Remain have the totally naïve view that immigrants magically appear at 9.00am, contribute to the UK economy and then equally magically vanish at 5.00pm.
Presumably they must think that there are shanty towns around the major UK cities that house them - well there are!
Once you realise how stupid their position is, voting leave naturally follows.
I believe they live in the woods, never get sick, pregnant, old, need the police or schools...
Do you believe they pay taxes?
Why did you support a government whose entire economic and fiscal policy is based on high levels of immigration?
Those that are not on minimum wage or paid cash in hand do pay taxes.
As for economic policy based on high immigration, to a point they inherited high immigration, and I'm not sure the treasury economic policy is based on anything.
Leavers so concerned about public services should explain how they will be paid for when the tax money generated by EU immigrants starts to decline.
Oh dear - someone please read something abut velocity of money. NB - the money supply in the UK is dropping because so many immigrants send it abroad to be spent in their own countries. (Not that I blame them individually).
That would be good if true - the government could print some more without inflation - but I don't get it. The other countries don't use British pounds, so they must be selling their pounds to somebody, and that somebody now has pounds to spend. Do you have a non-bonkers link talking about this?
Remain have the totally naïve view that immigrants magically appear at 9.00am, contribute to the UK economy and then equally magically vanish at 5.00pm.
Presumably they must think that there are shanty towns around the major UK cities that house them - well there are!
Once you realise how stupid their position is, voting leave naturally follows.
I believe they live in the woods, never get sick, pregnant, old, need the police or schools...
Do you believe they pay taxes?
Why did you support a government whose entire economic and fiscal policy is based on high levels of immigration?
Those that are not on minimum wage or paid cash in hand do pay taxes.
As for economic policy based on high immigration, to a point they inherited high immigration, and I'm not sure the treasury economic policy is based on anything.
Certainly not on economics. However I am sure someone said that the Government would cut levels of immigration to the tens of thousands - the name escapes me for the moment.
Yes, the government of which Priti, IDS, Gove etc were a part of - and which many Leavers on here so vocally supported until just a few weeks ago - basically lied to the British people.
Something about collective responsibility IIRC - basically if you were in the Government then you had to support it. That rule was specifically withdrawn for the referendum.
If you know the government is lying you point it out and resign. If you don't you are part of the lie.
You mean like IDS did? Anyway I don't mind - the more the Government is tarred with lying the better for Leave.
Completely agree. My point is that the Tory Leavers are hypocrites, not that their hypocrisy won't be effective. I have always expected Leave to win and still do.
Bloody hell. Do you?
One of the few remainers to take that view here.
Yep - it'll be very tight, but immigration is the killer for Remain. George & Dave are reaping what they sowed.
Voters of all colours want immigration reduced. Below 100K seemed a reasonable target.
It would be achievable if the EU wasn't a basket case but they insist on making a mess.
Still, it will be good. We can get back to dealing with the whole world again rather than being little Europeans.
Remain have the totally naïve view that immigrants magically appear at 9.00am, contribute to the UK economy and then equally magically vanish at 5.00pm.
Presumably they must think that there are shanty towns around the major UK cities that house them - well there are!
Once you realise how stupid their position is, voting leave naturally follows.
I believe they live in the woods, never get sick, pregnant, old, need the police or schools...
Do you believe they pay taxes?
Why did you support a government whose entire economic and fiscal policy is based on high levels of immigration?
Those that are not on minimum wage or paid cash in hand do pay taxes.
As for economic policy based on high immigration, to a point they inherited high immigration, and I'm not sure the treasury economic policy is based on anything.
Leavers so concerned about public services should explain how they will be paid for when the tax money generated by EU immigrants starts to decline.
A scoundrel's argument.
You have to take into account the services they consume as well: NHS, schools and housing, perhaps.
I agree. And the evidence is that they put in more than they take out.
No, That evidence suggests that those who pay tax, get less out in child benefit and tax credits.
It says nothing about how much they use or don't use services. So there is no actual evidence either way.
It could be your right and they don't use any.
My money is that they use quite a bit.
I think it's important to separate EU and non-EU immigration. The costs of the latter are far higher because so many more non-EU immigrants are unproductive.
Maybe the people I meet with every day are far from being typical - if any of them have an opinion, it isn't one they choose to talk about. Really, I don't think I've ever heard anyone mention it.
That's interesting. I wonder if there's a London/non-London difference (if you're outside London)? I'm interested enough but I'm getting bored with how often it comes up in everyday conversations over the poker table, in work contexts, etc. And when I was canvassing last week, 95% had a definite opinion.
What are others finding in their non-political social circle?
I have only heard about it twice in conversations that I have not initiated. On medical colleague for Leave and one Nurse for Remain.
No posters anywhere that I can see, and only one leaflet (grass roots out); and the Britain First demo in the city centre, ostensibly for Leave, though getting a very hostile reception so most likely benefitting Remain.
People will vote though, just not sure how.
I'm not so sure. Seems to me that if people aren't interested enough even to chat about it casually, it's a bit of a stretch to deduce they're intending to turn out & vote but just don't know which way.
I wonder if the egregious nature of the campaign is really starting to get on people's nerves now, and many may turn away in disgust.
With good reason, but if that were the case, again, I'd expect people to be talking about their feelings. Instead of that - zilch. Much more as though it simply doesn't register.
Remain have the totally naïve view that immigrants magically appear at 9.00am, contribute to the UK economy and then equally magically vanish at 5.00pm.
Presumably they must think that there are shanty towns around the major UK cities that house them - well there are!
Once you realise how stupid their position is, voting leave naturally follows.
I believe they live in the woods, never get sick, pregnant, old, need the police or schools...
Do you believe they pay taxes?
Why did you support a government whose entire economic and fiscal policy is based on high levels of immigration?
Those that are not on minimum wage or paid cash in hand do pay taxes.
As for economic policy based on high immigration, to a point they inherited high immigration, and I'm not sure the treasury economic policy is based on anything.
Leavers so concerned about public services should explain how they will be paid for when the tax money generated by EU immigrants starts to decline.
A scoundrel's argument.
You have to take into account the services they consume as well: NHS, schools and housing, perhaps.
I agree. And the evidence is that they put in more than they take out.
No, That evidence suggests that those who pay tax, get less out in child benefit and tax credits.
It says nothing about how much they use or don't use services. So there is no actual evidence either way.
It could be your right and they don't use any.
My money is that they use quite a bit.
I think it's important to separate EU and non-EU immigration. The costs of the latter are far higher because so many more non-EU immigrants are unproductive.
Remain have the totally naïve view that immigrants magically appear at 9.00am, contribute to the UK economy and then equally magically vanish at 5.00pm.
Presumably they must think that there are shanty towns around the major UK cities that house them - well there are!
Once you realise how stupid their position is, voting leave naturally follows.
I believe they live in the woods, never get sick, pregnant, old, need the police or schools...
Do you believe they pay taxes?
Why did you support a government whose entire economic and fiscal policy is based on high levels of immigration?
Those that are not on minimum wage or paid cash in hand do pay taxes.
As for economic policy based on high immigration, to a point they inherited high immigration, and I'm not sure the treasury economic policy is based on anything.
Leavers so concerned about public services should explain how they will be paid for when the tax money generated by EU immigrants starts to decline.
A scoundrel's argument.
You have to take into account the services they consume as well: NHS, schools and housing, perhaps.
I agree. And the evidence is that they put in more than they take out.
No, That evidence suggests that those who pay tax, get less out in child benefit and tax credits.
It says nothing about how much they use or don't use services. So there is no actual evidence either way.
It could be your right and they don't use any.
My money is that they use quite a bit.
I think it's important to separate EU and non-EU immigration. The costs of the latter are far higher because so many more non-EU immigrants are unproductive.
Those numbers don't quite add up, unless it is taking account of non EU migrants who arrived in say 1950, now getting a pension for example. This will also happen to many EU migrants who stay.
Also, all these studies seem to have a partisan bent either way.
Remain have the totally naïve view that immigrants magically appear at 9.00am, contribute to the UK economy and then equally magically vanish at 5.00pm.
Presumably they must think that there are shanty towns around the major UK cities that house them - well there are!
Once you realise how stupid their position is, voting leave naturally follows.
I believe they live in the woods, never get sick, pregnant, old, need the police or schools...
Do you believe they pay taxes?
Why did you support a government whose entire economic and fiscal policy is based on high levels of immigration?
Those that are not on minimum wage or paid cash in hand do pay taxes.
As for economic policy based on high immigration, to a point they inherited high immigration, and I'm not sure the treasury economic policy is based on anything.
Leavers so concerned about public services should explain how they will be paid for when the tax money generated by EU immigrants starts to decline.
Oh dear - someone please read something abut velocity of money. NB - the money supply in the UK is dropping because so many immigrants send it abroad to be spent in their own countries. (Not that I blame them individually).
That would be good if true - the government could print some more without inflation - but I don't get it. The other countries don't use British pounds, so they must be selling their pounds to somebody, and that somebody now has pounds to spend. Do you have a non-bonkers link talking about this?
You could simply say that the transfer of money simply manifests as part of our balance of payments deficit. Which is what these days? £40 billion?
(That doesn't mean that immigrants send £40 billion a year back home).
More money is printed - the banks print out money every time they give a loan - what is the UK personal debt now? The Government replaces the money through issuing Gilts. - pushing up interest payments - we now spend £40 billion a year on paying interest on our debts - which makes the EU £8 - £10 billion look like chicken feed.
Yes but how much of that price movement is due to you talking her up? Even if McSally is being sounded out by the Trump team, would we expect an announcement before the GOP convention in mid-July?
Remain have the totally naïve view that immigrants magically appear at 9.00am, contribute to the UK economy and then equally magically vanish at 5.00pm.
Presumably they must think that there are shanty towns around the major UK cities that house them - well there are!
Once you realise how stupid their position is, voting leave naturally follows.
I believe they live in the woods, never get sick, pregnant, old, need the police or schools...
Do you believe they pay taxes?
Why did you support a government whose entire economic and fiscal policy is based on high levels of immigration?
Those that are not on minimum wage or paid cash in hand do pay taxes.
As for economic policy based on high immigration, to a point they inherited high immigration, and I'm not sure the treasury economic policy is based on anything.
Leavers so concerned about public services should explain how they will be paid for when the tax money generated by EU immigrants starts to decline.
A scoundrel's argument.
You have to take into account the services they consume as well: NHS, schools and housing, perhaps.
I agree. And the evidence is that they put in more than they take out.
No, That evidence suggests that those who pay tax, get less out in child benefit and tax credits.
It says nothing about how much they use or don't use services. So there is no actual evidence either way.
It could be your right and they don't use any.
My money is that they use quite a bit.
Yes, SO is making a bit of a fool of himself.
His argument is: immigrants are young, therefore they use the NHS less and also other services.
Unfortunately, those youngsters are also the people who have children. Try going into a maternity ward in London or a Catholic school in London to find confirmation of that.
Any evidence for your claims here? Some EU immigrants have kids, most don't. Many stay for only a year or two. They cost far less than our migrants that head to other parts of the EU.
Whilst one admire's the Mail's ability to get the entire headline into the URL one can't help wondering who gives a toss about the correct mode of address for an Antiguan knight in Britain. Any real scandal is left to the end of the story.
Yes but how much of that price movement is due to you talking her up? Even if McSally is being sounded out by the Trump team, would we expect an announcement before the GOP convention in mid-July?
I'm flattered you think I move markets!
But yes, Trump has said there are five under consideration, and the announcement will be made at the convention...
Remain have the totally naïve view that immigrants magically appear at 9.00am, contribute to the UK economy and then equally magically vanish at 5.00pm.
Presumably they must think that there are shanty towns around the major UK cities that house them - well there are!
Once you realise how stupid their position is, voting leave naturally follows.
I believe they live in the woods, never get sick, pregnant, old, need the police or schools...
Do you believe they pay taxes?
Why did you support a government whose entire economic and fiscal policy is based on high levels of immigration?
Those that are not on minimum wage or paid cash in hand do pay taxes.
As for economic policy based on high immigration, to a point they inherited high immigration, and I'm not sure the treasury economic policy is based on anything.
Leavers so concerned about public services should explain how they will be paid for when the tax money generated by EU immigrants starts to decline.
A scoundrel's argument.
You have to take into account the services they consume as well: NHS, schools and housing, perhaps.
I agree. And the evidence is that they put in more than they take out.
No, That evidence suggests that those who pay tax, get less out in child benefit and tax credits.
It says nothing about how much they use or don't use services. So there is no actual evidence either way.
It could be your right and they don't use any.
My money is that they use quite a bit.
Yes, SO is making a bit of a fool of himself.
His argument is: immigrants are young, therefore they use the NHS less and also other services.
Unfortunately, those youngsters are also the people who have children. Try going into a maternity ward in London or a Catholic school in London to find confirmation of that.
Any evidence for your claims here? Some EU immigrants have kids, most don't. Many stay for only a year or two. They cost far less than our migrants that head to other parts of the EU.
How come so many schools are having issues with school places filled with EU children?
Whilst one admire's the Mail's ability to get the entire headline into the URL one can't help wondering who gives a toss about the correct mode of address for an Antiguan knight in Britain. Any real scandal is left to the end of the story.
Yes but how much of that price movement is due to you talking her up? Even if McSally is being sounded out by the Trump team, would we expect an announcement before the GOP convention in mid-July?
I'm flattered you think I move markets!
[she actually went out to 85 after I posted approvingly yesterday] (^_-)
Remain have the totally naïve view that immigrants magically appear at 9.00am, contribute to the UK economy and then equally magically vanish at 5.00pm.
Presumably they must think that there are shanty towns around the major UK cities that house them - well there are!
Once you realise how stupid their position is, voting leave naturally follows.
I believe they live in the woods, never get sick, pregnant, old, need the police or schools...
Do you believe they pay taxes?
Why did you support a government whose entire economic and fiscal policy is based on high levels of immigration?
Those that are not on minimum wage or paid cash in hand do pay taxes.
Leavers so concerned about public services should explain how they will be paid for when the tax money generated by EU immigrants starts to decline.
A scoundrel's argument.
You have to take into account the services they consume as well: NHS, schools and housing, perhaps.
I agree. And the evidence is that they put in more than they take out.
No, That evidence suggests that those who pay tax, get less out in child benefit and tax credits.
It says nothing about how much they use or don't use services. So there is no actual evidence either way.
It could be your right and they don't use any.
My money is that they use quite a bit.
Yes, SO is making a bit of a fool of himself.
His argument is: immigrants are young, therefore they use the NHS less and also other services.
Unfortunately, those youngsters are also the people who have children. Try going into a maternity ward in London or a Catholic school in London to find confirmation of that.
Any evidence for your claims here? Some EU immigrants have kids, most don't. Many stay for only a year or two. They cost far less than our migrants that head to other parts of the EU.
How come so many schools are having issues with school places filled with EU children?
Trade union acts to get best deal for its members? Shock! Horror!
And you don't think that the DoH had similar discussions re strike tactics?
Handwaving doesn't put Humpty Dumpty back together again.
Considering that 6 months of messages were leaked, there were very few like the ones that you cite, and many more concerning issues other than pay.
There are major rota gaps in August that cannot be filled, Hunt has significantly worsened the situation. People are voting with their feet, leaving the NHS.
Doesn't sound like Trump is keen on us or the rest of NATO!
Just as well we have the EU...
Well if only the other EU countries would spend what they are supposed to individually on defence - but they've been living high off the hog. And that is why Mr Trump is p*ss*d off.
Doesn't sound like Trump is keen on us or the rest of NATO!
Just as well we have the EU...
Howls of derisive laughter, Dr. Sox.
If the countries in the Eu that are members of NATO actually met their treaty agreements in terms of expenditure, let alone willingness to actually fight, then maybe the Septics would not have such a reason for complaint.
The idea that the EU could in anyway put forward a serious defence force is laughable.
Any evidence for your claims here? Some EU immigrants have kids, most don't. Many stay for only a year or two. They cost far less than our migrants that head to other parts of the EU.
You really are rattled, aren't you, SO?
How about two new Catholic schools in West London? St. Richard Reynolds and Holy Family. How about St Vincent's turning from a two form entry school to a three form one? And why is Polish the language spoken outside the school gates?
You seem have got completely confused between immigration and temporary stays worked out through the profusion of NINo's issued. The latter fulfill your criteria, the former do not. The immigration figures are huge and possibly underestimated. The idea that - as you point out - young people are not having children is risible.
Doesn't sound like Trump is keen on us or the rest of NATO!
Just as well we have the EU...
Howls of derisive laughter, Dr. Sox.
If the countries in the Eu that are members of NATO actually met their treaty agreements in terms of expenditure, let alone willingness to actually fight, then maybe the Septics would not have such a reason for complaint.
The idea that the EU could in anyway put forward a serious defence force is laughable.
I wish you Leavers would make up your minds about whether the EU is an aggressive Hitlerian monster or an ineffectual talking shop :-)
Doesn't sound like Trump is keen on us or the rest of NATO!
Just as well we have the EU...
Well if only the other EU countries would spend what they are supposed to individually on defence - but they've been living high off the hog. And that is why Mr Trump is p*ss*d off.
Including us... we only made the contribution match by including military pensioners.
Admiral Anson may need to sign on the Chelsea pensioners again.
That article says of the 5.1million babies that were born in the European Union[2] in 2014 775,900 were born in UK[1]. That's about 1 in 6.57, so they've rounded down when they should have rounded up to 1 in 7.
Is this rounding justifiable?
Let's look at what is the lowest the ratio can be taking rounding into account. If "5.1million" originally meant "5,050,000", then the ratio becomes 5050000/775900, which is 1 in 6.5. So even on a generous interpretation their rounding was unjustifiable: it should be 1 in 7.
Incidentally, the UK pop'n is approx 65million, so the UK is 500million/65million - i.e. 1 in 7.69 people: let's call it 1 in 8.
So the answer to your question is: * If you use spurious accuracy[3], the UK has 1 in 6.57 births and 1 in 7.69 people in the EU. * If you don't, then the UK has approx 1 in 7 births and approx 1 in 8 people in the EU.
NOTES [1] The article uses "UK" and "Britain" interchangeably [2] The article uses "Europe" and the "EU" interchangeably [3] Spurious accuracy occurs if you do sums with a rounded number and an unrounded number and quote an unrounded result - your sum is only as accurate as the weakest number, if you see what I mean
Comments
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3614462/Queen-s-envoy-honours-scandal-Title-given-Commonwealth-chief-s-crony-reviewed-amid-Palace-fury.html
It would be achievable if the EU wasn't a basket case but they insist on making a mess.
Still, it will be good. We can get back to dealing with the whole world again rather than being little Europeans.
Oh.
I'll get me coat...
Sorry.... (a bit)
https://twitter.com/SunPolitics/status/736688870302076932
Also, all these studies seem to have a partisan bent either way.
(That doesn't mean that immigrants send £40 billion a year back home).
More money is printed - the banks print out money every time they give a loan - what is the UK personal debt now? The Government replaces the money through issuing Gilts. - pushing up interest payments - we now spend £40 billion a year on paying interest on our debts - which makes the EU £8 - £10 billion look like chicken feed.
But yes, Trump has said there are five under consideration, and the announcement will be made at the convention...
What's the scandal?
And you don't think that the DoH had similar discussions re strike tactics?
https://fullfact.org/education/whats-behind-shortfall-school-places/
There are major rota gaps in August that cannot be filled, Hunt has significantly worsened the situation. People are voting with their feet, leaving the NHS.
Just as well we have the EU...
If the countries in the Eu that are members of NATO actually met their treaty agreements in terms of expenditure, let alone willingness to actually fight, then maybe the Septics would not have such a reason for complaint.
The idea that the EU could in anyway put forward a serious defence force is laughable.
How about two new Catholic schools in West London? St. Richard Reynolds and Holy Family. How about St Vincent's turning from a two form entry school to a three form one? And why is Polish the language spoken outside the school gates?
You seem have got completely confused between immigration and temporary stays worked out through the profusion of NINo's issued. The latter fulfill your criteria, the former do not. The immigration figures are huge and possibly underestimated. The idea that - as you point out - young people are not having children is risible.
And who gives a damn about emigration?
Admiral Anson may need to sign on the Chelsea pensioners again.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3613669/The-SEVEN-reasons-d-better-outside-EU-former-HSBC-chief-says-Britain-regain-control-City.html
Did you mean in the EU?
(Europe and the EU are not interchangeable)
1 in 3 UK born children have at least one foreign born parent. Still a massive change in population though.
That article says of the 5.1million babies that were born in the European Union[2] in 2014 775,900 were born in UK[1]. That's about 1 in 6.57, so they've rounded down when they should have rounded up to 1 in 7.
Is this rounding justifiable?
Let's look at what is the lowest the ratio can be taking rounding into account. If "5.1million" originally meant "5,050,000", then the ratio becomes 5050000/775900, which is 1 in 6.5. So even on a generous interpretation their rounding was unjustifiable: it should be 1 in 7.
Incidentally, the UK pop'n is approx 65million, so the UK is 500million/65million - i.e. 1 in 7.69 people: let's call it 1 in 8.
So the answer to your question is:
* If you use spurious accuracy[3], the UK has 1 in 6.57 births and 1 in 7.69 people in the EU.
* If you don't, then the UK has approx 1 in 7 births and approx 1 in 8 people in the EU.
NOTES
[1] The article uses "UK" and "Britain" interchangeably
[2] The article uses "Europe" and the "EU" interchangeably
[3] Spurious accuracy occurs if you do sums with a rounded number and an unrounded number and quote an unrounded result - your sum is only as accurate as the weakest number, if you see what I mean