Discussion
p1stonhead said:
The best deal would be limiting immigration through our own controls (say immigrants need to be working after 3 months or else we can send them home)
So how does that work then? And with free movement how do you stop them turning around the next day and coming back? It's one of those pointless nods to sovereignty that the EU makes when in practice the EU remains supreme. Jinx said:
So how does that work then? And with free movement how do you stop them turning around the next day and coming back? It's one of those pointless nods to sovereignty that the EU makes when in practice the EU remains supreme.
Ummm....It's the existing freedom of movement rules. The point being made is the UK Government chooses not to enforce them. The question you should be asking is why not?
Eddie Strohacker said:
Jinx said:
So how does that work then? And with free movement how do you stop them turning around the next day and coming back? It's one of those pointless nods to sovereignty that the EU makes when in practice the EU remains supreme.
Ummm....It's the existing freedom of movement rules. The point being made is the UK Government chooses not to enforce them. The question you should be asking is why not?
Jinx said:
p1stonhead said:
The best deal would be limiting immigration through our own controls (say immigrants need to be working after 3 months or else we can send them home)
So how does that work then? And with free movement how do you stop them turning around the next day and coming back? It's one of those pointless nods to sovereignty that the EU makes when in practice the EU remains supreme. Mario149 said:
I think the point is no-one even bothered to try because the market sorts itself out. As I've said elsewhere, I guarantee that if we implement some sort of border controls while at the same time issuing visas for all the businesses that ask for them in order to ensure our economy functions correctly, we'll end up with as near as makes no practical difference the same levels of immigration, just with the extra cost, complexity and lag of managing the new system.
That assumes that all businesses who ask will get (in the long run). If some businesses don't get, they'll need to find their resources elsewhere (or fold).
Remember nobody is talking about restricting the high value resources.
Jinx said:
Eddie Strohacker said:
Jinx said:
So how does that work then? And with free movement how do you stop them turning around the next day and coming back? It's one of those pointless nods to sovereignty that the EU makes when in practice the EU remains supreme.
Ummm....It's the existing freedom of movement rules. The point being made is the UK Government chooses not to enforce them. The question you should be asking is why not?
Mario149 said:
I think the point is no-one even bothered to try because the market sorts itself out. As I've said elsewhere, I guarantee that if we implement some sort of border controls while at the same time issuing visas for all the businesses that ask for them in order to ensure our economy functions correctly, we'll end up with as near as makes no practical difference the same levels of immigration, just with the extra cost, complexity and lag of managing the new system.
That's the false premise bit. Under the current system (non-EU) there are some pretty tight rules under the granting of work visa's (I don't think coffee maker at Costa is included). So the argument "it will all be the same anyway so let's not change anything" is based on a false premise.Jinx said:
That was the point - if you send them home they can under the existing rules of freedom of movement, turn around and come back.
Not really. If the state invested in entry & exit checks & an effective ID scheme, it would be able under the rules, to weed out those who failed to meet the criteria I.e gaining employment within three months, returning on spec. It chooses not to because it has no incentive to do so outside of political sentiment. Dodgy businesses circumventing the rules for their own purposes is a separate matter.Eddie Strohacker said:
Not really. If the state invested in entry & exit checks & an effective ID scheme, it would be able under the rules, to weed out those who failed to meet the criteria I.e gaining employment within three months, returning on spec. It chooses not to because it has no incentive to do so outside of political sentiment. Dodgy businesses circumventing the rules for their own purposes is a separate matter.
So invest in a hugely costly process that would probably go against data protection rules (you would need and entire database of EU nationals) just to kick someone out for 24 hours. And you wonder why they didn't implement this.Jinx said:
So invest in a hugely costly process that would probably go against data protection rules (you would need and entire database of EU nationals) just to kick someone out for 24 hours. And you wonder why they didn't implement this.
Is the answer not obvious? Migrants as a whole pay more in than they take out. Successive governments have had no incentive to invest in a system to weed out the comparatively small number who game the system but whom also receive disproportionate coverage in the gutter press.Eddie Strohacker said:
Jinx said:
So how does that work then? And with free movement how do you stop them turning around the next day and coming back? It's one of those pointless nods to sovereignty that the EU makes when in practice the EU remains supreme.
Ummm....It's the existing freedom of movement rules. The point being made is the UK Government chooses not to enforce them. The question you should be asking is why not?
Eddie Strohacker said:
Jinx said:
So invest in a hugely costly process that would probably go against data protection rules (you would need and entire database of EU nationals) just to kick someone out for 24 hours. And you wonder why they didn't implement this.
Is the answer not obvious? Migrants as a whole pay more in than they take out. Successive governments have had no incentive to invest in a system to weed out the comparatively small number who game the system but whom also receive disproportionate coverage in the gutter press.crankedup said:
Falls back onto the same old same old, having lost the argument with sensible discussion! It's not simply a matter of immmigrant workers issues that the UK decided to leave the EU is it.
No but it is the matter under discussion. No idea why you would try to take a diversionary position by lobbing in a drive by two word 'Human rights' bomb, unless of course you realise belatedly that some of us aren't just making this up as we go along.p1stonhead said:
The best deal would be limiting immigration through our own controls (say immigrants need to be working after 3 months or else we can send them home), free single market access and not being part of schengen.
Wait a second.......
If those controls had worked, you may have tipped the balance of the vote. People knew they didn't work, never would and got bored of the gullible telling them controls were in place. Wait a second.......
pgh said:
Eddie Strohacker said:
Migrants as a whole pay more in than they take out.
Whilst it would be truly fantastic if this was the case, I have to view this claim with a skeptical eye. Do you have any data/research behind this claim please?Using the information here: https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=15... an individual needs to be earning a very healthy salary in order to be considered a net contributor. I can't imagine that migrants as a whole average £40k+ salaries, it seems this would need to be the case for your claim to stand up.
Very happy to look at any data you have - it would be truly awesome if all of the people coming here were indeed contributing.
To be fair to Eddie, that's not what he is saying.
pgh said:
Whilst it would be truly fantastic if this was the case, I have to view this claim with a skeptical eye. Do you have any data/research behind this claim please?
Using the information here: https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=15... an individual needs to be earning a very healthy salary in order to be considered a net contributor. I can't imagine that migrants as a whole average £40k+ salaries, it seems this would need to be the case for your claim to stand up.
Very happy to look at any data you have - it would be truly awesome if all of the people coming here were indeed contributing.
As ever, there is debate & some assumption around the subject & research into it when delaing with large numbers but overall, I think I can make the claim without Sheriff Rosco P Coltrane running me out of town.Using the information here: https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=15... an individual needs to be earning a very healthy salary in order to be considered a net contributor. I can't imagine that migrants as a whole average £40k+ salaries, it seems this would need to be the case for your claim to stand up.
Very happy to look at any data you have - it would be truly awesome if all of the people coming here were indeed contributing.
https://fullfact.org/immigration/do-eu-immigrants-...
Eddie Strohacker said:
Jinx said:
So how does that work then? And with free movement how do you stop them turning around the next day and coming back? It's one of those pointless nods to sovereignty that the EU makes when in practice the EU remains supreme.
Ummm....It's the existing freedom of movement rules. The point being made is the UK Government chooses not to enforce them. The question you should be asking is why not?
p1stonhead said:
Eddie Strohacker said:
Jinx said:
So how does that work then? And with free movement how do you stop them turning around the next day and coming back? It's one of those pointless nods to sovereignty that the EU makes when in practice the EU remains supreme.
Ummm....It's the existing freedom of movement rules. The point being made is the UK Government chooses not to enforce them. The question you should be asking is why not?
You advocate a scheme you know not to work and tell people systems are in place. Sorry, people aren't buying that bullst any longer.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff