How many Romanian/Bulgarian migrants are you predicting?

[porridge]

Kermit power said:

It's an interesting assumption that we're a wealthy country when we've got a national debt of over £30k per working person.

Your Socialist ideal is great in theory, but in practice we simply can't afford it! Unemployment benefits, housing benefits, pensions, healthcare.... It's all got to be paid for somewhere, and we do not have the money to pay for it, hence the vast national debt and our kids' futures being more and more heavily mortgaged.

You say it's not unreasonable for people to expect somewhere warm and dry to live and to be able to feed and clothe their family. Let's flip that round the other way.... Why is it reasonable for people to even have a family if they can't afford to feed and clothe them? Why should the state (which of course actually means taxpayers like us) pay for them to have families?

WTF is wrong with you? Dropped on your head as a child Apologies but getting sick of this. UNCONTROLLED EU IMMIGRATION DOES NOT HELP WITH THE BENEFIT ISSUE AND INSTEAD MAKES IT WORSE. If you have a bee in your bonnet then the last thing you want is uncontrolled immigration on indefinate leave to stay in the UK.

Let me spell it out once again with a picture and the impact of immigration on this.

Picture 1


1) State pension is the single biggest welfare cost. Uncontrolled EU Immigration = More in the future to get old and on mimimum wage means they again will be reliant on the state pension.
2) Old people vote, so government won't cut benefits to rich pensioners. EU Immigration means in the future more people will be getting these perks.
3) In work benefits increase as Immigration lowers wages. So Immigration means more benefits not only for the min wage immigrants, but also the existing workers whose wages drop.
4) The NHS costs go up if the population goes up.

Pic 2


1) As the population increases, the demand for homes increases and rent goes up. The Housing Benefits bill goes up, you do not want uncontrolled immigration if you are against benefits.
2) As rent/mortgage goes up, people have less to spend in the economy- witness the crap sales results of all the retailers this Christmas. This will lead to less new jobs.

Pic 3


1) Minimum wage do not pay much tax and take out more than the put in. It costs London councils £6,000 per child per year in education. Allow in any EU and plenty working immigrant families will come. Just two kids and thats 12k a year taxpayers are paying.

pic 4


Do you see what this shows? Immgrants are not holding up the UK GDP, British workers are. They are not all unemployed and lazy as you seem to be convinced. Immigrants allow low end employers to pay peanuts and exploitation is rife.







I can go on with all the other costs and social factors.


Please STOP bringing up the benefits as an argument for EU immigration, it is a seperate issue that also needs to be controlled.. If you must blame everything on benefits then start another thread.

[blindswelledrat]

Porridge, I love the way that every time someone pulls you up on your xenophobia you claim they are demanding uncontrolled immigration.
Nobody in any of the tens of pages of this thread has been in full support of it. You just fall back on pretending people say that because it's easy to argue against.

[Mrr T]

Digga said:

You called me racist. You have, IMHO, relieved yourself of any right to assert rationality in the debate - that is a particularly low and idiotic blow in a debate such as this.

You can ask all you like (in correct or incorrect grammar - past tense is asked, not ask) but I'm no longer going to stoop to engaging with you.

Oh dam; did not read my reply carefully. I will try to remember in future that "asked" is the past tense. Quite happy to stop commenting on your posts when you engage your brain and stop posting in Daily Mail headlines. Immigration is a complex subject which should be discussed as such.

[Digga]

Mrr T said:

Digga said:

You called me racist. You have, IMHO, relieved yourself of any right to assert rationality in the debate - that is a particularly low and idiotic blow in a debate such as this.

You can ask all you like (in correct or incorrect grammar - past tense is asked, not ask) but I'm no longer going to stoop to engaging with you.

Oh dam; did not read my reply carefully. I will try to remember in future that "asked" is the past tense. Quite happy to stop commenting on your posts when you engage your brain and stop posting in Daily Mail headlines. Immigration is a complex subject which should be discussed as such.

And making ad hominem attacks, calling people racist is part of your rational debating skillset for such complex subjects?

You are totally in the wrong there mate, unless you take that slur back.

[Kermit power]

porridge said:

WTF is wrong with you? Dropped on your head as a child Apologies but getting sick of this. UNCONTROLLED EU IMMIGRATION DOES NOT HELP WITH THE BENEFIT ISSUE AND INSTEAD MAKES IT WORSE. If you have a bee in your bonnet then the last thing you want is uncontrolled immigration on indefinate leave to stay in the UK.

Let me spell it out once again with a picture and the impact of immigration on this.

Picture 1


1) State pension is the single biggest welfare cost. Uncontrolled EU Immigration = More in the future to get old and on mimimum wage means they again will be reliant on the state pension.
2) Old people vote, so government won't cut benefits to rich pensioners. EU Immigration means in the future more people will be getting these perks.
3) In work benefits increase as Immigration lowers wages. So Immigration means more benefits not only for the min wage immigrants, but also the existing workers whose wages drop.
4) The NHS costs go up if the population goes up.

Pic 2


1) As the population increases, the demand for homes increases and rent goes up. The Housing Benefits bill goes up, you do not want uncontrolled immigration if you are against benefits.
2) As rent/mortgage goes up, people have less to spend in the economy- witness the crap sales results of all the retailers this Christmas. This will lead to less new jobs.

Pic 3


1) Minimum wage do not pay much tax and take out more than the put in. It costs London councils £6,000 per child per year in education. Allow in any EU and plenty working immigrant families will come. Just two kids and thats 12k a year taxpayers are paying.

pic 4


Do you see what this shows? Immgrants are not holding up the UK GDP, British workers are. They are not all unemployed and lazy as you seem to be convinced. Immigrants allow low end employers to pay peanuts and exploitation is rife.







I can go on with all the other costs and social factors.


Please STOP bringing up the benefits as an argument for EU immigration, it is a seperate issue that also needs to be controlled.. If you must blame everything on benefits then start another thread.

All of which is very pretty, but completely irrelevant.

Our country is attractive to immigrants either directly (they get to claim them) or indirectly (homegrown people can claim them rather than doing the low paid jobs) because of our benefits system.

Fix the benefits problem, and you will have done a huge amount to fix the immigration problem.

Yes, of course, the benefits bill would still be a problem even if we didn't have a single immigrant, but that doesn't mean it isn't directly relevant to immigration.

[Mrr T]

Guam said:

Did I go and interview them lol?
Of course not, however I trust the local businessmen who adressed my questions regarding what it was when I spotted it, I was pulled over for a break right after I spotted it.
They told me they were Romanians, I figured as they lived there, they would be fairly credible in that regard.

Oddly enough I tend to listen to Locals regarding local issues when in their bailiwick

So you did not interview them, You spoke to a local businessman, but then you did pull over, and spoke to them and they said they where Romanian. Very odd post. I assume if you spoke to them they spoke English.

Now i am not saying there may not be some Romanians living under tarpaulin by the road side.i am saying even if what you say is true its a very tiny number.

The title of this tread was how many Romanians and Bulgarians would come. I think the answer so far is not many.

[Mermaid]

Mrr T said:

..The title of this tread was how many Romanians and Bulgarians would come. I think the answer so far is not many.

So the campaign to dissuade them worked .

Or are they PR savvy & do they have a cunning plan?

[blindswelledrat]

Guam said:

Well this high profile encounter is going well for Keith Vaz.

The "First" migrant has done a Houdini apparently

What does any of that mean?

[Mrr T]

Guam said:

Of course not, however I trust the local businessmen who adressed my questions regarding what it was when I spotted it, I was pulled over for a break right after I spotted it.
They told me they were Romanians, I figured as they lived there, they would be fairly credible in that regard.

So "They" (the businessmen) told you "they" (the people living under the tarpaulin) where Romanian. You can understand why I was confused.

I said I do not disbelieve you. I just wonder whether you are suggest this one example means you think all Romanian and Bulgarian immigrants are going to set up tarpaulin camps?

[porridge]

Kermit power said:

All of which is very pretty, but completely irrelevant.

Our country is attractive to immigrants either directly (they get to claim them) or indirectly (homegrown people can claim them rather than doing the low paid jobs) because of our benefits system.

Fix the benefits problem, and you will have done a huge amount to fix the immigration problem.

Yes, of course, the benefits bill would still be a problem even if we didn't have a single immigrant, but that doesn't mean it isn't directly relevant to immigration.

You fail to address any of it, including if you were dropped on your head as a baby!

once again

MINIMUM WAGES IN THE UK ARE 6-8x MORE THAN EASTERN EUROPE. EVEN WITHOUT BENEFITS THIS IMMIGRATION WILL NOT STOP.

[porridge]

blindswelledrat said:

Porridge, I love the way that every time someone pulls you up on your xenophobia you claim they are demanding uncontrolled immigration.
Nobody in any of the tens of pages of this thread has been in full support of it. You just fall back on pretending people say that because it's easy to argue against.

Again you falsely accuse me of Xenophobia to stir things up. Why do you want to have the same conversation again and again? Go troll elsewhere.

[blindswelledrat]

porridge said:

MINIMUM WAGES IN THE UK ARE 6-8x MORE THAN EASTERN EUROPE. EVEN WITHOUT BENEFITS THIS IMMIGRATION WILL NOT STOP.

You're ignoring the point.
If there were no benefits then the current workshy would work these minimum wage jobs and there would only be enough jobs for a limited number of immigrants. Number of jobs available is equally important as salary for immigrants.

[porridge]

blindswelledrat said:

porridge said:

MINIMUM WAGES IN THE UK ARE 6-8x MORE THAN EASTERN EUROPE. EVEN WITHOUT BENEFITS THIS IMMIGRATION WILL NOT STOP.

You're ignoring the point.
If there were no benefits then the current workshy would work these minimum wage jobs and there would only be enough jobs for a limited number of immigrants. Number of jobs available is equally important as salary for immigrants.

You are being unrealistic.

The UK has a system where the minimum wage is not enough to live on and the government tops up with in-work benefits, perks and pensions. If there were "no benefits" than wages would rise due to

1)as we live in a democracy and people would vote for a party that would recognise this.
2) Benefits helps the fundamental basis of our capitalist society- consumerism. Benefits people don't save, they spend spend spend- a indirect method of governmental stimulus. If no benefits then you would need to ensure a surplus of income for those on lower incomes (the majority in a wage pyramid) to still be able to have spare cash to spend.

This cannot be switched off overnight, benefit withdrawal needs a prolonged gradual withdrawal, so you or Kermit banging on with "stop benefits and we will be ok" is unrealistic over the short to medium term.

[vonuber]

quote=porridge]
MINIMUM WAGES IN THE UK ARE 6-8x MORE THAN EASTERN EUROPE. EVEN WITHOUT BENEFITS THIS IMMIGRATION WILL NOT STOP.
[/quote]

The cost of living in Eastern Europe is probably 6-8 times less. In fact having actually been to Romania (and actually know some Romanians and speak to them) for a lot of things it is certainly so.

[porridge]

vonuber said:

porridge said:

MINIMUM WAGES IN THE UK ARE 6-8x MORE THAN EASTERN EUROPE. EVEN WITHOUT BENEFITS THIS IMMIGRATION WILL NOT STOP.

The cost of living in Eastern Europe is probably 6-8 times less. In fact having actually been to Romania (and actually know some Romanians and speak to them) for a lot of things it is certainly so.

Yes, I know and do not need to visit that to know... but you are comparing like for like?

Many young men come over alone and live 10 to a flat (at which point the cost of living is not 6-8 times the UK) and send money back home. It is the same as occurred in the 70s & 80s, poor immigrants will always squeeze into a property and make enough to go back home much wealthier or establish themselves here.

I want our young to be just as flexible and move for jobs around the UK (as they already do), but I do not want them to to be forced to live 10 to a flat in-order to compete with these immigrants. We are not a 3rd world country and do not want to introduce such living standards as the norm.

[2354519y]

Everybody assumes that eastern europeans automatically go on welfare and " drain" the NHS, whatever that is. Working on the frontline of the nhs i hardly ever see any young poles or other Slavic peoples. The majority of our workload is elderly/middle aged native British eople. Comprising mostly people with heart disease or diabetes, or musculoskeletal problems or asthmatics.

[blindswelledrat]

porridge said:

You are being unrealistic.

The UK has a system where the minimum wage is not enough to live on and the government tops up with in-work benefits, perks and pensions. If there were "no benefits" than wages would rise due to

1)as we live in a democracy and people would vote for a party that would recognise this.
2) Benefits helps the fundamental basis of our capitalist society- consumerism. Benefits people don't save, they spend spend spend- a indirect method of governmental stimulus. If no benefits then you would need to ensure a surplus of income for those on lower incomes (the majority in a wage pyramid) to still be able to have spare cash to spend.

This cannot be switched off overnight, benefit withdrawal needs a prolonged gradual withdrawal, so you or Kermit banging on with "stop benefits and we will be ok" is unrealistic over the short to medium term.

Of course I agree it's not black and white and I don't advocate cutting off all benefits. I also realise that you cant cut it off overnight.
We are just discussing general theory here, which you can't disprove by policy minutiae
Just as we cant switch off benefits overnight, we cant switch off immigration overnight so it's not even worth mentioning.
SO back to the actual point you've ignored. If the unemployed British were prepared to work then there would be less jobs for the immigrants and that would naturally curtail it. Economic migrants to not go to places where there is no work available.

[porridge]

blindswelledrat said:

porridge said:

You are being unrealistic.

The UK has a system where the minimum wage is not enough to live on and the government tops up with in-work benefits, perks and pensions. If there were "no benefits" than wages would rise due to

1)as we live in a democracy and people would vote for a party that would recognise this.
2) Benefits helps the fundamental basis of our capitalist society- consumerism. Benefits people don't save, they spend spend spend- a indirect method of governmental stimulus. If no benefits then you would need to ensure a surplus of income for those on lower incomes (the majority in a wage pyramid) to still be able to have spare cash to spend.

This cannot be switched off overnight, benefit withdrawal needs a prolonged gradual withdrawal, so you or Kermit banging on with "stop benefits and we will be ok" is unrealistic over the short to medium term.

Of course I agree it's not black and white and I don't advocate cutting off all benefits. I also realise that you cant cut it off overnight.
We are just discussing general theory here, which you can't disprove by policy minutiae
Just as we cant switch off benefits overnight, we cant switch off immigration overnight so it's not even worth mentioning.

Why not? We could introduce limits/points based system and other rules in a matter of time. Let the EU huff and puff.

Bulgaria got borders opened and then broke the EU Agreement- introduced a new law banning non-Bulgarians from buying land in Bulgaria. The EU has said "oh that is very naughty" http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/01/06/344094/bul...

blindswelledrat said:

SO back to the actual point you've ignored. If the unemployed British were prepared to work then there would be less jobs for the immigrants and that would naturally curtail it. Economic migrants to not go to places where there is no work available.

As said 2 posts above:
I want our young to be just as flexible and move for jobs around the UK (as they already do), but I do not want them to to be forced to live 10 to a flat in-order to compete with these immigrants. We are not a 3rd world country and do not want to introduce such living standards as the norm.

Edited by porridge on Friday 10th January 13:48

[WinstonWolf]

Mrr T said:

WinstonWolf said:

I will take a picture of a high street in the UK for you next time I'm there. There is one 'English' shop left, the rest are Polish/Lithuanian/Latvian supermarkets.

I have seen them and shop often in one. When you can explain the connection between a ghetto and a supermarket let me know.

By the way my town is also full of Chinese and Indian restaurants.

You know precisely what I mean, I'll give you the benefit of intelligence for now. They call themselves supermarkets but basically they are shops that sell cheap alcohol, the patrons stand around outside drinking and the area degenerates over time.

As I said, I'll take a picture next time I'm there to show how the area has changed.

[mrpurple]

How about the EU setting the levels for all benefits?

For example set levels of payment that ALL members have to pay and setting out directly the criteria for who receives them. That way people that rely on benefits will migrate to the country where the cost of living is the lowest perhaps?

Just a thought?