The teachers spend more time with these children than the rest,"
There was also the labour voter who lost out on her pension because she took time off to look after her kids, whilst she reckons immigrants can claim benefits.
There must be squillions of lab supporters up and down the land like this. They would never vote tory and the lib dems are just more of the same. My gut tells me the labour poll share versus those who will vote for the party in the euros bear absolutely no relation to each other. Which is why I predicted labour will come third.
Mr. Anorak, sad to see she's being indoctrinated, although that is an amusing conversation.
Mr. Eagles, I trust there will be at least one reference to classical history?
Well it's a major issue and she's been taught the view of an overwhelming proportion of scientists, so I'm not too fussed. To do otherwise would be akin to agreeing with the "teach the controversy" New Earth Creationists, and their approach to evolution in schools.
My highly-tuned antennae tell me you may not agree...
The teachers spend more time with these children than the rest,"
There was also the labour voter who lost out on her pension because she took time off to look after her kids, whilst she reckons immigrants can claim benefits.
There must be squillions of lab supporters up and down the land like this. They would never vote tory and the lib dems are just more of the same. My gut tells me the labour poll share versus those who will vote for the party in the euros bear absolutely no relation to each other. Which is why I predicted labour will come third.
Polling firms that major on who voted for which party in 2010 GE will underestimate UKIP and overestimate Labour that is almost certain IMO
...indicates prejudice against him purely because he is a Conservative.
As a digression to this discussion, it's a well-established fact of human psychology that the brain frequently uses cognitive shortcuts to make judgements more quickly, sacrificing a degree of accuracy for speed and efficiency.
Generally speaking, these cognitive shortcuts work pretty well and you can see them on all sides of political debate. However, they do make political debate rather difficult, because it means that the debate is very rarely about the specifics of the issue at hand, but is about people's different cognitive shortcuts, that have been formed over many years of [differing] experience.
In essence I do not trust IDS and I do not trust him because he is a Tory. Now I can dress this up by pointing to details that reinforce this prejudice - the proposal to charge for appealing against DWP decisions that seems to have been floated because too many of the appeals were successful, etc, but I can admit that it is essentially a prejudice that it would take a lot of contrary evidence to overcome.
I don't feel ashamed of holding this prejudice, and it's not one that is directed uniquely at Tories - the New Labour record on welfare reform is little different in my opinion according to my prejudices - and I feel that my prejudice is justified in the light of the information available to me.
The point I am making is that if I enter into a debate about IDS's welfare reforms with you, we are mostly going to be talking indirectly about our respective prejudices, rather than about the abstract policy detail.
Surely, here more than anywhere, we should be able to rise above our political prejudices? If I'm betting on politics, I'd be a fool to let my base anti-LD contempt, my irrational distrust of Labourites or my unconscious snobbery towards UKIP cloud my judgement.
I take your point about cognitive shortcutting, and I accept that we often will see what we want to see and fail to hear what we do not want to hear. However, I think we can discuss policy issues without suggesting the other side cannot see the reality around them; our differences are around dealing with that reality, priorities and policies.
I would like to think so, but I've been a regular on pb.com for a long time and it rarely happens.
I cannot see that the camp in the picture is specifically a concentration camp or an extermination camp sensu Final Solution. It could be any old prison camp sensu any POW escape movie.
The teachers spend more time with these children than the rest,"
There was also the labour voter who lost out on her pension because she took time off to look after her kids, whilst she reckons immigrants can claim benefits.
There must be squillions of lab supporters up and down the land like this. They would never vote tory and the lib dems are just more of the same. My gut tells me the labour poll share versus those who will vote for the party in the euros bear absolutely no relation to each other. Which is why I predicted labour will come third.
Polling firms that major on who voted for which party in 2010 GE will underestimate UKIP and overestimate Labour that is almost certain IMO
Provided new converts to UKIP do not misremember their 2010 vote and erroneously tell the pollsters that they have been a long-term supporter of UKIP, then it will not provide a problem for the pollsters. Past-vote weighting would still work.
It's the pollsters who use party ID weighting that I would worry about more.
I cannot see that the camp in the picture is specifically a concentration camp or an extermination camp sensu Final Solution. It could be any old prison camp sensu any POW escape movie.
It certainly looks like a labour camp, of some sort. It's funny, but a pretty sick joke.
I cannot see that the camp in the picture is specifically a concentration camp or an extermination camp sensu Final Solution. It could be any old prison camp sensu any POW escape movie.
Yes, It's a prison camp, it's no way offensive to suggest "Eton old boys" policy is to put the disabled in a "prison camp" surrounded by watch towers. Facepalm etc.
...indicates prejudice against him purely because he is a Conservative.
As a digression to this discussion, it's a well-established fact of human psychology that the brain frequently uses cognitive shortcuts to make judgements more quickly, sacrificing a degree of accuracy for speed and efficiency.
Generally speaking, these cognitive shortcuts work pretty well and you can see them on all sides of political debate. However, they do make political debate rather difficult, because it means that the debate is very rarely about the specifics of the issue at hand, but is about people's different cognitive shortcuts, that have been formed over many years of [differing] experience.
In essence I do not trust IDS and I do not trust him because he is a Tory. Now I can dress this up by pointing to details that reinforce this prejudice - the proposal to charge for appealing against DWP decisions that seems to have been floated because too many of the appeals were successful, etc, but I can admit that it is essentially a prejudice that it would take a lot of contrary evidence to overcome.
I don't feel ashamed of holding this prejudice, and it's not one that is directed uniquely at Tories - the New Labour record on welfare reform is little different in my opinion according to my prejudices - and I feel that my prejudice is justified in the light of the information available to me.
The point I am making is that if I enter into a debate about IDS's welfare reforms with you, we are mostly going to be talking indirectly about our respective prejudices, rather than about the abstract policy detail.
Surely, here more than anywhere, we should be able to rise above our political prejudices? If I'm betting on politics, I'd be a fool to let my base anti-LD contempt, my irrational distrust of Labourites or my unconscious snobbery towards UKIP cloud my judgement.
I take your point about cognitive shortcutting, and I accept that we often will see what we want to see and fail to hear what we do not want to hear. However, I think we can discuss policy issues without suggesting the other side cannot see the reality around them; our differences are around dealing with that reality, priorities and policies.
I would like to think so, but I've been a regular on pb.com for a long time and it rarely happens.
"The point I am making is that if I enter into a debate about IDS's welfare reforms with you, we are mostly going to be talking indirectly about our respective prejudices, rather than about the abstract policy detail."
Which makes most of political debate with most people completely futile, because it isn't a debate just a clash of prejudices. Of course another name for a person who hangs onto their own views regardless of any evidence is bigot.
However, there are some people, albeit a minority, who try and overcome their prejudices they are worth talking to and learning from. In my experience such people tend to be found more in the older age group as they have lost the certainty of youth.
Very few politicians seem to fit into that category but one who did, and I suspect it was the real reason for his downfall, was John Hutton, the former Labour MP and Secretary of State for Defence. In his interview on the wireless with Eddie Mair (surely the best bit of political interviewing in modern times) Hutton explained how he had moved from a unthinking tribal Labour MP to someone who stopped labelling people and started to accept that someone whose ideas were different from his own may actually have just as good a motivation as he did and something useful to say. We could seriously do with more people like Hutton in public life and on this board.
Comparing the latest competition predictions with Ladbrokes vote share lines, the biggest difference is the 26.39% overall average guess for UKIP compared to our over/under line of 28%.
I cannot see that the camp in the picture is specifically a concentration camp or an extermination camp sensu Final Solution. It could be any old prison camp sensu any POW escape movie.
Yes, It's a prison camp, it's no way offensive to suggest "Eton old boys" policy is to put the disabled in a "prison camp" surrounded by watch towers. Facepalm etc.
Oh, I quite agree!
But to link it to the holocaust is overusing the latter (not least because of the involvement of the disabled in that). All the same, it is foolish and worse to use even the more limited version when it is so easily misunderstood, deliberately or otherwise.
OK, I've succumbed: £25 at 7/4 on Lutfur Rahman in Tower Hamlets. Those odds are just too tempting.
Yes, I took the same view. I've also taken the plunge and gone "under" for An Independence From Europe, since I share Nick Palmer's and your view of the matter. I see that the consensus, however, is "over".
However this is to be expected as there are doubtless more Tories completing the survey than Greens, so the Tory overall average will be pulled towards their own view. Someone with more time than me can probably work out what the G.E. VI proportions are.
You've been a bit economical with the truth in not taking account of differences in cost of living in the UK compared with (say) Bulgaria, but we'll forgive you that slight Cleggism.
@isam You very neatly show how so many English non-workers think that the world owes them a living. I enjoyed the article, though I disagree with much of it.
To moan about this being a "stealth tax" when the spare room subsidy is allegedly a tax seems perverse. The point it makes about the middle and upper classes benefitting from the immigration of cheap labour and frankly ignoring the consequences for the poor or less skilled is spot on and is a point not made nearly often enough.
You've been a bit economical with the truth in not taking account of differences in cost of living in the UK compared with (say) Bulgaria, but we'll forgive you that slight Cleggism.
Thanks Richard.
Yes I agree that is a moot point.. my argument would be if I were being paid £47 an hour abroad I would happily live in a worse place/share with others/drink tinnies from the off license instead of going to the pub in order to save for when I go home. Didnt have the space to fit that in, and I guess the point is to provoke discussion.. hasnt provoked much though ha!
To moan about this being a "stealth tax" when the spare room subsidy is allegedly a tax seems perverse. The point it makes about the middle and upper classes benefitting from the immigration of cheap labour and frankly ignoring the consequences for the poor or less skilled is spot on and is a point not made nearly often enough.
I was tempted to write "First" in the comments - but I've forgotten my Disqus login!
Sunil,
Very fair. A couple near me who are Romanian - her good worker - him not so good, reckon that in 3 years they can save enough from UK earnings to build their own house in Romania.
I ruminated yesterday about this claim on the Sunday Politics that the Libs are "very resilient". What on earth will it take to destroy them if not a routing in the next two national elections (which now looks very likely)?
It's a very good, well argued piece. Some questions:
1. Don't we all benefit from prices (and taxes) being lower than they would otherwise be if there were no immigrants doing low paid jobs? 2. Don't we all benefit from the competition that a greater provision of certain services - plumbers, electricians, builders etc - will bring in terms of quality of work and service? 3. Given you believe that the unemployed and the low paid are largely the victims of immigration, would you be opposed to any further cuts in welfare spending? 4. What happens when we leave the EU? Will wages rise dramatically?
I ruminated yesterday about this claim on the Sunday Politics that the Libs are "very resilient". What on earth will it take to destroy them if not a routing in the next two national elections (which now looks very likely)?
The LibDems have played an honorable role in putting the country back on its feet after Labour's catastrophic 13-year occupation. It's Labour that merits electoral obliteration.
Liked that blog @Isam. My question though is whether would rise in these jobs enough to attract Brits, were the immigrants not here. Look at the retail sector - dismal wages for shop girls since the year dot, yet notorious for carrying a shed load of vacancies at any one time (especially in London). You would think that they would address this by offering better pay and conditions, yet many major chains offer awful of both, and the chronic understaffing continues . Most shop girls get paid less than street cleaners.
It's a very good, well argued piece. Some questions:
1. Don't we all benefit from prices (and taxes) being lower than they would otherwise be if there were no immigrants doing low paid jobs? 2. Don't we all benefit from the competition that a greater provision of certain services - plumbers, electricians, builders etc - will bring in terms of quality of work and service? 3. Given you believe that the unemployed and the low paid are largely the victims of immigration, would you be opposed to any further cuts in welfare spending? 4. What happens when we leave the EU? Will wages rise dramatically?
The "other side of the coin" to immigration reducing wages in the UK, is importing cheaper goods from China. One applies to goods and one to services.
Therefore those that oppose immigration because of lowering wages should also be asking for import controls on goods as well.
I was tempted to write "First" in the comments - but I've forgotten my Disqus login!
Sunil,
Very fair. A couple near me who are Romanian - her good worker - him not so good, reckon that in 3 years they can save enough from UK earnings to build their own house in Romania.
Which means that pretty much anyone in the UK could do the same, they could work hard, save money, and build a house in Romania.
Immigration is only really a problem if its not being balanced by emigration. The British used to be very enthusiastic at emigrating to places. What has changed?
Liked that blog @Isam. My question though is whether would rise in these jobs enough to attract Brits, were the immigrants not here. Look at the retail sector - dismal wages for shop girls since the year dot, yet notorious for carrying a shed load of vacancies at any one time (especially in London). You would think that they would address this by offering better pay and conditions, yet many major chains offer awful of both, and the chronic understaffing continues . Most shop girls get paid less than street cleaners.
@Independent: Miliband calls politicians out of touch in TV interview - then has no idea how much he spends on his own weekly shop http://t.co/tk8b5f5ZPk
@sirlodsworth: Ed Miliband should offer a personal shopper service. The cost of living crisis would be fixed in an instant.
I ruminated yesterday about this claim on the Sunday Politics that the Libs are "very resilient". What on earth will it take to destroy them if not a routing in the next two national elections (which now looks very likely)?
The LibDems have played an honorable role in putting the country back on its feet after Labour's catastrophic 13-year occupation. It's Labour that merits electoral obliteration.
Yes I'm aware of the nonsense you spout every day. But what about the question I asked?
I ruminated yesterday about this claim on the Sunday Politics that the Libs are "very resilient". What on earth will it take to destroy them if not a routing in the next two national elections (which now looks very likely)?
I don't know why you or anyone else would want to see the Liberal Democrats "destroyed" but a quick history lesson will underline the Party's capacity for survival. In 1951, the Liberal Party won 2.5% of the vote and 6 seats and in 1970 the party won 6 seats on just 7.5% of the vote.
In the 1950s and 1970s, the party had barely 100 Councillors nationally but still survived. UKIP curently has 220 Councillors and no one suggests hey are finished.
Clearly a disgusting Tweet, but my natural reaction is that parties have thousands and thousands of councillors, and any one might say stupid things.
However, given the fact that the media have decided in the case of UKIP to give these sorts of tweets full articles in national newspapers, its circulated in editorials as examples of what the party believes, and the party leader is then questioned about the ugliness in his party, I'm sure they'll be doing the same in this case.
Either that or journalists for the Guardian, Standard, Independent etc are massive hypocrites that are a disgrace to journalism, and prefer to be partisan shills rather than men of intellectual honesty.
Liked that blog @Isam. My question though is whether would rise in these jobs enough to attract Brits, were the immigrants not here. Look at the retail sector - dismal wages for shop girls since the year dot, yet notorious for carrying a shed load of vacancies at any one time (especially in London). You would think that they would address this by offering better pay and conditions, yet many major chains offer awful of both, and the chronic understaffing continues . Most shop girls get paid less than street cleaners.
Its noteworthy that for the last year, the retail, hotel and restaurant sector has seen the highest rate of earnings growth of all sectors - 3.2% vs 1.8% for the private sector as a whole.
Immigration is only really a problem if its not being balanced by emigration.
So if thirty million Brits emigrated next year, and they were replaced with thirty million Somalis and Congolese, there wouldn't be any problems associated with that?
@Independent: Miliband calls politicians out of touch in TV interview - then has no idea how much he spends on his own weekly shop http://t.co/tk8b5f5ZPk
@sirlodsworth: Ed Miliband should offer a personal shopper service. The cost of living crisis would be fixed in an instant.
#muppet
I have some sympathy when politicians don't know the price of individual items, but surely everyone knows how much the total on the supermarket bill tends to be?
But he was put on the spot about how much it really costs to feed a family of four. Asked about the average weekly household grocery bill, Mr Miliband responded: ‘It depends on how much you are spending.’
It's a very good, well argued piece. Some questions:
1. Don't we all benefit from prices (and taxes) being lower than they would otherwise be if there were no immigrants doing low paid jobs? 2. Don't we all benefit from the competition that a greater provision of certain services - plumbers, electricians, builders etc - will bring in terms of quality of work and service? 3. Given you believe that the unemployed and the low paid are largely the victims of immigration, would you be opposed to any further cuts in welfare spending? 4. What happens when we leave the EU? Will wages rise dramatically?
Thanks.
I will try and answer..
1. Are prices lower? I though inflation had been rising, hence the "cost of living crisis". I guess you would say that they would be higher still were it not for immigrants.
2. I think my point is that certain people benefit and others suffer. Maybe on the whole as a coiuntry we benefit, but thats the party line that disguises the cost to the poorest.
3. I think people that are unemploiyed (and this covers @BobaFett's question about shop girls) should be made to at least share a job (3 days a week?) that is on offer at the local job centre.That way the state doesnt have to pay them anything and they still have 3 days a week to look for the type of job they actually want.They be getting £150 a week and the govt would save £50 a week
4. I would be guessing, but I think there would be a rise in pay for the lowest paid, and a reduction in profit for those at the top
But he was put on the spot about how much it really costs to feed a family of four. Asked about the average weekly household grocery bill, Mr Miliband responded: ‘It depends on how much you are spending.’
If you have a large pool of labour that is either fully paid, or heavily subsidised by the tax payer, while your company pays practically no tax, things are even better. You could even invest the money saved in housing for rent at a higher return than investing it in your own business (you get a grant for that instead), things are stupendous. Minor problem being if tax payers realise this, they might get annoyed, but they are way to stupid, and busy blaming everyone else.
@Independent: Miliband calls politicians out of touch in TV interview - then has no idea how much he spends on his own weekly shop http://t.co/tk8b5f5ZPk
@sirlodsworth: Ed Miliband should offer a personal shopper service. The cost of living crisis would be fixed in an instant.
#muppet
I have some sympathy when politicians don't know the price of individual items, but surely everyone knows how much the total on the supermarket bill tends to be?
The real question is, how much more than the average does Miliband's weekly shop cost? A household with a substantial six figure income will not be skimping on treats. Perhaps Ed is wary of revealing the truth?
Liked that blog @Isam. My question though is whether would rise in these jobs enough to attract Brits, were the immigrants not here. Look at the retail sector - dismal wages for shop girls since the year dot, yet notorious for carrying a shed load of vacancies at any one time (especially in London). You would think that they would address this by offering better pay and conditions, yet many major chains offer awful of both, and the chronic understaffing continues . Most shop girls get paid less than street cleaners.
Its noteworthy that for the last year, the retail, hotel and restaurant sector has seen the highest rate of earnings growth of all sectors - 3.2% vs 1.8% for the private sector as a whole.
I know a person in one of the agencies who is now working 100% on getting unemployed UK people into catering jobs. The clampdowns from the current Govt are starting to benefit UK people. The person moans about it being tougher than hiring from outside the UK, but it supports your facts about wage growth.
Mr Miliband later admitted that his shopping estimate may have been on the low side, saying he had been thinking of the bill for 'basic groceries'.
Keep digging Ed...The average figure thrown at him was for exactly that, not for extras, for booze, etc. I would have much more respect if politicians just owned up when caught out like this, and they all do it.
@TCPoliticalBetting Another lucrative "business". Farming unemployed people into the lowest paid jobs in one of your friends business's, and not only does the tax payer get hit for the wages, the government even pays you for your effort.
The honest answer would have been "I haven't the faintest clue how much we spend on groceries. Since Justine and I earn well over £350K between us, whatever we spend would be small change, frankly."
All hail the hotel and catering services, one of the biggest users of zero hours contracts, and best of all, the poor sods can't refuse them now.(actually they can at the moment, but this problem will be sorted in short order with the new guidelines) You have to love the "free" market.
Immigration is only really a problem if its not being balanced by emigration.
So if thirty million Brits emigrated next year, and they were replaced with thirty million Somalis and Congolese, there wouldn't be any problems associated with that?
That size of population movement would only occur if there were major problems, causing such dramatic population movements, so the question is absurd.
4. I would be guessing, but I think there would be a rise in pay for the lowest paid, and a reduction in profit for those at the top
Taken to its logical extent, that argument means that if the size of the population of the United Kingdom fell to one, there would be a massive pay increase for those at the bottom, and a massive pay cut for those at the top. Whether it would be advisable is another matter altogether...
If you have a large pool of labour that is either fully paid, or heavily subsidised by the tax payer, while your company pays practically no tax, things are even better.
Agreed, but it sounds like you are arguing for the end of tax credits?
Comments
There was also the labour voter who lost out on her pension because she took time off to look after her kids, whilst she reckons immigrants can claim benefits.
There must be squillions of lab supporters up and down the land like this. They would never vote tory and the lib dems are just more of the same. My gut tells me the labour poll share versus those who will vote for the party in the euros bear absolutely no relation to each other. Which is why I predicted labour will come third.
My highly-tuned antennae tell me you may not agree...
I did get a reference in about Phalanx in last night's thread, given the Greek chat earlier in the day, which I hope you approved of
It's the pollsters who use party ID weighting that I would worry about more.
Which makes most of political debate with most people completely futile, because it isn't a debate just a clash of prejudices. Of course another name for a person who hangs onto their own views regardless of any evidence is bigot.
However, there are some people, albeit a minority, who try and overcome their prejudices they are worth talking to and learning from. In my experience such people tend to be found more in the older age group as they have lost the certainty of youth.
Very few politicians seem to fit into that category but one who did, and I suspect it was the real reason for his downfall, was John Hutton, the former Labour MP and Secretary of State for Defence. In his interview on the wireless with Eddie Mair (surely the best bit of political interviewing in modern times) Hutton explained how he had moved from a unthinking tribal Labour MP to someone who stopped labelling people and started to accept that someone whose ideas were different from his own may actually have just as good a motivation as he did and something useful to say. We could seriously do with more people like Hutton in public life and on this board.
http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/archive/2014/05/20/11223211.Video_rant_Bradford_MP_George_Galloway____regrets_losing_temper___/
Mr. Eagles, I'm afraid I missed that.
Mr. Llama, you're quite correct. It's a damned shame that Hutton wasn't Defence Secretary longer, and Des Browne/Bob Ainsworth for less time.
Applies to BBC confirmed figures for UK-wide turnout in the 2014 European elections. Must be announced by end June 2014. PP decision final.
29% or under 13/2
29.01 to 34% 15/8
34.01 to 39% 13/8
39.01 to 44% 11/4
Over 44% 7/2
Con - 22.1%
Lab - 23.1%
LD - 7.2%
UKIP - 24.5%
Green - 9.8 %
SNP - 2.9%
Plaid - 0.8%
BNP - 1.5%
AIFE - 1.8%
Other - 6.3%
I went for: Ukip 27.7%, Lab 23.7%, Con 21.3%, Green 9.3%, LD 6.2%, AIFE 0.9%
OblitusSumMe's post upthread makes me think I might have been a bit low on AIFE, but we shall see.
UKIP 27.8%, Lab 26.2%, Con 21.3%, Green 9.0%, LD 6.7%, AIFE 2.2%
But to link it to the holocaust is overusing the latter (not least because of the involvement of the disabled in that). All the same, it is foolish and worse to use even the more limited version when it is so easily misunderstood, deliberately or otherwise.
Welsh people clearly like rising council taxes and third world health and education services at first world prices.
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/05/17/mass-migration-is-a-tax-on-working-classes
EDIT: Oh, yeah. Obviously. *slinks off in embarrassment*
Greens 1.52pp (+20.3%)
UKIP 4.42pp (+16.7%)
LD 1.01pp (+12.7%)
Lab 1.87pp (+7.3%)
Con 1.14pp (+4.9%)
However this is to be expected as there are doubtless more Tories completing the survey than Greens, so the Tory overall average will be pulled towards their own view. Someone with more time than me can probably work out what the G.E. VI proportions are.
You've been a bit economical with the truth in not taking account of differences in cost of living in the UK compared with (say) Bulgaria, but we'll forgive you that slight Cleggism.
I thought "Stealth" made the distiction... but thanks anyway
Not bad, not bad at all
I was tempted to write "First" in the comments - but I've forgotten my Disqus login!
@JohnRentoul: TNS BMRB Euro Parl poll LAB 28% (+1), UKIP 31% (-5), CON 21% (+3), LIB DEM 7% (-3) Change since 30 April
I think I'll wet myself laughing if they go that low on Thursday.
Where is Sissy Senior when you want him?
Com Res: UKIP 33%, Labour 27%, Con 20%;
Opinium: UKIP 31%, Labour 29%, Con 20%;
TNS: UKIP 31%, Labour 28%, Con 21%;
Yougov: Labour 28%, UKIP 24%, Con 21%, but among those certain to vote UKIP 29%, Labour 25%, Con 19%.
Given that the first three weight their top-line figures by likelihood to vote, the pollsters are now in very similar territory.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2633226/Britain-heard-appalling-Ukip-says-Cameron-Prime-Minister-launches-scathing-attack-rival-partys-politics-anger.html
What a stunning UKIP performance if they are anywhere near +10 points.
To moan about this being a "stealth tax" when the spare room subsidy is allegedly a tax seems perverse. The point it makes about the middle and upper classes benefitting from the immigration of cheap labour and frankly ignoring the consequences for the poor or less skilled is spot on and is a point not made nearly often enough.
That'd be funnier than an old Frankie Howerd video.
My guess is that Labour will under-perform, though, and will probably be closer to 20% than 30%.
Tory - 25%
Labour - 23%
LD - 8%
UKIP - 29%
Greens - 9%
Swivel-eyed loon - 0.5%
Yes I agree that is a moot point.. my argument would be if I were being paid £47 an hour abroad I would happily live in a worse place/share with others/drink tinnies from the off license instead of going to the pub in order to save for when I go home. Didnt have the space to fit that in, and I guess the point is to provoke discussion.. hasnt provoked much though ha!
Very fair. A couple near me who are Romanian - her good worker - him not so good, reckon that in 3 years they can save enough from UK earnings to build their own house in Romania.
1. Don't we all benefit from prices (and taxes) being lower than they would otherwise be if there were no immigrants doing low paid jobs?
2. Don't we all benefit from the competition that a greater provision of certain services - plumbers, electricians, builders etc - will bring in terms of quality of work and service?
3. Given you believe that the unemployed and the low paid are largely the victims of immigration, would you be opposed to any further cuts in welfare spending?
4. What happens when we leave the EU? Will wages rise dramatically?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2633789/Disorder-court-Murder-trial-stopped-judge-spots-court-staff-having-SEX.html
But 4th seat very close between Plaid & Cons, and could even go to Lab
Look at the retail sector - dismal wages for shop girls since the year dot, yet notorious for carrying a shed load of vacancies at any one time (especially in London).
You would think that they would address this by offering better pay and conditions, yet many major chains offer awful of both, and the chronic understaffing continues .
Most shop girls get paid less than street cleaners.
Therefore those that oppose immigration because of lowering wages should also be asking for import controls on goods as well.
Immigration is only really a problem if its not being balanced by emigration. The British used to be very enthusiastic at emigrating to places. What has changed?
@sirlodsworth: Ed Miliband should offer a personal shopper service. The cost of living crisis would be fixed in an instant.
#muppet
In the 1950s and 1970s, the party had barely 100 Councillors nationally but still survived. UKIP curently has 220 Councillors and no one suggests hey are finished.
However, given the fact that the media have decided in the case of UKIP to give these sorts of tweets full articles in national newspapers, its circulated in editorials as examples of what the party believes, and the party leader is then questioned about the ugliness in his party, I'm sure they'll be doing the same in this case.
Either that or journalists for the Guardian, Standard, Independent etc are massive hypocrites that are a disgrace to journalism, and prefer to be partisan shills rather than men of intellectual honesty.
Its noteworthy that for the last year, the retail, hotel and restaurant sector has seen the highest rate of earnings growth of all sectors - 3.2% vs 1.8% for the private sector as a whole.
When you have access to a large pool of labour, the potentiality of the economy to grow without inflation is much higher than it used to be.
But he was put on the spot about how much it really costs to feed a family of four. Asked about the average weekly household grocery bill, Mr Miliband responded: ‘It depends on how much you are spending.’
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2633679/Miliband-accused-touch-reality-saying-spends-just-80-weekly-shop-average-100.html#ixzz32G5cbtBH
And you have to hand it to the Mail: their ability to choose photos to make politicians look stupid is second to none.
I will try and answer..
1. Are prices lower? I though inflation had been rising, hence the "cost of living crisis". I guess you would say that they would be higher still were it not for immigrants.
2. I think my point is that certain people benefit and others suffer. Maybe on the whole as a coiuntry we benefit, but thats the party line that disguises the cost to the poorest.
3. I think people that are unemploiyed (and this covers @BobaFett's question about shop girls) should be made to at least share a job (3 days a week?) that is on offer at the local job centre.That way the state doesnt have to pay them anything and they still have 3 days a week to look for the type of job they actually want.They be getting £150 a week and the govt would save £50 a week
4. I would be guessing, but I think there would be a rise in pay for the lowest paid, and a reduction in profit for those at the top
https://mtc.cdn.vine.co/r/videos/7BD74A977A1080421146199048192_2c2251f6888.0.3.8027486095367531262.mp4
If you have a large pool of labour that is either fully paid, or heavily subsidised by the tax payer, while your company pays practically no tax, things are even better.
You could even invest the money saved in housing for rent at a higher return than investing it in your own business (you get a grant for that instead), things are stupendous.
Minor problem being if tax payers realise this, they might get annoyed, but they are way to stupid, and busy blaming everyone else.
(Posted by an anti-Osborne, pro YES chap).
Keep digging Ed...The average figure thrown at him was for exactly that, not for extras, for booze, etc. I would have much more respect if politicians just owned up when caught out like this, and they all do it.
@CCHQPress: Car crash Miliband interview: ‘But he’s not the leader of the Council is he?’ 2hr2mins50secs: http://t.co/YOd7npZmqT . @labourpress fail
Are they vegans?
Another lucrative "business".
Farming unemployed people into the lowest paid jobs in one of your friends business's, and not only does the tax payer get hit for the wages, the government even pays you for your effort.
Ed is getting a bit podgy these days. The Two Eds, Cameron and Clegg, could all do with it.
You have to love the "free" market.
Agreed, but it sounds like you are arguing for the end of tax credits?
http://www.ukpolitical.info/european-parliament-election-turnout.htm