no better off... but that won't inspire the average family to vote for the 'out' position the telegraph supports

also the real issue with the cost of food is the supermarkets - there is a huge difference between the price a farmer sells his goods for and what the consumer pays, so even in the unlikely event that withdrawing from the cap somehow magically reduces the cost of food production (which it doesnt) there is no guarantee of any savings being passed on to the consumer.

Also the cost per household of the CAP is about £200 per year , so I suspect that the rest of the 'cost saving' of withdrawing from the CAP is made up of the dubious idea that with a freer trade we'd be able to increase food imports and thus provide ultra cheap food thus saving each household an extra £1k per year.

this is cobblers because

a) per above there's no guarantee that supermarkets would pass the cost saving on anyway
b) ultra cheap food from abroad tends to come from deregulated markets with worse animal welfare, and dubious health side effects
c) apart from it being ethically indefensible to put british farmers out of business by buying ultra cheap goods from dubious markets (which is an odd position for a party which is allegedly all about putting our country first) it also comes with a big hidden cost in rural deprivation and unemployment
d)do we really want to be in a position where we are totally dependent on a foreign power for our food ?

 

[SFTPhotography]

nope - thats just ill thought out telegraph hyperbole , which assumes taxation would reduce if we weren't paying into europe - however they can't have it both ways , if the govt is going to use the 'billions saved' for other purposes , the level of taxation will have to remain unchanged (which is likely as why would the govt willingly give money back to the populace)

No, the govt could say out of a £15bil saving perhaps cut tax collected by £8bil by cutting taxes and still have an extra £7bil to spend.

 

[dejongj]

Stole this from the Telegraph.....


1. Since we joined the EEC in 1973, we have been in surplus with every continent in the world except Europe. Over those 27 years, we have run a trade deficit with the other member states that averages out at £30 million per day.

2. In 2010 our gross contribution to the EU budget was be £14 billion. To put this figure in context, all the reductions announced by George Osborne at the Conservative Party Conference would, collectively, save £7 billion a year across the whole of government spending.

3. On the European Commission’s own figures, the annual costs of EU regulation outweigh the advantages of the single market by €600 to €180 billion.

4. The Common Agricultural Policy costs every family £1200 a year in higher food bills.

5. Outside the Common Fisheries Policy, Britain could reassert control over its waters out to 200 miles or the median line, which would take in around 65 per cent of North Sea stocks.

6. Successive British governments have refused to say what proportion of domestic laws come from Brussels, but a thorough analysis by the German Federal Justice Ministry showed that 84 per cent of the legislation in that country came from the EU.

7. Outside the EU, Britain would be free to negotiate much more liberal trade agreements with third countries than is possible under the Common External Tariff.

8. The countries with the highest GDP per capita in Europe are Norway and Switzerland. Both export more, proportionately, to the EU, than Britain does.

9. Outside the EU, Britain could be a deregulated, competitive, offshore haven.

10. Oh, and we’d be a democracy again.

Now if that is all true, it is very exciting to exit Especially like number 9, we've already got the palm trees!

 

[SFTPhotography]

that is the prevailing prejudice - that intelligent people work with their minds, while thickies work with their hands ... but do we really want thickies doing our electrics or fitting our gas central heating ? (also when you look at renumeration a good sparky can make as much as many white collar careers). End of the day i'm with Ruth here , most manual trades take a degree of skill and intellect- it may not be neurosurgery, but it isnt trolley pushing or working in macdonalds either

Ok but they are within the remit of most people. Simple training is all thats needed and cutting benefits down to making training and low pay more lucrative whilst training more appealing than the dole seems a logical place to start.

 

[big soft moose]

No, the govt could say out of a £15bil saving perhaps cut tax collected by £8bil by cutting taxes and still have an extra £7bil to spend.

they could - but they won't

they've demonstrated how little they care about the population by making huge cuts to public services to save about £7 billion per year in order to reduce the deficit - if they are suddenly handed an extra £15bn they aren't going to hand half of it to the population - and that assumes that the £15bn saving actually exists and isn't swallowed up in various hidden costs

 

[big soft moose]

Ok but they are within the remit of most people. Simple training is all thats needed and cutting benefits down to making training and low pay more lucrative whilst training more appealing than the dole seems a logical place to start.

no they arent - if the average person on the dole was capable of being a sparky or a plumber they'd already be retraining - theres nothing simple about learning electrics

 

[SFTPhotography]

they could - but they won't

they've demonstrated how little they care about the population by making huge cuts to public services to save about £7 billion per year in order to reduce the deficit - if they are suddenly handed an extra £15bn they aren't going to hand half of it to the population - and that assumes that the £15bn saving actually exists and isn't swallowed up in various hidden costs

How can you possibly know this? The extra money saved could be used in any number of ways and surely its better to have it saved rather than spent needlessly.

 

[SFTPhotography]

no they arent - if the average person on the dole was capable of being a sparky or a plumber they'd already be retraining - theres nothing simple about learning electrics

Joinery, painting/decorating. Plenty of trades and labouring jobs going and plenty of fit young men/women on the dole to do them!!!

 

[OldCarlos]

I'm being really thick then, because that 'question' definitely assumes that there's a £15 billion per year saving to be made every way that I read it.

Not quoting it as fact would have been done by adding a qualification, or being vague about the number; like this:
"So why don't we leave & save a supposed £15 billion per year + we can decide to have a points system."

"So why don't we leave & save £X billions per year + we can decide to have a points system."

None of that would have required much effort and would have achieved what you say you meant. But you chose not to, you quoted it as fact, whether you think you did or not or whether you intended to or not, is conjecture, the words are there for everyone to read and they lack any shred of ambiguity.

Not sure what your problem is, but you just seem hell bent on trying to score points/splitting hairs? I'm out.

 

[Deleted member 49549]

How can you possibly know this? The extra money saved could be used in any number of ways and surely its better to have it saved rather than spent needlessly.

There is no money saved. The cost of leaving the EU will likely be far greater than the numbers mention above.

 

[SFTPhotography]

There is no money saved. The cost of leaving the EU will likely be far greater than the numbers mention above.

How is that?

 

[viv1969]

Ok but they are within the remit of most people. Simple training is all thats needed and cutting benefits down to making training and low pay more lucrative whilst training more appealing than the dole seems a logical place to start.

Simple training will get a job as a labourer.
All the mentioned trades are very skilled occupations, which take long apprenticeships to master and become certified.
Sometimes your lack of understanding, regardless of opinion, beggars belief.

 

[Deleted member 49549]

How is that?

Educated peoples opinion.

 

[SFTPhotography]

Simple training will get a job as a labourer.
All the mentioned trades are very skilled occupations, which take long apprenticeships to master and become certified.
Sometimes your lack of understanding, regardless of opinion, beggars belief.

We have plenty of British young capable people. They should be doing this. Until every British person is in work or training that is physically able to be, there is no need for imported labour.

Seems logical to me.

 

[SFTPhotography]

Educated peoples opinion.

I trust Farage and Golding over all the others.

 

[Deleted member 49549]

I trust Farage and Golding over all the others.

We know, that is why you are so often wrong.

 

[dejongj]

Educated peoples opinion.

Opinions are great but the facts suggest there is a nett £12Bn benefit

 

[viv1969]

We have plenty of British young capable people. They should be doing this. Until every British person is in work or training that is physically able to be, there is no need for imported labour.

Seems logical to me.

That doesn't even make sense.
Until every British person is in work or training there is every need for imported SKILLED workers.

 

[dejongj]

We have plenty of British young capable people. They should be doing this. Until every British person is in work or training that is physically able to be, there is no need for imported labour.

Seems logical to me.

And they can if they want to. Yet somehow not enough want to do that. So you supplement the local supply. Simples

 

[Ricardodaforce]

I trust Farage and Golding over all the others.

Are you serous? Golding in particular is a vile, ignorant, bullying, pathetic excuse of a man. To put your trust in such an idiot is laughable.

 

[SFTPhotography]

We know, that is why you are so often wrong.

On the contrary. It's how I see the sad direction the EU is going and how it'll drag is down.

If it was been run by someone like Marie Le Penne or Orban I'd be much more for it.