I love the EU because...

[crankedup]

jonnyb said:

markcoznottz said:

crankedup said:

battered said:

crankedup said:

battered said:

Balmoral said:

battered said:

What has been proven by the ONS is that the EU migrants to UK have on the whole contributed more money in taxes etc than they have cost.

I don't understand the distinction being made, surely it would be the same for non EU migrants too? Even more so, as they don't enjoy the same rights, privileges or entitlements.

Edited by Balmoral on Thursday 30th March 16:15

Possibly so. However the question was "...the EU" so I'm talking about EU migrants making a positive contribution, which is more than can be said for certain sectors of the indigenous population. This may also be true about non-EU migrants, it doesn't detract from the positive contribution of the EU set.

The question is just how long can the UK sustain the number of immigrants entering the UK.
If, for example, Romainia, Bulgaria, Poland offered reciprocal benifit s in terms of employment and Social care perhaps UK residents may have been tempted to cross over to those Countries. As it is it seems that the UK is the number one distination for way too many eu and other immigrants. Be good to have some control over our borders

You can say the same about the north of England and the south east. Why is all the work in London, why do we allow people like me to travel from the north (Leeds) every week? How long can London sustain this? (Erm...indefinitely, it seems). I work in a factory in outer SE London, inside the M25, near the Dartford Xing. They pay for me to be in an hotel. Also there - a bloke from Selby. Another from Wakefield. Leicester. Milton K. Birmingham. All of us on the M11/A1/M1/M6 tonight. Why? Because it pays. Because there are not enough skilled people wanting to do this work in SE London. When are we going to stop these Yorkshiremen coming down here and taking our jobs?

Your not alone asking questions such as those ^^^^
I live in East Anglia, terrible infrastructure, low wage economy. I had the choice to stick or go, I chose to stick.

The UK has a shortage of some skilled workers as well as some unskilled sector jobs. IMO!
these shortages have in the main been brought about by bad Government policies of both colours over the past 4 decades.
The worst policy was the cessation of apprenticeships. The focus upon university education has been another disaster and the import of cheap labour.

Our daughter left East Anglia to work in London, she earns a large salary and enjoys city social life as well. It's suits her and her husband very well, we wouldn't even consider the option.

The de-skilling of the indigenous population and the dumbing down of uni can't have been by accident, it dovetails with open borders and a cheaper compliant workforce, which is what globalisation is all about. The move to a service based economy helps this as well. Unfortunately the part of the displaced and 'forgotten' population were still there, and crucially could still vote, so here we are.

I really do hate this "victim" culture. No one has "de-skilled" any one. No-one is "forgotten" and in this context no one is "displaced" either, Its not the depression era.
What you don't have is a right to a good job and decent wage, you have to work hard to get them, and work hard to keep them. You earn respect, its not a right.
May be people should have tried harder at school.

Have you been directly affected, or a family member affected? Very likely not otherwise your post may well be of a very different tone.
Walk onto a building site and note just how many of the builders are from eu countries. They are prepared to work hard for less money, therefore the indigenous worker is either displaced or must accept that lower wage.
This is political manipulation on a grand scale, if the playing field was flat the indigenous worker would have greater choice but going to Poland for work is not attractive.
Your assertions are completely irrelevant and naive through your lack of personal experiences.

Edited by crankedup on Tuesday 4th April 22:11

[jjlynn27]

crankedup said:

Have you been directly affected, or a family member affected? Very likely not otherwise your post may well be of a very different tone.
Walk onto a building site and note just how many of the builders are from eu countries. They are prepared to work hard for less money, therefore the indigenous worker is either displaced or must accept that lower wage.

So what if they 'must accept lower wage'? What about call centre workers who are competing with people in India, South Africa and so on. What about people who 'must accept lower wage' through advances in technology?

[crankedup]

mike9009 said:

crankedup said:

I'm sure that some EU projects are hugely successful, my issue is that I prefer to see our money spent as we wish, not how beaurocrates in Brussels dictates.

Also my mention of duds is not some loose change found down the back of the sofa. It's millions upon millions of euro. .

I agree, although now we are going to autocrats in Westminster dictating where we waste money on pet projects around the UK. I would prefer my money to go direct to the local council and have them decide.

Second thoughts the autocrats in our council aren't any better. I would like sovereignty and taxing decisions to be made by our local town council so real local decisions can be made in the interests of my local neighbourhood. Why should we continue to have Westminster dictating where all my taxes are spent....

Well it's a fair point, however, our Government kids hell bent on regional devolution and pressing hard for this. In effect that will give more local accountability and we, the electorate can vote out Members.
I am far from convinced that regional devolution will provide the answers, I despair at the thought of too much power in so few hands

[crankedup]

jjlynn27 said:

crankedup said:

Have you been directly affected, or a family member affected? Very likely not otherwise your post may well be of a very different tone.
Walk onto a building site and note just how many of the builders are from eu countries. They are prepared to work hard for less money, therefore the indigenous worker is either displaced or must accept that lower wage.

So what if they 'must accept lower wage'? What about call centre workers who are competing with people in India, South Africa and so on. What about people who 'must accept lower wage' through advances in technology?

Try to think about it, lower wages whilst inflation takes off, housing becomes ever more expensive, less money in more people's pockets as disposable income. All this, and your own examples are leading to a low wage economy, good for big employers perhaps in the short term.
Competing with other Countries has always been part of the downside of a globalised market place. Agree that tech' is a threat to many jobs and is an unstoppable force, however, I do not agree that importing. heap labour that drives wages down is helpful to the indigenous worker.
If I had the answer to solve all the ills you mention I would be a billionaire. By your attitude it's one suffer all suffer, I can't agree with that.
Our saviour to a certain extent is the high quality of our production, our high tech' centres, sciences and pharmaceuticals. We need to expand our manufacturing base urgently though.

[battered]

KrissKross said:

battered said:

KrissKross said:

2, "LOL" - A common response from people who don't understand things is to laugh. Either that or to quote others who are equally inept. Care to share an example of what is difficult?

Yes, I will. I'm laughing at your remark that "European economics isn't complicated" because it's such an incredibly naive or stupid statement that it's funny. Macroeconomics is hugely complicated; to consider otherwise is ridiculous.

Please give an example.

Sure. 2 easy ones.
1. Raising tax rates should raise tax revenue. However it generally doesn't. (Monetarism, Chapter 1, page 1, pretty well)
2. Borrowing money that you don't have sounds like a bad idea but it can increase growth. (read Keynes for this)
3. If you stop giving £300M a week to the EU you don't get the £300M to spend, because the overall situation has now changed. None of this is zero-sum. (This one's one of mine, borne out by a comment made on the Andrew Marr show. The EU balance sheet doesn't work like the contents of my wallet).
So it goes on. There;s a reason why you can do both first degrees and higher degrees in economics - it's bloody hugely complex. European macroeconomics across the whole continent is staggeringly so. Anyone saying otherwise is either naive, stupid or being obtuse to make a point. Anyone using market stall analogies to analyse continental macroeconomics should stop now and do something simpler, like analyse the whole of fluid dynamics by pouring water out of a jug. It's only water. It's not complicated.

[princealbert23]

KrissKross said:

Agreed, £50 net or £50 Billion, this was never agreed through any democratic process. They are stealing our money.

It boils down to 'lend me £10 and I'll buy you a drink', except we never get the £10 back

[jjlynn27]

crankedup said:

jjlynn27 said:

crankedup said:

Have you been directly affected, or a family member affected? Very likely not otherwise your post may well be of a very different tone.
Walk onto a building site and note just how many of the builders are from eu countries. They are prepared to work hard for less money, therefore the indigenous worker is either displaced or must accept that lower wage.

So what if they 'must accept lower wage'? What about call centre workers who are competing with people in India, South Africa and so on. What about people who 'must accept lower wage' through advances in technology?

Try to think about it, lower wages whilst inflation takes off, housing becomes ever more expensive, less money in more people's pockets as disposable income. All this, and your own examples are leading to a low wage economy, good for big employers perhaps in the short term.
Competing with other Countries has always been part of the downside of a globalised market place. Agree that tech' is a threat to many jobs and is an unstoppable force, however, I do not agree that importing. heap labour that drives wages down is helpful to the indigenous worker.
If I had the answer to solve all the ills you mention I would be a billionaire. By your attitude it's one suffer all suffer, I can't agree with that.
Our saviour to a certain extent is the high quality of our production, our high tech' centres, sciences and pharmaceuticals. We need to expand our manufacturing base urgently though.

What do you think will happen to prices if you pay more for labour? What effect do you think that'll have on inflation?

[anonymous-user]

jjlynn27 said:

crankedup said:

jjlynn27 said:

crankedup said:

Have you been directly affected, or a family member affected? Very likely not otherwise your post may well be of a very different tone.
Walk onto a building site and note just how many of the builders are from eu countries. They are prepared to work hard for less money, therefore the indigenous worker is either displaced or must accept that lower wage.

So what if they 'must accept lower wage'? What about call centre workers who are competing with people in India, South Africa and so on. What about people who 'must accept lower wage' through advances in technology?

Try to think about it, lower wages whilst inflation takes off, housing becomes ever more expensive, less money in more people's pockets as disposable income. All this, and your own examples are leading to a low wage economy, good for big employers perhaps in the short term.
Competing with other Countries has always been part of the downside of a globalised market place. Agree that tech' is a threat to many jobs and is an unstoppable force, however, I do not agree that importing. heap labour that drives wages down is helpful to the indigenous worker.
If I had the answer to solve all the ills you mention I would be a billionaire. By your attitude it's one suffer all suffer, I can't agree with that.
Our saviour to a certain extent is the high quality of our production, our high tech' centres, sciences and pharmaceuticals. We need to expand our manufacturing base urgently though.

What do you think will happen to prices if you pay more for labour? What effect do you think that'll have on inflation?

Inflation is more directly linked to productivity than wage rates per se, so your question is too simplistic.

[wc98]

KrissKross said:

By high flyers, do you mean politicians?

certainly not, more the powerfully built company director types the only height i would like to see most politicians flying from is about 10 feet below the top of a lamp post.

[B'stard Child]

wc98 said:

KrissKross said:

By high flyers, do you mean politicians?

certainly not, more the powerfully built company director types the only height i would like to see most politicians flying from is about 10 feet below the top of a lamp post.

Pedant mode - tethered by a rope isn't flying.............

But I agree with your point and it really is most of them I'd like to see tethered

[KrissKross]

wc98 said:

KrissKross said:

By high flyers, do you mean politicians?

certainly not, more the powerfully built company director types the only height i would like to see most politicians flying from is about 10 feet below the top of a lamp post.

I am not clear what you mean, are you suggesting company directors, entrepreneurs and such people are a problem in the UK?

[KrissKross]

battered said:

KrissKross said:

battered said:

KrissKross said:

2, "LOL" - A common response from people who don't understand things is to laugh. Either that or to quote others who are equally inept. Care to share an example of what is difficult?

Yes, I will. I'm laughing at your remark that "European economics isn't complicated" because it's such an incredibly naive or stupid statement that it's funny. Macroeconomics is hugely complicated; to consider otherwise is ridiculous.

Please give an example.

Sure. 2 easy ones.
1. Raising tax rates should raise tax revenue. However it generally doesn't. (Monetarism, Chapter 1, page 1, pretty well)
2. Borrowing money that you don't have sounds like a bad idea but it can increase growth. (read Keynes for this)
3. If you stop giving £300M a week to the EU you don't get the £300M to spend, because the overall situation has now changed. None of this is zero-sum. (This one's one of mine, borne out by a comment made on the Andrew Marr show. The EU balance sheet doesn't work like the contents of my wallet).
So it goes on. There;s a reason why you can do both first degrees and higher degrees in economics - it's bloody hugely complex. European macroeconomics across the whole continent is staggeringly so. Anyone saying otherwise is either naive, stupid or being obtuse to make a point. Anyone using market stall analogies to analyse continental macroeconomics should stop now and do something simpler, like analyse the whole of fluid dynamics by pouring water out of a jug. It's only water. It's not complicated.

So we really do need 10,000+ bureaucrats employed to deal with these super complex points. I do get where you are trying to come from, a couple of your points are simply common sense. Plus you are also suggesting people with Piñata degrees these days are smart.

[wc98]

KrissKross said:

I am not clear what you mean, are you suggesting company directors, entrepreneurs and such people are a problem in the UK?

not at all,apologies for the lack of clarity .i am stating that the uk population is made up of people with a diverse range of abilities ,the high flyers generally are the most diverse . if everyone had the same attributes/ability for business/entrepreneurship ,how would any individuals stand out ?

to rise to the top ,you need a bottom to be above. to be in the top 10% at anything you need 90% below you. what i meant was that those people need more than a meagre existence to maintain some drive in them so the mechanisms that allow the high flyers to achieve their potential keep functioning.

[wc98]

battered said:

So it goes on. There;s a reason why you can do both first degrees and higher degrees in economics - it's bloody hugely complex. European macroeconomics across the whole continent is staggeringly so.

from this do i take it that those advising the eu on matters economic haven't got a degree ?

[KrissKross]

wc98 said:

to rise to the top ,you need a bottom to be above. to be in the top 10% at anything you need 90% below you. .

Most men cannot be porn stars, should they all shout its not fair?

[jjlynn27]

REALIST123 said:

Inflation is more directly linked to productivity than wage rates per se, so your question is too simplistic.

Before you comment, you might want to read exchange with crankedup, as it is you make yourself look even dumber than you are, and that takes some effort. You might also want to read up on cost push inflation.

[battered]

wc98 said:

battered said:

So it goes on. There;s a reason why you can do both first degrees and higher degrees in economics - it's bloody hugely complex. European macroeconomics across the whole continent is staggeringly so.

from this do i take it that those advising the eu on matters economic haven't got a degree ?

Course they haven't, they just come on here for as long as it takes to drink a coffee, then they know it all.

[battered]

KrissKross said:

So we really do need 10,000+ bureaucrats employed to deal with these super complex points. I do get where you are trying to come from, a couple of your points are simply common sense. Plus you are also suggesting people with Piñata degrees these days are smart.

No, and you know what else? We don't need the police, I haven't used the useless fkers all year.

WTF is a pinata degree and what relevance has it here?

[jjlynn27]

battered said:

No, and you know what else? We don't need the police, I haven't used the useless fkers all year.

WTF is a pinata degree and what relevance has it here?

'Pinata degree' is a degree in a subject that poster doesn't approve of. It's usually written by people without a degree.

[crankedup]

jjlynn27 said:

crankedup said:

jjlynn27 said:

crankedup said:

Have you been directly affected, or a family member affected? Very likely not otherwise your post may well be of a very different tone.
Walk onto a building site and note just how many of the builders are from eu countries. They are prepared to work hard for less money, therefore the indigenous worker is either displaced or must accept that lower wage.

So what if they 'must accept lower wage'? What about call centre workers who are competing with people in India, South Africa and so on. What about people who 'must accept lower wage' through advances in technology?

Try to think about it, lower wages whilst inflation takes off, housing becomes ever more expensive, less money in more people's pockets as disposable income. All this, and your own examples are leading to a low wage economy, good for big employers perhaps in the short term.
Competing with other Countries has always been part of the downside of a globalised market place. Agree that tech' is a threat to many jobs and is an unstoppable force, however, I do not agree that importing. heap labour that drives wages down is helpful to the indigenous worker.
If I had the answer to solve all the ills you mention I would be a billionaire. By your attitude it's one suffer all suffer, I can't agree with that.
Our saviour to a certain extent is the high quality of our production, our high tech' centres, sciences and pharmaceuticals. We need to expand our manufacturing base urgently though.

What do you think will happen to prices if you pay more for labour? What effect do you think that'll have on inflation?

My argument is the effect that unskillled and semi skilled worker immigrants have had on the wage economy of the UK. Indigenous workers still have to pay a mortgage or rent, they do not generally live twenty people to a three bed house and share this burden equally. Also the bills of living have to be paid.
So far as inflation is concerned, some inflation is a good thing in so much it reduces the effect of debt, as in National and private. Of course inflation has to be controlled and this is the job for the BOE in conjunction with the Government. Wage inflation is a given, or used to be, it is an incentive to go to work and stay at work, but must be controlled. The mathematics on the grand scale are above my pay grade tbh.