politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » UKIP are doing a passable impression of ferrets in a sack a
Comments
-
JxSi are the independence coalition?rcs1000 said:
Now on 68.5%!rcs1000 said:
JxSi currently on 66.6%!Theuniondivvie said:Official Catalan count page.
http://resultats.parlament2015.cat/09AU/DAU09999CM_L2.htm
(Warning: only 3,800 votes counted, so not likely to be representative)0 -
That's not what I'm saying.Moses_ said:
I love not only the backtracking but also the trashing of a paper report when the story is not in your favour which of course was not in evidence during piggy gate when it was of course "absolutely true"Dair said:
I love stories like this.Moses_ said:I see Nicola doesn't want a migrant family to live with her after all.
Asked in an interview on Sky News on September 6 if she would house Syrian refugees in her own home, Ms Sturgeon replied:
‘Yes, I would."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3250573/SNP-chief-Nicola-Sturgeon-backtracks-vow-home-Syrian-refugees.html#ixzz3mxiPQ6un
If the media wasn't filled with incredulous nonsense like this "report", then potentially damaging stories like Michelle Thomson would not end up being so easily dismissed and ignored.
Nice attempt at "look squirrel" though....
I have absolutely no reason to doubt the story about Thomson. My point is that any traction it could have is utterly lost in the constant stream of implausible and ridiculous SNP bashing by the media. My point is that genuine concern stories are lost in the deluge of trash.0 -
Furthermore there's a reason why many of the locals who are on benefits are the ones on benefits rather than employed. It is not due to a lack of jobs.alex. said:
The cafe argument is hardly obvious either. The numbers of "locals" working in local cafes, takeways, restaurants in places like London must be a miniscule percentage based on experience. Even if you managed to fill these jobs with every person on benefits, i suspect that a labour shortage would emerge pretty rapidly. And customer service would go rapidly down the pan, as the existing workforce is by and large highly motivated to better themselves which i suspect would be less true of the replacement.rcs1000 said:I'm sorry, but people graduate from the technology department at the University of Krakow and jump on a bus to London. They work for start-ups around Old Street (and other places). They go there because that is where the greatest concentration of start-up tech jobs is in the world, outside Silicon Valley.
These guys are 21, 22, 23: they don't fill in forms, they turn up at Techstars, and the like, and ask for jobs.0 -
I agree with muich of what Mr Jessop says, but I'm going to vote IN. I don't believe anyone can tell me what's going to happen in ten years time, but I'm certain that if were on our own the wind will blow a damn site colder than if we're with in the EU.
As for being like Norway or Switzerland .... I'd raher we were in the tent sharing in the decision making, than outside anxiously waiting to see who was p****ing where!0 -
Correct, but unrestricted immigration doesn't help the situation.Philip_Thompson said:
Furthermore there's a reason why many of the locals who are on benefits are the ones on benefits rather than employed. It is not due to a lack of jobs.alex. said:
The cafe argument is hardly obvious either. The numbers of "locals" working in local cafes, takeways, restaurants in places like London must be a miniscule percentage based on experience. Even if you managed to fill these jobs with every person on benefits, i suspect that a labour shortage would emerge pretty rapidly. And customer service would go rapidly down the pan, as the existing workforce is by and large highly motivated to better themselves which i suspect would be less true of the replacement.rcs1000 said:I'm sorry, but people graduate from the technology department at the University of Krakow and jump on a bus to London. They work for start-ups around Old Street (and other places). They go there because that is where the greatest concentration of start-up tech jobs is in the world, outside Silicon Valley.
These guys are 21, 22, 23: they don't fill in forms, they turn up at Techstars, and the like, and ask for jobs.
0 -
It's not a muddle at all.rcs1000 said:
It rather depends on CUP, I suspect. I don't believe they will support a UDI without an absolute majority of votes for independence.SouthamObserver said:Blooy hell it's tight. On vote percentage, pro-Indy parties have 49.8%.
If that turns out to be right Spain will be in deep crisis.
If we assume that the figures are right (and they could be 51-49 either way, of course), then I would expect that CUP will demand a proper referendum, and threaten to support a UDI in the event that it is denied.
In this way, everything will muddle on for a few years yet.
If Junts are close to 50% and CUP put them pro-Indy votes over the 50% then whether a referendum is called or not is down to Madrid. It is, in effect, their only card. Junts will accept a referendum and that immediately puts them in coalition with CUP and a vote being called soon.
Spain is finished. We should all be applauding that.0 -
Alternatively we could make our own decisions.OldKingCole said:I agree with muich of what Mr Jessop says, but I'm going to vote IN. I don't believe anyone can tell me what's going to happen in ten years time, but I'm certain that if were on our own the wind will blow a damn site colder than if we're with in the EU.
As for being like Norway or Switzerland .... I'd raher we were in the tent sharing in the decision making, than outside anxiously waiting to see who was p****ing where!
0 -
Not necessarily. An open parallel list gives the voters complete power to choose, with unattributed list votes not counted towards the top. So 100 votes for Tories in a single seat of which 20 for X, 25 for Y and 27 for Z and 28 for the Tory list as a whole with no preference results in Z getting the seat. An open sequential list tilts it to the top of the list, so those 28 with no preference would go to X, giving him the seat, but if voters really hate X they can defeat him by rallying to Y or Z. A closed list (like our Euro-elections) only allows you to vote for the list and X always gets the first seat.tlg86 said:
When I was a politics A Level student I thought PR was the work of the devil, but now I'm not so sure. If we were to go to PR then I'd much prefer STV over D'Hondt as it allows voters the order in which they allocate their vote to individuals. With D'Hondt it is the party that controls the order in which candidates are elected.
The Danes give parties the option. Smaller parties tend to make a virtue of open lists - pick who you fancy. Parties expecting to be in government are keener to ensure their potential ministers get in, so go for closed or open sequential.0 -
The blokes who do our software are from Poland and they still live in Poland.. I fail to see in the digital age why people have to travel here to do the work.. It'd be better for them anyway, English wages and Polish pricesrcs1000 said:
I'm sorry, but people graduate from the technology department at the University of Krakow and jump on a bus to London. They work for start-ups around Old Street (and other places). They go there because that is where the greatest concentration of start-up tech jobs is in the world, outside Silicon Valley.blackburn63 said:
If we leave the EU why does the talent pool narrow? If you run a specialist technology company (for example) you'll have the resources to select from across the world, quite rightly. If you run a cafe there'll be plenty locally quite capable of washing pots, no need to trawl the globe.rcs1000 said:
You see: I am an Out-er, on the basis that we would be better off as Norway or Switzerland. And I don't see why any foreigners should receive any benefits, or get a vote.JEO said:
If we exit the EU, as long as we don't do anything silly like keeping free movement, there shouldn't be any recriminations.JosiasJessop said:
Britain voting to leave the EU will be just the start. Then there will come the negotiations and decisions about what we do want from Europe; and that will be the cause of a whole load of arguments and recriminations.isam said:
A fitting footnote will be Britain leaving the EU.. then the party can finish a la Paul Weller ending The Jam and leaving everyone wanting moreStark_Dawning said:Yes, UKIP is finished. It was an interesting fad for a bit, but I suspect it will be all but forgotten in a few year's time. The interesting question is what will happen to Farage's disciples. I suspect many will decamp to Corbyn's Labour. He seems to provide the naughtiness most of them crave.
But I believe - as an employer - that I am served better by being able to hire anyone I want from as large a talent pool as possible. And as an employee I like the freedom of being able to work for anyone who'll employ me across as large a range of places as possible. It's a clear extension of my freedom as a human being.
These guys are 21, 22, 23: they don't fill in forms, they turn up at Techstars, and the like, and ask for jobs.0 -
Is there a betting market on Carswell defecting back to the Tories? Odds of around 5/2 - 3/1 would seem to be about right.0
-
BREAKING: The Netherlands will organise a referendum on the EU next spring after citizens collected 440.000 signatures. 1st in history on EU enlargement, but considering the success of this initiative the same committee may launch an iniative on membership
0 -
Errm Wasn't it supposed to be close ?rcs1000 said:
Now on 68.5%!rcs1000 said:
JxSi currently on 66.6%!Theuniondivvie said:Official Catalan count page.
http://resultats.parlament2015.cat/09AU/DAU09999CM_L2.htm
(Warning: only 3,800 votes counted, so not likely to be representative)
Is this the 50-50 ?!0 -
The EU is not the top table for decision making.OldKingCole said:I agree with muich of what Mr Jessop says, but I'm going to vote IN. I don't believe anyone can tell me what's going to happen in ten years time, but I'm certain that if were on our own the wind will blow a damn site colder than if we're with in the EU.
As for being like Norway or Switzerland .... I'd raher we were in the tent sharing in the decision making, than outside anxiously waiting to see who was p****ing where!0 -
Agree completely with that sentiment. Fingers crossed here for the end of Spain.Dair said:
It's not a muddle at all.rcs1000 said:
It rather depends on CUP, I suspect. I don't believe they will support a UDI without an absolute majority of votes for independence.SouthamObserver said:Blooy hell it's tight. On vote percentage, pro-Indy parties have 49.8%.
If that turns out to be right Spain will be in deep crisis.
If we assume that the figures are right (and they could be 51-49 either way, of course), then I would expect that CUP will demand a proper referendum, and threaten to support a UDI in the event that it is denied.
In this way, everything will muddle on for a few years yet.
If Junts are close to 50% and CUP put them pro-Indy votes over the 50% then whether a referendum is called or not is down to Madrid. It is, in effect, their only card. Junts will accept a referendum and that immediately puts them in coalition with CUP and a vote being called soon.
Spain is finished. We should all be applauding that.0 -
by when? I'll laypeter_from_putney said:Is there a betting market on Carswell defecting back to the Tories? Odds of around 5/2 - 3/1 would seem to be about right.
0 -
Surely he'll go independent if he re-rats. He'll have no credibility left if he defects again and the Tories must like their odds of regaining the seat without him next time given how close they came (against all expectations) this year.peter_from_putney said:Is there a betting market on Carswell defecting back to the Tories? Odds of around 5/2 - 3/1 would seem to be about right.
0 -
Now at 56.16% with 0.69% reporting0
-
ErrrrrDair said:
It's not a muddle at all.rcs1000 said:
It rather depends on CUP, I suspect. I don't believe they will support a UDI without an absolute majority of votes for independence.SouthamObserver said:Blooy hell it's tight. On vote percentage, pro-Indy parties have 49.8%.
If that turns out to be right Spain will be in deep crisis.
If we assume that the figures are right (and they could be 51-49 either way, of course), then I would expect that CUP will demand a proper referendum, and threaten to support a UDI in the event that it is denied.
In this way, everything will muddle on for a few years yet.
If Junts are close to 50% and CUP put them pro-Indy votes over the 50% then whether a referendum is called or not is down to Madrid. It is, in effect, their only card. Junts will accept a referendum and that immediately puts them in coalition with CUP and a vote being called soon.
Spain is finished. We should all be applauding that.
There are two questions here:
1. Will JxSi win a majority of seats? In which case they say they will pursue UDI
2. If they do not, what is the attitude of the other Catalonian nationalist grouping, the CUP?
My view, which is the same as Southam's largely, is that if CUP+JxSi fails to get a majority of votes (which looks likely) then CUP will not back a UDI, but they will demand a referendum.
I suspect the Madrid government will enter into a series of kicking the can down the road tactics, including the changing of the Spanish constitution, new autonomous measures for Catalonia, etc., culminating in a c. 2020 referendum, and who knows what result that produces. Opinion polls have about a 4 point lead for the "anti-independence", but who knows.0 -
Was thinking the sameisam said:
by when? I'll laypeter_from_putney said:Is there a betting market on Carswell defecting back to the Tories? Odds of around 5/2 - 3/1 would seem to be about right.
0 -
I think that's the main point on which the referendum result will hang: where do you feel most comfortable? For me, it's not immigration or payments that make me feel most uncomfortable about remaining in the EU: it's the Euro and ever-closer union.OldKingCole said:I agree with muich of what Mr Jessop says, but I'm going to vote IN. I don't believe anyone can tell me what's going to happen in ten years time, but I'm certain that if were on our own the wind will blow a damn site colder than if we're with in the EU.
As for being like Norway or Switzerland .... I'd raher we were in the tent sharing in the decision making, than outside anxiously waiting to see who was p****ing where!
It's perfectly reasonable for someone to see it the other way as well, as long as they've put some thought into it.
One thing I would say though is this: recent events with Germany have shown that being in the EU does not grant you a seat at the table for decisions. It's clear that the only seat is Merkel's, and the rest of the EU has to live with whatever decisions Germany makes, for good or bad.
To stretch your analogy, Germany's alone inside the tent, and the rest of the EU are outside getting pi***ed on. Meanwhile the rest of the world are at a different campsite having a jamboree.
Now that I've given people a mental image of Merkel and golden showers, I'll leave...
0 -
Assuming we can agree a deadline, let's say a year from now, you can have 3/1 with me.peter_from_putney said:Is there a betting market on Carswell defecting back to the Tories? Odds of around 5/2 - 3/1 would seem to be about right.
0 -
0.69% counted and JxSi on 56.16%0
-
Not binding...Plato_Says said:BREAKING: The Netherlands will organise a referendum on the EU next spring after citizens collected 440.000 signatures. 1st in history on EU enlargement, but considering the success of this initiative the same committee may launch an iniative on membership
where have we heard that one before?0 -
He could credibly return post-referendum IMO.Philip_Thompson said:
Surely he'll go independent if he re-rats. He'll have no credibility left if he defects again and the Tories must like their odds of regaining the seat without him next time given how close they came (against all expectations) this year.peter_from_putney said:Is there a betting market on Carswell defecting back to the Tories? Odds of around 5/2 - 3/1 would seem to be about right.
0 -
I'll offer 5-2 for a 2 year horizon
(Carswell) 0 -
Sure it does. It fills a vacancy.blackburn63 said:
Correct, but unrestricted immigration doesn't help the situation.Philip_Thompson said:
Furthermore there's a reason why many of the locals who are on benefits are the ones on benefits rather than employed. It is not due to a lack of jobs.alex. said:
The cafe argument is hardly obvious either. The numbers of "locals" working in local cafes, takeways, restaurants in places like London must be a miniscule percentage based on experience. Even if you managed to fill these jobs with every person on benefits, i suspect that a labour shortage would emerge pretty rapidly. And customer service would go rapidly down the pan, as the existing workforce is by and large highly motivated to better themselves which i suspect would be less true of the replacement.rcs1000 said:I'm sorry, but people graduate from the technology department at the University of Krakow and jump on a bus to London. They work for start-ups around Old Street (and other places). They go there because that is where the greatest concentration of start-up tech jobs is in the world, outside Silicon Valley.
These guys are 21, 22, 23: they don't fill in forms, they turn up at Techstars, and the like, and ask for jobs.0 -
If I could vote tomorrow it would be OUT, but I suspect over the course of the referendum IN will be boring and clinical whereas various people in OUT (including Farage) will say some ludicrous things that will make me question myself.JosiasJessop said:
I think that's the main point on which the referendum result will hang: where do you feel most comfortable? For me, it's not immigration or payments that make me feel most uncomfortable about remaining in the EU: it's the Euro and ever-closer union.OldKingCole said:I agree with muich of what Mr Jessop says, but I'm going to vote IN. I don't believe anyone can tell me what's going to happen in ten years time, but I'm certain that if were on our own the wind will blow a damn site colder than if we're with in the EU.
As for being like Norway or Switzerland .... I'd raher we were in the tent sharing in the decision making, than outside anxiously waiting to see who was p****ing where!
It's perfectly reasonable for someone to see it the other way as well, as long as they've put some thought into it.
One thing I would say though is this: recent events with Germany have shown that being in the EU does not grant you a seat at the table for decisions. It's clear that the only seat is Merkel's, and the rest of the EU has to live with whatever decisions Germany makes, for good or bad.
To stretch your analogy, Germany's alone inside the tent, and the rest of the EU are outside getting pi***ed on. Meanwhile the rest of the world are at a different campsite having a jamboree.
Now that I've given people a mental image of Merkel and golden showers, I'll leave...0 -
But it doesn't cut the welfare bill, something I assume you're in favour of.Philip_Thompson said:
Sure it does. It fills a vacancy.blackburn63 said:
Correct, but unrestricted immigration doesn't help the situation.Philip_Thompson said:
Furthermore there's a reason why many of the locals who are on benefits are the ones on benefits rather than employed. It is not due to a lack of jobs.alex. said:
The cafe argument is hardly obvious either. The numbers of "locals" working in local cafes, takeways, restaurants in places like London must be a miniscule percentage based on experience. Even if you managed to fill these jobs with every person on benefits, i suspect that a labour shortage would emerge pretty rapidly. And customer service would go rapidly down the pan, as the existing workforce is by and large highly motivated to better themselves which i suspect would be less true of the replacement.rcs1000 said:I'm sorry, but people graduate from the technology department at the University of Krakow and jump on a bus to London. They work for start-ups around Old Street (and other places). They go there because that is where the greatest concentration of start-up tech jobs is in the world, outside Silicon Valley.
These guys are 21, 22, 23: they don't fill in forms, they turn up at Techstars, and the like, and ask for jobs.
0 -
Wasn't Thatcher one of the Empire Loyalists ?OldKingCole said:
When I were a lad, as they say, there was something called the League of Empire Loyalists. To be fair, it didn't have the support UKIP had ... don't recall it ever really fighting aGeneral Election ....normally supported the Tories, but whatever happened to it?JEO said:
UKIP won't be finished as long as we stay in an unreformed EU. Even afterwards, they could stay alive as long as immigration levels remain unaddressed.Stark_Dawning said:Yes, UKIP is finished. It was an interesting fad for a bit, but I suspect it will be all but forgotten in a few year's time. The interesting question is what will happen to Farage's disciples. I suspect many will decamp to Corbyn's Labour. He seems to provide the naughtiness most of them crave.
I assume the members just died off.
Like UKIP's will!0 -
This is the type of statement which people on a board like this should not be making.rcs1000 said:
1. Will JxSi win a majority of seats? In which case they say they will pursue UDI
It is a nonsense to have any expectation that the jxSi are looking for anything other than a referendum. It is POLITICS. This is how politics works.0 -
Stop their benefits if they wont do an unskilled job that is vacantPhilip_Thompson said:
Sure it does. It fills a vacancy.blackburn63 said:
Correct, but unrestricted immigration doesn't help the situation.Philip_Thompson said:
Furthermore there's a reason why many of the locals who are on benefits are the ones on benefits rather than employed. It is not due to a lack of jobs.alex. said:
The cafe argument is hardly obvious either. The numbers of "locals" working in local cafes, takeways, restaurants in places like London must be a miniscule percentage based on experience. Even if you managed to fill these jobs with every person on benefits, i suspect that a labour shortage would emerge pretty rapidly. And customer service would go rapidly down the pan, as the existing workforce is by and large highly motivated to better themselves which i suspect would be less true of the replacement.rcs1000 said:I'm sorry, but people graduate from the technology department at the University of Krakow and jump on a bus to London. They work for start-ups around Old Street (and other places). They go there because that is where the greatest concentration of start-up tech jobs is in the world, outside Silicon Valley.
These guys are 21, 22, 23: they don't fill in forms, they turn up at Techstars, and the like, and ask for jobs.0 -
I didn't mention barbed wire fencesblackburn63 said:So if we leave the EU and introduce a visa system along the lines of Australia and Canada, those bright Poles will still be allowed, I hope encouraged, to come here.
Your view is contradictory, you mention Norway and Switzerlandland then suggest we'll be building a Hungarian style barbed wire fence. We need and want bright young graduates. I'm sure you can think of one or two we don't want or need.
And neither Australia not Canada has a thriving tech start-up scene.
Your 21 year old tech graduate is going where he and is opera singing girlfriend can find work. And that's London.
Amuse yourself: go the incubator sites (Techstars and the like). Go through to the sires of the individual investments they make. And count the number of foreigners (mostly Eastern Europeans).
There is nothing amazing that London has, that Berlin does not. It wouldn't take much to move the centre of tech innovation Eastwards.
Look: it's perfectly reasoanable and obviously correct to say that freedom of movement has costs. But it also has benefits. You need to accept that whichever route you choose has costs.0 -
I don't think so. If he rats twice then he'll have zero credibility and zero trust not to rat a third time.alex. said:
He could credibly return post-referendum IMO.Philip_Thompson said:
Surely he'll go independent if he re-rats. He'll have no credibility left if he defects again and the Tories must like their odds of regaining the seat without him next time given how close they came (against all expectations) this year.peter_from_putney said:Is there a betting market on Carswell defecting back to the Tories? Odds of around 5/2 - 3/1 would seem to be about right.
It would have been one thing if he'd gone independent, but another party is not independent.0 -
It seems you're not actually in favour of freedom of movement, nor am I, if Messi wants to sign for Spurs we should be allowed to sign him. But there's plenty of kids in Tottenham capable of sweeping the terraces, we don't need to import people with brooms.rcs1000 said:
I didn't mention barbed wire fencesblackburn63 said:So if we leave the EU and introduce a visa system along the lines of Australia and Canada, those bright Poles will still be allowed, I hope encouraged, to come here.
Your view is contradictory, you mention Norway and Switzerlandland then suggest we'll be building a Hungarian style barbed wire fence. We need and want bright young graduates. I'm sure you can think of one or two we don't want or need.
And neither Australia not Canada has a thriving tech start-up scene.
Your 21 year old tech graduate is going where he and is opera singing girlfriend can find work. And that's London.
Amuse yourself: go the incubator sites (Techstars and the like). Go through to the sires of the individual investments they make. And count the number of foreigners (mostly Eastern Europeans).
There is nothing amazing that London has, that Berlin does not. It wouldn't take much to move the centre of tech innovation Eastwards.
Look: it's perfectly reasoanable and obviously correct to say that freedom of movement has costs. But it also has benefits. You need to accept that whichever route you choose has costs.
0 -
The greatest of them all ratted more than once.Philip_Thompson said:
I don't think so. If he rats twice then he'll have zero credibility and zero trust not to rat a third time.alex. said:
He could credibly return post-referendum IMO.Philip_Thompson said:
Surely he'll go independent if he re-rats. He'll have no credibility left if he defects again and the Tories must like their odds of regaining the seat without him next time given how close they came (against all expectations) this year.peter_from_putney said:Is there a betting market on Carswell defecting back to the Tories? Odds of around 5/2 - 3/1 would seem to be about right.
It would have been one thing if he'd gone independent, but another party is not independent.0 -
No objections to that, personally and it is already the existing law afterall and see the hysteria over "IDS sanctions".isam said:
Stop their benefits if they wont do an unskilled job that is vacantPhilip_Thompson said:
Sure it does. It fills a vacancy.blackburn63 said:
Correct, but unrestricted immigration doesn't help the situation.Philip_Thompson said:
Furthermore there's a reason why many of the locals who are on benefits are the ones on benefits rather than employed. It is not due to a lack of jobs.alex. said:
The cafe argument is hardly obvious either. The numbers of "locals" working in local cafes, takeways, restaurants in places like London must be a miniscule percentage based on experience. Even if you managed to fill these jobs with every person on benefits, i suspect that a labour shortage would emerge pretty rapidly. And customer service would go rapidly down the pan, as the existing workforce is by and large highly motivated to better themselves which i suspect would be less true of the replacement.rcs1000 said:I'm sorry, but people graduate from the technology department at the University of Krakow and jump on a bus to London. They work for start-ups around Old Street (and other places). They go there because that is where the greatest concentration of start-up tech jobs is in the world, outside Silicon Valley.
These guys are 21, 22, 23: they don't fill in forms, they turn up at Techstars, and the like, and ask for jobs.
Only a closed-minded extremist could deny their are either costs or benefits to free movement. A sane discussion is whether the benefits outweigh the costs, but to claim there are either no costs or no benefits is not rational.0 -
I don't think so. Though originally a Conservative pressure group, by the time Maggie was in politics they had split with One Nation Conservatism, contested a few seats in the sixties then the rump party joined the National Front at its foundation.surbiton said:
Wasn't Thatcher one of the Empire Loyalists ?OldKingCole said:
When I were a lad, as they say, there was something called the League of Empire Loyalists. To be fair, it didn't have the support UKIP had ... don't recall it ever really fighting aGeneral Election ....normally supported the Tories, but whatever happened to it?JEO said:
UKIP won't be finished as long as we stay in an unreformed EU. Even afterwards, they could stay alive as long as immigration levels remain unaddressed.Stark_Dawning said:Yes, UKIP is finished. It was an interesting fad for a bit, but I suspect it will be all but forgotten in a few year's time. The interesting question is what will happen to Farage's disciples. I suspect many will decamp to Corbyn's Labour. He seems to provide the naughtiness most of them crave.
I assume the members just died off.
Like UKIP's will!0 -
Canada. Take a look at the immigration levels in Canada. Take a look at the level of unskilled immigrants, not the techi ones. I've pointed to links in the past.blackburn63 said:
So if we leave the EU and introduce a visa system along the lines of Australia and Canada, those bright Poles will still be allowed, I hope encouraged, to come here.rcs1000 said:
I'm sorry, but people graduate from the technology department at the University of Krakow and jump on a bus to London. They work for start-ups around Old Street (and other places). They go there because that is where the greatest concentration of start-up tech jobs is in the world, outside Silicon Valley.blackburn63 said:
If we leave the EU why does the talent pool narrow? If you run a specialist technology company (for example) you'll have the resources to select from across the world, quite rightly. If you run a cafe there'll be plenty locally quite capable of washing pots, no need to trawl the globe.rcs1000 said:
You see: I am an Out-er, on the basis that we would be better off as Norway or Switzerland. And I don't see why any foreigners should receive any benefits, or get a vote.JEO said:
If we exit the EU, as long as we don't do anything silly like keeping free movement, there shouldn't be any recriminations.JosiasJessop said:
Britain voting to leave the EU will be just the start. Then there will come the negotiations and decisions about what we do want from Europe; and that will be the cause of a whole load of arguments and recriminations.isam said:Stark_Dawning said:Yes, UKIP is finished. It was an interesting fad for a bit, but I suspect it will be all but forgotten in a few year's time. The interesting question is what will happen to Farage's disciples. I suspect many will decamp to Corbyn's Labour. He seems to provide the naughtiness most of them crave.
But I believe - as an employer - that I am served better by being able to hire anyone I want from as large a talent pool as possible. And as an employee I like the freedom of being able to work for anyone who'll employ me across as large a range of places as possible. It's a clear extension of my freedom as a human being.
These guys are 21, 22, 23: they don't fill in forms, they turn up at Techstars, and the like, and ask for jobs.
Your view is contradictory, you mention Norway and Switzerlandland then suggest we'll be building a Hungarian style barbed wire fence. We need and want bright young graduates. I'm sure you can think of one or two we don't want or need.
0 -
Random comments.
1. Re Suzanne Evans not being a local gal for London - Wales, this is Mark Reckless. Mark Reckless this is Wales?
2. Drop Dier to bench, sell Kane in my fantasy footie = nailed on Spurs win.
3. English Rugby = South African cricketers.
4. Love that pic from This Week re Ms. Evans, the Lady Jane Grey of UKIP.
5. Why is the BBC front page round up on Sunday online always seemingly Observer first and Independent second?
6. Alan Johnson on This Week showed how tribal Labour are - a la Burnham, the party always comes first - he will oppose leaving NATO and not renewing Trident but if the party policy is to do so, then he'll stand on that basis at the next election.0 -
"But there's plenty of kids in Tottenham capable of sweeping the terraces, we don't need to import people with brooms"blackburn63 said:
It seems you're not actually in favour of freedom of movement, nor am I, if Messi wants to sign for Spurs we should be allowed to sign him. But there's plenty of kids in Tottenham capable of sweeping the terraces, we don't need to import people with brooms.rcs1000 said:
I didn't mention barbed wire fencesblackburn63 said:So if we leave the EU and introduce a visa system along the lines of Australia and Canada, those bright Poles will still be allowed, I hope encouraged, to come here.
Your view is contradictory, you mention Norway and Switzerlandland then suggest we'll be building a Hungarian style barbed wire fence. We need and want bright young graduates. I'm sure you can think of one or two we don't want or need.
And neither Australia not Canada has a thriving tech start-up scene.
Your 21 year old tech graduate is going where he and is opera singing girlfriend can find work. And that's London.
Amuse yourself: go the incubator sites (Techstars and the like). Go through to the sires of the individual investments they make. And count the number of foreigners (mostly Eastern Europeans).
There is nothing amazing that London has, that Berlin does not. It wouldn't take much to move the centre of tech innovation Eastwards.
Look: it's perfectly reasoanable and obviously correct to say that freedom of movement has costs. But it also has benefits. You need to accept that whichever route you choose has costs.
Really ? Even 40 years ago, you could not get a single "waiter" who was English apart from very, very posh places. I am sure that is the situation even today.0 -
Tommy Robinson @TRobinsonNewEra 25m25 minutes ago
http://m.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/11791671.display/ … It revealed the number of Muslims in the UK had increased 80 per cent between 2001 and 2011 -
P. Pink @ideas4thefuture Sep 25
After Beheading 100 People This Year, Saudi Arabia Joins U.N. Human Rights Council With U.S. Support http://buff.ly/1iA3lmOReckon we are Stage 2 pic.twitter.com/PA6B5T0XZU
— SoftBunty (@BuntyBagshawe) September 27, 20150 -
When people come up with this "sharing in the decision making" argument, I always wonder just how much of a "say" they imagine "we" have.OldKingCole said:I agree with muich of what Mr Jessop says, but I'm going to vote IN. I don't believe anyone can tell me what's going to happen in ten years time, but I'm certain that if were on our own the wind will blow a damn site colder than if we're with in the EU.
As for being like Norway or Switzerland .... I'd raher we were in the tent sharing in the decision making, than outside anxiously waiting to see who was p****ing where!
0 -
Disingenuous, we don't have free movement, we have a discriminatory system based on country of origin not skills or attributes. That needs reversing.Philip_Thompson said:
No objections to that, personally and it is already the existing law afterall and see the hysteria over "IDS sanctions".isam said:
Stop their benefits if they wont do an unskilled job that is vacantPhilip_Thompson said:
Sure it does. It fills a vacancy.blackburn63 said:
Correct, but unrestricted immigration doesn't help the situation.Philip_Thompson said:
Furthermore there's a reason why many of the locals who are on benefits are the ones on benefits rather than employed. It is not due to a lack of jobs.alex. said:
The cafe argument is hardly obvious either. The numbers of "locals" working in local cafes, takeways, restaurants in places like London must be a miniscule percentage based on experience. Even if you managed to fill these jobs with every person on benefits, i suspect that a labour shortage would emerge pretty rapidly. And customer service would go rapidly down the pan, as the existing workforce is by and large highly motivated to better themselves which i suspect would be less true of the replacement.rcs1000 said:I'm sorry, but people graduate from the technology department at the University of Krakow and jump on a bus to London. They work for start-ups around Old Street (and other places). They go there because that is where the greatest concentration of start-up tech jobs is in the world, outside Silicon Valley.
These guys are 21, 22, 23: they don't fill in forms, they turn up at Techstars, and the like, and ask for jobs.
Only a closed-minded extremist could deny their are either costs or benefits to free movement. A sane discussion is whether the benefits outweigh the costs, but to claim there are either no costs or no benefits is not rational.
0 -
We have free movement within the EU. I personally don't think that needs reversing but feel free to make the case if you do.blackburn63 said:
Disingenuous, we don't have free movement, we have a discriminatory system based on country of origin not skills or attributes. That needs reversing.Philip_Thompson said:
No objections to that, personally and it is already the existing law afterall and see the hysteria over "IDS sanctions".isam said:
Stop their benefits if they wont do an unskilled job that is vacantPhilip_Thompson said:
Sure it does. It fills a vacancy.blackburn63 said:
Correct, but unrestricted immigration doesn't help the situation.Philip_Thompson said:
Furthermore there's a reason why many of the locals who are on benefits are the ones on benefits rather than employed. It is not due to a lack of jobs.alex. said:
The cafe argument is hardly obvious either. The numbers of "locals" working in local cafes, takeways, restaurants in places like London must be a miniscule percentage based on experience. Even if you managed to fill these jobs with every person on benefits, i suspect that a labour shortage would emerge pretty rapidly. And customer service would go rapidly down the pan, as the existing workforce is by and large highly motivated to better themselves which i suspect would be less true of the replacement.rcs1000 said:I'm sorry, but people graduate from the technology department at the University of Krakow and jump on a bus to London. They work for start-ups around Old Street (and other places). They go there because that is where the greatest concentration of start-up tech jobs is in the world, outside Silicon Valley.
These guys are 21, 22, 23: they don't fill in forms, they turn up at Techstars, and the like, and ask for jobs.
Only a closed-minded extremist could deny their are either costs or benefits to free movement. A sane discussion is whether the benefits outweigh the costs, but to claim there are either no costs or no benefits is not rational.0 -
Messi?
Spurs?
Only if he brings back Bale from the rivals with him....0 -
I was thinking that when I wrote that, but it was a different era.TheScreamingEagles said:
The greatest of them all ratted more than once.Philip_Thompson said:
I don't think so. If he rats twice then he'll have zero credibility and zero trust not to rat a third time.alex. said:
He could credibly return post-referendum IMO.Philip_Thompson said:
Surely he'll go independent if he re-rats. He'll have no credibility left if he defects again and the Tories must like their odds of regaining the seat without him next time given how close they came (against all expectations) this year.peter_from_putney said:Is there a betting market on Carswell defecting back to the Tories? Odds of around 5/2 - 3/1 would seem to be about right.
It would have been one thing if he'd gone independent, but another party is not independent.0 -
Utter nonsense, two friends of mine are waiters, even more are waitresses.surbiton said:
"But there's plenty of kids in Tottenham capable of sweeping the terraces, we don't need to import people with brooms"blackburn63 said:
It seems you're not actually in favour of freedom of movement, nor am I, if Messi wants to sign for Spurs we should be allowed to sign him. But there's plenty of kids in Tottenham capable of sweeping the terraces, we don't need to import people with brooms.rcs1000 said:
I didn't mention barbed wire fencesblackburn63 said:So if we leave the EU and introduce a visa system along the lines of Australia and Canada, those bright Poles will still be allowed, I hope encouraged, to come here.
Your view is contradictory, you mention Norway and Switzerlandland then suggest we'll be building a Hungarian style barbed wire fence. We need and want bright young graduates. I'm sure you can think of one or two we don't want or need.
And neither Australia not Canada has a thriving tech start-up scene.
Your 21 year old tech graduate is going where he and is opera singing girlfriend can find work. And that's London.
Amuse yourself: go the incubator sites (Techstars and the like). Go through to the sires of the individual investments they make. And count the number of foreigners (mostly Eastern Europeans).
There is nothing amazing that London has, that Berlin does not. It wouldn't take much to move the centre of tech innovation Eastwards.
Look: it's perfectly reasoanable and obviously correct to say that freedom of movement has costs. But it also has benefits. You need to accept that whichever route you choose has costs.
Really ? Even 40 years ago, you could not get a single "waiter" who was English apart from very, very posh places. I am sure that is the situation even today.
0 -
I do remember a conference speech [ in Blackpool, I think ] where right at the start of the speech she pointed to the back of the hall where she used to stand with the Empire loyalists. If was one of her earlier speeches and may even be while as the LoTO.foxinsoxuk said:
I don't think so. Though originally a Conservative pressure group, by the time Maggie was in politics they had split with One Nation Conservatism, contested a few seats in the sixties then the rump party joined the National Front at its foundation.surbiton said:
Wasn't Thatcher one of the Empire Loyalists ?OldKingCole said:
When I were a lad, as they say, there was something called the League of Empire Loyalists. To be fair, it didn't have the support UKIP had ... don't recall it ever really fighting aGeneral Election ....normally supported the Tories, but whatever happened to it?JEO said:
UKIP won't be finished as long as we stay in an unreformed EU. Even afterwards, they could stay alive as long as immigration levels remain unaddressed.Stark_Dawning said:Yes, UKIP is finished. It was an interesting fad for a bit, but I suspect it will be all but forgotten in a few year's time. The interesting question is what will happen to Farage's disciples. I suspect many will decamp to Corbyn's Labour. He seems to provide the naughtiness most of them crave.
I assume the members just died off.
Like UKIP's will!0 -
I absolutely believe it needs reversing, why should people from Europe be given preferential treatment? You can't have it both ways - do you want the best ie a level playing field, or do you want some to have an unfair advantage?Philip_Thompson said:
We have free movement within the EU. I personally don't think that needs reversing but feel free to make the case if you do.blackburn63 said:
Disingenuous, we don't have free movement, we have a discriminatory system based on country of origin not skills or attributes. That needs reversing.Philip_Thompson said:
No objections to that, personally and it is already the existing law afterall and see the hysteria over "IDS sanctions".isam said:
Stop their benefits if they wont do an unskilled job that is vacantPhilip_Thompson said:
Sure it does. It fills a vacancy.blackburn63 said:
Correct, but unrestricted immigration doesn't help the situation.Philip_Thompson said:
Furthermore there's a reason why many of the locals who are on benefits are the ones on benefits rather than employed. It is not due to a lack of jobs.alex. said:
The cafe argument is hardly obvious either. The numbers of "locals" working in local cafes, takeways, restaurants in places like London must be a miniscule percentage based on experience. Even if you managed to fill these jobs with every person on benefits, i suspect that a labour shortage would emerge pretty rapidly. And customer service would go rapidly down the pan, as the existing workforce is by and large highly motivated to better themselves which i suspect would be less true of the replacement.rcs1000 said:I'm sorry, but people graduate from the technology department at the University of Krakow and jump on a bus to London. They work for start-ups around Old Street (and other places). They go there because that is where the greatest concentration of start-up tech jobs is in the world, outside Silicon Valley.
These guys are 21, 22, 23: they don't fill in forms, they turn up at Techstars, and the like, and ask for jobs.
Only a closed-minded extremist could deny their are either costs or benefits to free movement. A sane discussion is whether the benefits outweigh the costs, but to claim there are either no costs or no benefits is not rational.
0 -
Members of a club have rights which non-members don't. Is that breaking news ?blackburn63 said:
I absolutely believe it needs reversing, why should people from Europe be given preferential treatment? You can't have it both ways - do you want the best ie a level playing field, or do you want some to have an unfair advantage?Philip_Thompson said:
We have free movement within the EU. I personally don't think that needs reversing but feel free to make the case if you do.blackburn63 said:
Disingenuous, we don't have free movement, we have a discriminatory system based on country of origin not skills or attributes. That needs reversing.Philip_Thompson said:
No objections to that, personally and it is already the existing law afterall and see the hysteria over "IDS sanctions".isam said:
Stop their benefits if they wont do an unskilled job that is vacantPhilip_Thompson said:
Sure it does. It fills a vacancy.blackburn63 said:
Correct, but unrestricted immigration doesn't help the situation.Philip_Thompson said:
Furthermore there's a reason why many of the locals who are on benefits are the ones on benefits rather than employed. It is not due to a lack of jobs.alex. said:
The cafe argument is hardly obvious either. The numbers of "locals" working in local cafes, takeways, restaurants in places like London must be a miniscule percentage based on experience. Even if you managed to fill these jobs with every person on benefits, i suspect that a labour shortage would emerge pretty rapidly. And customer service would go rapidly down the pan, as the existing workforce is by and large highly motivated to better themselves which i suspect would be less true of the replacement.rcs1000 said:I'm sorry, but people graduate from the technology department at the University of Krakow and jump on a bus to London. They work for start-ups around Old Street (and other places). They go there because that is where the greatest concentration of start-up tech jobs is in the world, outside Silicon Valley.
These guys are 21, 22, 23: they don't fill in forms, they turn up at Techstars, and the like, and ask for jobs.
Only a closed-minded extremist could deny their are either costs or benefits to free movement. A sane discussion is whether the benefits outweigh the costs, but to claim there are either no costs or no benefits is not rational.0 -
44.7 for JxSI 3.55% reporting0
-
Yes it does. A welfare bill of the same number shared between more tax payers is a cut.blackburn63 said:
But it doesn't cut the welfare bill, something I assume you're in favour of.Philip_Thompson said:
Sure it does. It fills a vacancy.blackburn63 said:
Correct, but unrestricted immigration doesn't help the situation.Philip_Thompson said:
Furthermore there's a reason why many of the locals who are on benefits are the ones on benefits rather than employed. It is not due to a lack of jobs.alex. said:
The cafe argument is hardly obvious either. The numbers of "locals" working in local cafes, takeways, restaurants in places like London must be a miniscule percentage based on experience. Even if you managed to fill these jobs with every person on benefits, i suspect that a labour shortage would emerge pretty rapidly. And customer service would go rapidly down the pan, as the existing workforce is by and large highly motivated to better themselves which i suspect would be less true of the replacement.rcs1000 said:I'm sorry, but people graduate from the technology department at the University of Krakow and jump on a bus to London. They work for start-ups around Old Street (and other places). They go there because that is where the greatest concentration of start-up tech jobs is in the world, outside Silicon Valley.
These guys are 21, 22, 23: they don't fill in forms, they turn up at Techstars, and the like, and ask for jobs.0 -
Where do you live ? How much do they get paid ?blackburn63 said:
Utter nonsense, two friends of mine are waiters, even more are waitresses.surbiton said:
"But there's plenty of kids in Tottenham capable of sweeping the terraces, we don't need to import people with brooms"blackburn63 said:
It seems you're not actually in favour of freedom of movement, nor am I, if Messi wants to sign for Spurs we should be allowed to sign him. But there's plenty of kids in Tottenham capable of sweeping the terraces, we don't need to import people with brooms.rcs1000 said:
I didn't mention barbed wire fencesblackburn63 said:So if we leave the EU and introduce a visa system along the lines of Australia and Canada, those bright Poles will still be allowed, I hope encouraged, to come here.
Your view is contradictory, you mention Norway and Switzerlandland then suggest we'll be building a Hungarian style barbed wire fence. We need and want bright young graduates. I'm sure you can think of one or two we don't want or need.
And neither Australia not Canada has a thriving tech start-up scene.
Your 21 year old tech graduate is going where he and is opera singing girlfriend can find work. And that's London.
Amuse yourself: go the incubator sites (Techstars and the like). Go through to the sires of the individual investments they make. And count the number of foreigners (mostly Eastern Europeans).
There is nothing amazing that London has, that Berlin does not. It wouldn't take much to move the centre of tech innovation Eastwards.
Look: it's perfectly reasoanable and obviously correct to say that freedom of movement has costs. But it also has benefits. You need to accept that whichever route you choose has costs.
Really ? Even 40 years ago, you could not get a single "waiter" who was English apart from very, very posh places. I am sure that is the situation even today.0 -
I want both. If it was up to me I'd extend free no questions asked movement on a reciprocal basis to more nations of a similar culture to ours - ie the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.blackburn63 said:
I absolutely believe it needs reversing, why should people from Europe be given preferential treatment? You can't have it both ways - do you want the best ie a level playing field, or do you want some to have an unfair advantage?Philip_Thompson said:
We have free movement within the EU. I personally don't think that needs reversing but feel free to make the case if you do.blackburn63 said:
Disingenuous, we don't have free movement, we have a discriminatory system based on country of origin not skills or attributes. That needs reversing.Philip_Thompson said:
No objections to that, personally and it is already the existing law afterall and see the hysteria over "IDS sanctions".isam said:
Stop their benefits if they wont do an unskilled job that is vacantPhilip_Thompson said:
Sure it does. It fills a vacancy.blackburn63 said:
Correct, but unrestricted immigration doesn't help the situation.Philip_Thompson said:
Furthermore there's a reason why many of the locals who are on benefits are the ones on benefits rather than employed. It is not due to a lack of jobs.alex. said:
The cafe argument is hardly obvious either. The numbers of "locals" working in local cafes, takeways, restaurants in places like London must be a miniscule percentage based on experience. Even if you managed to fill these jobs with every person on benefits, i suspect that a labour shortage would emerge pretty rapidly. And customer service would go rapidly down the pan, as the existing workforce is by and large highly motivated to better themselves which i suspect would be less true of the replacement.rcs1000 said:I'm sorry, but people graduate from the technology department at the University of Krakow and jump on a bus to London. They work for start-ups around Old Street (and other places). They go there because that is where the greatest concentration of start-up tech jobs is in the world, outside Silicon Valley.
These guys are 21, 22, 23: they don't fill in forms, they turn up at Techstars, and the like, and ask for jobs.
Only a closed-minded extremist could deny their are either costs or benefits to free movement. A sane discussion is whether the benefits outweigh the costs, but to claim there are either no costs or no benefits is not rational.
While using a visa system for those we haven't got such reciprocal deals with.0 -
Correct and it's a club that I don't wish to be a member of, nor do approx 50% of the UK. That may well be breaking news to you.surbiton said:
Members of a club have rights which non-members don't. Is that breaking news ?blackburn63 said:
I absolutely believe it needs reversing, why should people from Europe be given preferential treatment? You can't have it both ways - do you want the best ie a level playing field, or do you want some to have an unfair advantage?Philip_Thompson said:
We have free movement within the EU. I personally don't think that needs reversing but feel free to make the case if you do.blackburn63 said:
Disingenuous, we don't have free movement, we have a discriminatory system based on country of origin not skills or attributes. That needs reversing.Philip_Thompson said:
No objections to that, personally and it is already the existing law afterall and see the hysteria over "IDS sanctions".isam said:
Stop their benefits if they wont do an unskilled job that is vacantPhilip_Thompson said:
Sure it does. It fills a vacancy.blackburn63 said:
Correct, but unrestricted immigration doesn't help the situation.Philip_Thompson said:
Furthermore there's a reason why many of the locals who are on benefits are the ones on benefits rather than employed. It is not due to a lack of jobs.alex. said:
The cafe argument is hardly obvious either. The numbers of "locals" working in local cafes, takeways, restaurants in places like London must be a miniscule percentage based on experience. Even if you managed to fill these jobs with every person on benefits, i suspect that a labour shortage would emerge pretty rapidly. And customer service would go rapidly down the pan, as the existing workforce is by and large highly motivated to better themselves which i suspect would be less true of the replacement.rcs1000 said:I'm sorry, but people graduate from the technology department at the University of Krakow and jump on a bus to London. They work for start-ups around Old Street (and other places). They go there because that is where the greatest concentration of start-up tech jobs is in the world, outside Silicon Valley.
These guys are 21, 22, 23: they don't fill in forms, they turn up at Techstars, and the like, and ask for jobs.
Only a closed-minded extremist could deny their are either costs or benefits to free movement. A sane discussion is whether the benefits outweigh the costs, but to claim there are either no costs or no benefits is not rational.
0 -
If he goes independent then he would have to fund his own by election. If UKIP sack him he might easily just sit tight. If I were him I would just withdraw the whip from myself and sit as an independent!Philip_Thompson said:
I don't think so. If he rats twice then he'll have zero credibility and zero trust not to rat a third time.alex. said:
He could credibly return post-referendum IMO.Philip_Thompson said:
Surely he'll go independent if he re-rats. He'll have no credibility left if he defects again and the Tories must like their odds of regaining the seat without him next time given how close they came (against all expectations) this year.peter_from_putney said:Is there a betting market on Carswell defecting back to the Tories? Odds of around 5/2 - 3/1 would seem to be about right.
It would have been one thing if he'd gone independent, but another party is not independent.0 -
Fox's Ostriches had a poor week too. No goalscorers and Hart in goal.Scrapheap_as_was said:Random comments.
1. Re Suzanne Evans not being a local gal for London - Wales, this is Mark Reckless. Mark Reckless this is Wales?
2. Drop Dier to bench, sell Kane in my fantasy footie = nailed on Spurs win.
3. English Rugby = South African cricketers.
4. Love that pic from This Week re Ms. Evans, the Lady Jane Grey of UKIP.
5. Why is the BBC front page round up on Sunday online always seemingly Observer first and Independent second?
6. Alan Johnson on This Week showed how tribal Labour are - a la Burnham, the party always comes first - he will oppose leaving NATO and not renewing Trident but if the party policy is to do so, then he'll stand on that basis at the next election.
Arsenal were pretty impressive yesterday. Leicester good going forward, but Arsenal were the better finishers and our defence shocking. Time for the tinkerman to do some work on the defence.0 -
We'll see when the referendum happens what percentage agree. According to the latest polls I've seen you're on the losing side currently and I expect (though don't take for granted) a swing against you.blackburn63 said:Correct and it's a club that I don't wish to be a member of, nor do approx 50% of the UK. That may well be breaking news to you.
0 -
Even Blair stood on a platform of unilateral disarmament and leaving the EEC in 1983Scrapheap_as_was said:Random comments.
1. Re Suzanne Evans not being a local gal for London - Wales, this is Mark Reckless. Mark Reckless this is Wales?
2. Drop Dier to bench, sell Kane in my fantasy footie = nailed on Spurs win.
3. English Rugby = South African cricketers.
4. Love that pic from This Week re Ms. Evans, the Lady Jane Grey of UKIP.
5. Why is the BBC front page round up on Sunday online always seemingly Observer first and Independent second?
6. Alan Johnson on This Week showed how tribal Labour are - a la Burnham, the party always comes first - he will oppose leaving NATO and not renewing Trident but if the party policy is to do so, then he'll stand on that basis at the next election.0 -
If a migrant takes a min wage job his tax contribution is negligible. If a welfare claimant takes the same job we save £thousands.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes it does. A welfare bill of the same number shared between more tax payers is a cut.blackburn63 said:
But it doesn't cut the welfare bill, something I assume you're in favour of.Philip_Thompson said:
Sure it does. It fills a vacancy.blackburn63 said:
Correct, but unrestricted immigration doesn't help the situation.Philip_Thompson said:
Furthermore there's a reason why many of the locals who are on benefits are the ones on benefits rather than employed. It is not due to a lack of jobs.alex. said:
The cafe argument is hardly obvious either. The numbers of "locals" working in local cafes, takeways, restaurants in places like London must be a miniscule percentage based on experience. Even if you managed to fill these jobs with every person on benefits, i suspect that a labour shortage would emerge pretty rapidly. And customer service would go rapidly down the pan, as the existing workforce is by and large highly motivated to better themselves which i suspect would be less true of the replacement.rcs1000 said:I'm sorry, but people graduate from the technology department at the University of Krakow and jump on a bus to London. They work for start-ups around Old Street (and other places). They go there because that is where the greatest concentration of start-up tech jobs is in the world, outside Silicon Valley.
These guys are 21, 22, 23: they don't fill in forms, they turn up at Techstars, and the like, and ask for jobs.
I'm always amazed that people don't understand this, actually I think they do but it doesn't suit their entrenched position,
Let's extend your view to its logical conclusion: all UK residents should stop work and claim benefits, the tax contributions from migrants will cover it, what could possible go wrong?
0 -
Wasn't Blair a member of the CND. Cherie certainly was.HYUFD said:
Even Blair stood on a platform of unilateral disarmament and leaving the EEC in 1983Scrapheap_as_was said:Random comments.
1. Re Suzanne Evans not being a local gal for London - Wales, this is Mark Reckless. Mark Reckless this is Wales?
2. Drop Dier to bench, sell Kane in my fantasy footie = nailed on Spurs win.
3. English Rugby = South African cricketers.
4. Love that pic from This Week re Ms. Evans, the Lady Jane Grey of UKIP.
5. Why is the BBC front page round up on Sunday online always seemingly Observer first and Independent second?
6. Alan Johnson on This Week showed how tribal Labour are - a la Burnham, the party always comes first - he will oppose leaving NATO and not renewing Trident but if the party policy is to do so, then he'll stand on that basis at the next election.0 -
60 IN - 40 OUT. The Brits are not mad !Philip_Thompson said:
We'll see when the referendum happens what percentage agree. According to the latest polls I've seen you're on the losing side currently and I expect (though don't take for granted) a swing against you.blackburn63 said:Correct and it's a club that I don't wish to be a member of, nor do approx 50% of the UK. That may well be breaking news to you.
0 -
Of course we will, but as it stand the figure is approx 50%, to deny that is to be ridiculous.Philip_Thompson said:
We'll see when the referendum happens what percentage agree. According to the latest polls I've seen you're on the losing side currently and I expect (though don't take for granted) a swing against you.blackburn63 said:Correct and it's a club that I don't wish to be a member of, nor do approx 50% of the UK. That may well be breaking news to you.
Look, you want to stay in the EU, good for view, I don't.
0 -
Tax contribution is far more than just income tax and national insurance. It is also 20% VAT on almost everything the migrant spends his wages on, 20% VAT on the sales of whatever the company he is working for sells, corporation tax on the profits his company makes, Council Tax on his property, business rates for his employer, employers NI and more.blackburn63 said:
If a migrant takes a min wage job his tax contribution is negligible. If a welfare claimant takes the same job we save £thousands.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes it does. A welfare bill of the same number shared between more tax payers is a cut.blackburn63 said:
But it doesn't cut the welfare bill, something I assume you're in favour of.Philip_Thompson said:
Sure it does. It fills a vacancy.blackburn63 said:
Correct, but unrestricted immigration doesn't help the situation.Philip_Thompson said:
Furthermore there's a reason why many of the locals who are on benefits are the ones on benefits rather than employed. It is not due to a lack of jobs.alex. said:
The cafe argument is hardly obvious either. The numbers of "locals" working in local cafes, takeways, restaurants in places like London must be a miniscule percentage based on experience. Even if you managed to fill these jobs with every person on benefits, i suspect that a labour shortage would emerge pretty rapidly. And customer service would go rapidly down the pan, as the existing workforce is by and large highly motivated to better themselves which i suspect would be less true of the replacement.rcs1000 said:I'm sorry, but people graduate from the technology department at the University of Krakow and jump on a bus to London. They work for start-ups around Old Street (and other places). They go there because that is where the greatest concentration of start-up tech jobs is in the world, outside Silicon Valley.
These guys are 21, 22, 23: they don't fill in forms, they turn up at Techstars, and the like, and ask for jobs.
I'm always amazed that people don't understand this, actually I think they do but it doesn't suit their entrenched position,
Let's extend your view to its logical conclusion: all UK residents should stop work and claim benefits, the tax contributions from migrants will cover it, what could possible go wrong?
That's without getting into the economic multiplier effect.
But keep on with your entrenched views if you wish to ignore the big picture.0 -
Kep an eye on the PSC vote. The higher the more that will indicate a majority anti independence vote. If the new voters are anti-separation they'll go PSC.
Given how tight this will be, nothing much will happen now until the Spanish national election in December. At the very least the PP is going to lose its overall majority. That should clear the way for Catalonia to get a Basque-style settlement. Most Catalans would be fine with that and will endorse it in a referendum.
The PP takes most of the blame for this mess.0 -
A significant number of the people who vote to remain in the EU are happy with the status quo. The EU cannot survive in it's current form so change and more integration is inevitable.surbiton said:
60 IN - 40 OUT. The Brits are not mad !Philip_Thompson said:
We'll see when the referendum happens what percentage agree. According to the latest polls I've seen you're on the losing side currently and I expect (though don't take for granted) a swing against you.blackburn63 said:Correct and it's a club that I don't wish to be a member of, nor do approx 50% of the UK. That may well be breaking news to you.
0 -
New Thread New Thread
0 -
JxSi + CUP now at 49%...0
-
According to the Telegraph it is 27% for leave: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/11617702/poll.htmlblackburn63 said:
Of course we will, but as it stand the figure is approx 50%, to deny that is to be ridiculous.Philip_Thompson said:
We'll see when the referendum happens what percentage agree. According to the latest polls I've seen you're on the losing side currently and I expect (though don't take for granted) a swing against you.blackburn63 said:Correct and it's a club that I don't wish to be a member of, nor do approx 50% of the UK. That may well be breaking news to you.
Look, you want to stay in the EU, good for view, I don't.
27% is around 50% in the same way as Nick Clegg is around Downing Street.0 -
Precisely why Carswell might himself prefer to defect back to the Blue Team!Philip_Thompson said:
Surely he'll go independent if he re-rats. He'll have no credibility left if he defects again and the Tories must like their odds of regaining the seat without him next time given how close they came (against all expectations) this year.peter_from_putney said:Is there a betting market on Carswell defecting back to the Tories? Odds of around 5/2 - 3/1 would seem to be about right.
This would most probably happen post referendum - when irrespective of the outcome, UKIP would cease to have any raison d'être. Based on a timetable ending on 31 Decemmber 2018, I'm prepared wager up to £20 at odds of 3/1 ( I win up to £60 vs a maximum loss of £20) with a PBer having an established and demonstrable record of bona fide betting with others on this site - this is particularly important as PtP no longer appears to be around to act as arbitrator.
This offer remains opens open to the first such taker until 10.00pm tonight.
0 -
Sky news reports on the Trident fudge
One reason Trident was squeezed out, I'm told, was that "Mental Health" and the "NHS" were separated rather than grouped together as usual, creating another rival topic for debate.
So Mr Corbyn avoided his humiliation and the unions triumphed at Labour conference once again - without even having to use their voting muscle.
http://news.sky.com/story/1559870/inside-story-of-how-labour-fudged-trident-vote0 -
Im involved with things on a municipal level, and that report is so glaring in what it is not saying to know that there is most certainly another side to this. Of course whether there is another side or not, a child is dead.JEO said:This shouldn't be allowed to happen:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tragic-two-month-old-baby-6525391
The parents must be besides themselves.0 -
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/27/ashcroft-source-defends-revelations-camerons-student-days
The Cameron machine plays hardball.0 -
The difference being that Catalans are contributors the rest of Spain depends upon and could cope well on their own - and being in the Euro already there is no currency question.SeanT said:Re Catalunya. I recall having a long lunch with some clever Andalusians in Seville a couple of years ago, and this subject came up a lot. They didn't especially like the Catalans ("selfish, workaholic, dull") but were fiercely against Catalunya breaking up Spain.
They told me that Britain was mad to allow Scotland a referendum and such a thing would never come to pass in Spain.
Perhaps the British way, however tumultuous, was better in the end...
Whereas the Scots with the Barnett Formula were never going to step away from the teat that feeds them and the SNP had no answer to the currency question.0 -
Philip_Thompson said:blackburn63 said:Philip_Thompson said:
I think you're now being deliberately obdurate. I've already asked a reasonable question which you avoided. Surely in your world nobody currently living here needs to work, we simply need to import enough people to provide for us so I'll ask again:blackburn63 said:
Tax contribution is far more than just income tax and national insurance. It is also 20% VAT on almost everything the migrant spends his wages on, 20% VAT on the sales of whatever the company he is working for sells, corporation tax on the profits his company makes, Council Tax on his property, business rates for his employer, employers NI and more.Philip_Thompson said:
If a migrant takes a min wage job his tax contribution is negligible. If a welfare claimant takes the same job we save £thousands.blackburn63 said:
Yes it does. A welfare bill of the same number shared between more tax payers is a cut.Philip_Thompson said:
I'm always amazed that people don't understand this, actually I think they do but it doesn't suit their entrenched position,
Let's extend your view to its logical conclusion: all UK residents should stop work and claim benefits, the tax contributions from migrants will cover it, what could possible go wrong?
That's without getting into the economic multiplier effect.
But keep on with your entrenched views if you wish to ignore the big picture.
What could possibly go wrong?
If an unemployed man costs us £20k a year how many immigrants on min wage are required to pay for him?0 -
I answered your opening point and answered the question you would have asked if you understood what you were talking about.blackburn63 said:
I think you're now being deliberately obdurate. I've already asked a reasonable question which you avoided. Surely in your world nobody currently living here needs to work, we simply need to import enough people to provide for us so I'll ask again:Philip_Thompson said:
Tax contribution is far more than just income tax and national insurance. It is also 20% VAT on almost everything the migrant spends his wages on, 20% VAT on the sales of whatever the company he is working for sells, corporation tax on the profits his company makes, Council Tax on his property, business rates for his employer, employers NI and more.blackburn63 said:If a migrant takes a min wage job his tax contribution is negligible. If a welfare claimant takes the same job we save £thousands.
I'm always amazed that people don't understand this, actually I think they do but it doesn't suit their entrenched position,
Let's extend your view to its logical conclusion: all UK residents should stop work and claim benefits, the tax contributions from migrants will cover it, what could possible go wrong?
That's without getting into the economic multiplier effect.
But keep on with your entrenched views if you wish to ignore the big picture.
What could possibly go wrong?
If an unemployed man costs us £20k a year how many immigrants on min wage are required to pay for him?
Nobody is proposing that Brits don't need to work your question is a complete and utter straw man.0 -
Furthermore there's a reason why many of the locals who are on benefits are the ones on benefits rather than employed. It is not due to a lack of jobs.
Correct, but unrestricted immigration doesn't help the situation.
Sure it does. It fills a vacancy.
But it doesn't cut the welfare bill, something I assume you're in favour of.
Yes it does. A welfare bill of the same number shared between more tax payers is a cut.
If a migrant takes a min wage job his tax contribution is negligible. If a welfare claimant takes the same job we save £thousands.
I'm always amazed that people don't understand this, actually I think they do but it doesn't suit their entrenched position,
Let's extend your view to its logical conclusion: all UK residents should stop work and claim benefits, the tax contributions from migrants will cover it, what could possible go wrong?
Tax contribution is far more than just income tax and national insurance. It is also 20% VAT on almost everything the migrant spends his wages on, 20% VAT on the sales of whatever the company he is working for sells, corporation tax on the profits his company makes, Council Tax on his property, business rates for his employer, employers NI and more.
That's without getting into the economic multiplier effect.
But keep on with your entrenched views if you wish to ignore the big picture.
I'm glad we're now getting down to economics. If an unemployed man is on benefits of £20k pa how many immigrants will it take to fund him? My view is its better to get the person already here to take the job, then the welfare bill is cut, something you and IDS want.
Incidentally, how much per week will somebody earning the min wage pay in VAT? £10?
0 -
You didn't answer my question at all, I asked how many immigrants on min wage are required to support one married man with 2 children. It's a very real question.Philip_Thompson said:
I answered your opening point and answered the question you would have asked if you understood what you were talking about.blackburn63 said:
I think you're now being deliberately obdurate. I've already asked a reasonable question which you avoided. Surely in your world nobody currently living here needs to work, we simply need to import enough people to provide for us so I'll ask again:Philip_Thompson said:
Tax contribution is far more than just income tax and national insurance. It is also 20% VAT on almost everything the migrant spends his wages on, 20% VAT on the sales of whatever the company he is working for sells, corporation tax on the profits his company makes, Council Tax on his property, business rates for his employer, employers NI and more.blackburn63 said:If a migrant takes a min wage job his tax contribution is negligible. If a welfare claimant takes the same job we save £thousands.
I'm always amazed that people don't understand this, actually I think they do but it doesn't suit their entrenched position,
Let's extend your view to its logical conclusion: all UK residents should stop work and claim benefits, the tax contributions from migrants will cover it, what could possible go wrong?
That's without getting into the economic multiplier effect.
But keep on with your entrenched views if you wish to ignore the big picture.
What could possibly go wrong?
If an unemployed man costs us £20k a year how many immigrants on min wage are required to pay for him?
Nobody is proposing that Brits don't need to work your question is a complete and utter straw man.
0 -
At Cherie's behest I believesurbiton said:
Wasn't Blair a member of the CND. Cherie certainly was.HYUFD said:
Even Blair stood on a platform of unilateral disarmament and leaving the EEC in 1983Scrapheap_as_was said:Random comments.
1. Re Suzanne Evans not being a local gal for London - Wales, this is Mark Reckless. Mark Reckless this is Wales?
2. Drop Dier to bench, sell Kane in my fantasy footie = nailed on Spurs win.
3. English Rugby = South African cricketers.
4. Love that pic from This Week re Ms. Evans, the Lady Jane Grey of UKIP.
5. Why is the BBC front page round up on Sunday online always seemingly Observer first and Independent second?
6. Alan Johnson on This Week showed how tribal Labour are - a la Burnham, the party always comes first - he will oppose leaving NATO and not renewing Trident but if the party policy is to do so, then he'll stand on that basis at the next election.0 -
No one interested - time to grow upsurbiton said:http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/27/ashcroft-source-defends-revelations-camerons-student-days
The Cameron machine plays hardball.0 -
Oh please!surbiton said:http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/27/ashcroft-source-defends-revelations-camerons-student-days
The Cameron machine plays hardball.
Dellingpole wittered about smoking pot with Cameron at university. Big deal. But Dellingpole knew it was a hatchet job and was happy to cooperate. It's pretty pathetic now moaning about other people not liking his selective disclosures.0 -
Every person deserves their day in court, they also need taken out afterwards, tied to a post and a bullet put in their skull.JEO said:Is the sort of person that moves him and his family to Taliban-controlled Afghanistan for a more Islamic environment the sort of person we want back in the UK?
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/sep/25/last-british-detainee-in-guantanamo-bay-to-be-released0
