Immigration

[markcoznottz]

Countdown said:

markcoznottz said:

Knock that fking posturing dragons den macho posturing on the head, how do you know they are 'thriving'?? Have you examined thier books, spoke to thier accountant?

I'm an accountant and I've seen lots of "books", but in all honesty, I know which of the tradesmen I'm using are doing well and which ones probably aren't, without looking at their accounts.

The ones that are doing well are the ones I regularly use and are often hard to get hold of because they have a few other jobs on (usually for family or friends). They're the ones with nice houses and cars. They're the ones that turn up on a cold wet November night to fix a tenant's gas boiler. They're the ones that are not necessarily the cheapest but will do an honest job for a fair price.

I couldn't tell you how the cr@p ones are doing because I only used them once.

markcoznottz said:

We are talking about long term trends here.

The long term trends are this; As a result of the global economy, migration, and transport links there are no barriers to entry to low skilled jobs. That is why most of the low-skilled assembly jobs have been relocated to Countries where labour is cheap. Even the high skilled stuff is going the same way. Lots of UK industries have experienced this (have a look at all the cotton mills lying derelict in the North). If you want to compete you need something that sets you apart, whether that's quality, technical knowledge, design, ideally something that can't be replicated 20 minutes later in a chinese CAD office, or by a polish plumber 20 minutes after he steps off a Ryanair flight.

You're the best. You know the financial validity of a tradesman/ small business by what car they drive and the size of thier house. Maybe they inherited the house? Endless variables. In fact most small businesses would need TWICE the workload prior to 2007 just to stand still, when factoring QE, inflation, fuel prices, negative return on savings. Pertinent post by someone just now, how happy would the more professional trades be if thier trade was undercut? Not very il bet, but it won't happen because it's a closed shop. Same as the civil service, they look after thier own, despite thier enthusiasm for immigrant labour in other trades.

[Countdown]

Funkycoldribena said:

I do wonder if you would have the same opinions if we suddenly became flooded with accountants willing to work for a lot less than you?

There was a rush to outsource routine tax stuff to India some time ago.

http://www.fintaxexperts.com/

http://www.outsource2india.com/financial/UK-accoun...

It's not my main area of work (although I do dabble, mainly to keep my hand in). However friends who are full time Practice Accountants don't seem to have been overly affected by it.

Like with everything else in life, my view is "if it happens, it happens".

[Countdown]

markcoznottz said:

You're the best. You know the financial validity of a tradesman/ small business by what car they drive and the size of thier house. Maybe they inherited the house? Endless variables.

Of course. And they could have secretly won the Lottery. You missed off the variable about "how busy they are". If I'm paying somebody £2000 to put a boiler in, and they can't do it for several weeks, it suggests they're quite busy - no? Plus, knowing how much he's charged friends/family I can reasonably assess that he's doing reasonable well.

markcoznottz said:

In fact most small businesses would need TWICE the workload prior to 2007 just to stand still, when factoring QE, inflation, fuel prices, negative return on savings.

Depends what line of work you're in. Mortgages for investment properties are dirt cheap, inflation is at relatively low levels, fuel prices depend on what line of work you're in. At the end of the day it depends on how much you can charge per hour and, in turn, that depends on how good you are compared with your competition.

A family member fixes Pcs for a living, charges between £20 and £30ph and makes £800pw gross fairly regularly, Another family member took a gamble, invested in a catering business and his share (gross) is about £1k per week (admittedly stupid hours but that's the way it is).

markcoznottz said:

Pertinent post by someone just now, how happy would the more professional trades be if thier trade was undercut? Not very il bet, but it won't happen because it's a closed shop.

It isn't a closed shop. Barriers to entering accountancy are quite low. Any monkey with an excel spreadsheet can call himself an Accountant and charge £35 for completing an SA100. If you were able to differentiate yourself by providing knowledge/expertise which your competitors couldn't replicate you wouldn't be asking for protection.

[markcoznottz]

Countdown said:

It isn't a closed shop. Barriers to entering accountancy are quite low. Any monkey with an excel spreadsheet can call himself an Accountant and charge £35 for completing an SA100. If you were able to differentiate yourself by providing knowledge/expertise which your competitors couldn't replicate you wouldn't be asking for protection.

And for another two weeks the phone might not even ring but you wouldn't see that because you' know'. Turnover is not profit, and as for investment properties they are cheap for a reason, good tennants are hard to find.

[Countdown]

markcoznottz said:

Countdown said:

It isn't a closed shop. Barriers to entering accountancy are quite low. Any monkey with an excel spreadsheet can call himself an Accountant and charge £35 for completing an SA100. If you were able to differentiate yourself by providing knowledge/expertise which your competitors couldn't replicate you wouldn't be asking for protection.

And for another two weeks the phone might not even ring but you wouldn't see that because you' know'. Turnover is not profit, and as for investment properties they are cheap for a reason, good tennants are hard to find.

Whether you want to accept it or not, there are people out there who are doing well and who don't seem to be affected by the "rampant" immigration and the meltdown in the global economy. But it takes a bit of "get up and go" (I guess much like that demonstrated by the Polish tradesmen ).

[AJS-]

cymtriks said:

Amazing how people try to avoid this issue by playing the race card.

Time for some awkward questions which have nothing to do with race at all:

• Where are millions of extra people going to live? Which green belts, flood plains, ancient heaths or woodlands will have to go to build the houses? Remember we are talking about several extra cities the size of Birmingham. Remember that this will be on top of the housing problems that we already have.

How about we knock some of the crusty old victorian terraces down, such as the one I used to live in in zone 2, in London, and build some proper modern, purpose built condos that would actually accommodate the people who want to live there. In which case, I imagine it would be quite possible to actually free up land.

cymtriks said:

*Which valleys will have to be flooded to make new reservoirs? Answer the question and let's hear the views of the people who live there.

Or we could have a couple of desalination plants.

cymtriks said:

*We are told that it's a good thing because there are so many immigrant experts. Are there actually more doctors and scientists per head among immigrants than among those already here? If not then this is a false argument as they won't even be covering their own needs. If true then why isn't our really great (as evidenced by those stunning A level grades) education system generating our own experts? Is it ethical or sustainable to import more and more experts from abroad while failing to deal with our own inability to nurture enough ourselves?

Make sure it's more than the local population by requiring it for a visa.

Why aren't we producing our own experts - I would hazard a guess that it's because the financial incentives are skewed by the NHS, punitive taxation and exorbitant housing costs.

cymtriks said:

• The work ethic issue keeps being mentioned. Why is this so noticeable? Why is the only solution to import workers from abroad? Why won't we correct something so obviously wrong with our systems?

Because come election time, ~55% of the people realise that their primary source of income is the state, and consistently vote against governments who try to reduce it's size.

cymtriks said:

• When assimilation is complete (don't hold your breath) what makes you think that the work ethic we hear so much about will still be there? After all the only solution is to give up on our own and import people. If it isn't the only solution then why are we still importing workers on this pretext after so long?

Because the world is a big place and the mandated minimum wage is easily enough to attract millions more people to the UK. Why pay more?

cymtriks said:

• Given that it takes a long time and a lot of money to plan and build new roads, schools and hospitals how will our existing services cope until the the new worker's taxes start to work through the system. Will more debt be required? More PFI? Higher taxes for those already here to fill the gap? Remember that this is a rolling problem, not a one off event.

How about we allow the market to decide on these questions?

cymtriks said:

*How much population is enough? 70 Million? 80 Million? 100 Million?

93,783,541
Or any other arbitrary number you care to throw out there.

cymtriks said:

*Why can't we have a "one in - one out" or even "one in - two out" policy?

Why?

Is the goal to have an empty country?

[Countdown]

markcoznottz said:

and as for investment properties they are cheap for a reason, good tennants are hard to find.

Well, I try to rent out to Polish people. Excellent tenants. 8 of them in a 1 bedroom flat. Yields are roughly 100% and I have a 24 hour onsite Repairs & Maintenance service.

[Halb]

vonuber said:

unrepentant said:

Who are our own people?

Those who can trace an unbroken line back 10,000 years obviously.

The Beaker people? Or is it the Curved Ware people, who the frig is related to them nowadays?

[Pints]

FrankyH said:

A few immigrants, and there would have been no problem. We are way beyond that stage now. The problem is they want to allow immigration until we are outnumbered in our own country (genocide), surely any reasonable person can see what I am saying here?
We have a choice here, this is not something you deliberately choose (obviously).

I was born and educated in South Africa. I moved to the UK on a Dutch passport a little over a decade ago.
I now have two British born daughters, pay my taxes and would dearly love to call myself British (I've embraced everything about my adopted country).

I'm interested and curious to know what your thoughts are on an immigrant such as myself. Given the chance, would you choose to send me "home"?

[Halb]

FrankyH said:

They already make up 20 odd %, isn't that enough ( too much in fact)? Imagine say China making 20 odd % of China non Chinese, or Japan making Japan 20 odd % non Japanese, or Pakistan making Pakistan 20 odd % non Pakistani, and still letting more in, and you will see how unnatural and insane and wrong this is. We are not doing this to our own people in our own country either.

20 odd %? Where is that number from?

I wouldn't wish to emulate the Japanese, they are a particularly racist lot.

[markcoznottz]

Countdown said:

Well, I try to rent out to Polish people. Excellent tenants. 8 of them in a 1 bedroom flat. Yields are roughly 100% and I hWave a 24 hour onsite Repairs & Maintenance service.

You strike me as the answer for everything type. Notwithstanding your reply in this case which was meant in jest.

[Halb]

markcoznottz said:

You strike me as the answer for everything type. Notwithstanding your reply in this case which was meant in jest.

Aha! An accountant!

[Mermaid]

If the government was to say " with immediate effect, and for 3 years, there will be zero immigration whilst we sort ourselves out. Once we are in rude health, we will re-open the gates on a measured basis."

Would the majority of the population be in favour of that decision?

[Lost_BMW]

Victor McDade said:

Yes lets compare something which is legal to something which isn't.

Lots of local businesses and tradesmen are still thriving despite the 'genocidal' immigration we're facing. Those which aren't need to look at their business model again or they need to ask themselves if they're really cut out for it all.

Oh for Christ's sake, another one!

Nurse, irony bypass, quick...

[Lost_BMW]

TheHeretic said:

Lost_BMW said:

Or irony - you know the sort of thing some of us use to cope with our frustrations? But given that you clearly haven't the nous to spot it or the sense of levity to put up with it I guess the silliness of the (non) 'argument' just added to your angst.

I'll have to remember that PH is only for serious people like you to educate the rest of us fools in politics, society and the way of the world. Or you could just become a politician and do it for some actual purpose...


"Crosses TheHeretic off dinner party invitation list."

I'm not sure what was ironic about your post, but don't fret.

Yes, I know!

[Engineer1]

Mermaid said:

If the government was to say " with immediate effect, and for 3 years, there will be zero immigration whilst we sort ourselves out. Once we are in rude health, we will re-open the gates on a measured basis."

Would the majority of the population be in favour of that decision?

Possibly if the Red Tops and the Daily Mail sold it at the right time.

Would it be a good idea though? Would it even work? No because it would cost a freaking fortune to implement, enforce and defend, that and there would still be people working out tricks to get round it.

[Chris Type R]

Mermaid said:

If the government was to say " with immediate effect, and for 3 years, there will be zero immigration whilst we sort ourselves out. Once we are in rude health, we will re-open the gates on a measured basis."

Would the majority of the population be in favour of that decision?

Not possible while the UK is part of the EU.

[Chris Type R]

Mermaid said:

I reckon a high percentage of immigrants would prefer a pause/ serious slowdown of more immigration. Finely balanced.

I'd agree with this. Been living here since 1993.

[cymtriks]

AJS- said:

cymtriks said:

*Where are millions of extra people going to live? Which green belts, flood plains, ancient heaths or woodlands will have to go to build the houses? Remember we are talking about several extra cities the size of Birmingham. Remember that this will be on top of the housing problems that we already have.

How about we knock some of the crusty old victorian terraces down, such as the one I used to live in in zone 2, in London, and build some proper modern, purpose built condos that would actually accommodate the people who want to live there. In which case, I imagine it would be quite possible to actually free up land.

I would imagine that this wouldn't increase the overall land use of an entire city by very much. Then you would have the problem of actually convincing all of the current occupants to leave.

We are talking about several extra cities the size of Birmingham, your solution is hopelessly inadequate.

AJS- said:

cymtriks said:

*Which valleys will have to be flooded to make new reservoirs? Answer the question and let's hear the views of the people who live there.

Or we could have a couple of desalination plants.

Very expensive and very energy intensive. Why should we pay for this for people who have yet to arrive here when there is no benefit to us at all? How big will these plants have to be to provide for millions of people, where will they be put, what do people living there think?

The same questions, always ducked.

AJS- said:

cymtriks said:

*We are told that it's a good thing because there are so many immigrant experts. Are there actually more doctors and scientists per head among immigrants than among those already here? If not then this is a false argument as they won't even be covering their own needs. If true then why isn't our really great (as evidenced by those stunning A level grades) education system generating our own experts? Is it ethical or sustainable to import more and more experts from abroad while failing to deal with our own inability to nurture enough ourselves?

Make sure it's more than the local population by requiring it for a visa.

Why aren't we producing our own experts - I would hazard a guess that it's because the financial incentives are skewed by the NHS, punitive taxation and exorbitant housing costs.

cymtriks said:

• The work ethic issue keeps being mentioned. Why is this so noticeable? Why is the only solution to import workers from abroad? Why won't we correct something so obviously wrong with our systems?

Because come election time, ~55% of the people realise that their primary source of income is the state, and consistently vote against governments who try to reduce it's size.

cymtriks said:

• When assimilation is complete (don't hold your breath) what makes you think that the work ethic we hear so much about will still be there? After all the only solution is to give up on our own and import people. If it isn't the only solution then why are we still importing workers on this pretext after so long?

Because the world is a big place and the mandated minimum wage is easily enough to attract millions more people to the UK. Why pay more?

Why don't we face up to these issues first? Why is our solution to utterly fail to deal with this and then say "Oh well, we'll just import some people, and when they go the same way we'll just import a few more...". This is obviously unsustainable.

AJS- said:

cymtriks said:

• Given that it takes a long time and a lot of money to plan and build new roads, schools and hospitals how will our existing services cope until the the new worker's taxes start to work through the system. Will more debt be required? More PFI? Higher taxes for those already here to fill the gap? Remember that this is a rolling problem, not a one off event.

How about we allow the market to decide on these questions?

That's just it though isn't it, the market won't so it will turn out to be the taxpayer.
Again.

AJS- said:

cymtriks said:

*How much population is enough? 70 Million? 80 Million? 100 Million?

93,783,541
Or any other arbitrary number you care to throw out there.

cymtriks said:

*Why can't we have a "one in - one out" or even "one in - two out" policy?

Why?

Is the goal to have an empty country?

Is the goal to have 70 Million?
Why?
What would be wrong with 50 Million?

All of the issues I've mentioned will be made worse by increased population and many would be improved with less. At the moment our solution is unsustainable, it relies on an endless stream of new people not yet affected by the problems our systems create, to hide those problems and then still more people to hide the problem that they too will be affected.

[Engineer1]

Isn't the issue with the NHS is that its training is respected world wide so get your qualifications then emigrate to a country that pays better. We get the same thing with Commonwealth countries, they train there and work for the NHS getting good money.