Brexit (Old)

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Sorry Richard, but I do agree with Sephiroth that your phrasing, particularly "getting rid of" does come across a bit sinisterly, though I know you would not intend it to have this effect.
A different way would be to say "enforcing existing EU legislation that allows the UK and other countries to deport non-working citizens from other EU countries."
(The criteria is that have not worked for six months and cannot produce compelling evidence that they are continuing to seek employment and have a genuine chance of being engaged.)

I imagine that this is very difficult to enforce, do you know if this legislation is ever used? Never again do I want to visit London and find them living & begging/mugging in the subways and openly defecating in public parks.

I was talking to an elderly Irish friend over Christmas. He told me that when they first came to England the police would move them on from park benches if they were caught sleeping on them. They found work building the motorways etc and obtained money for accommodation that way.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Sorry Richard, but I do agree with Sephiroth that your phrasing, particularly "getting rid of" does come across a bit sinisterly, though I know you would not intend it to have this effect.
A different way would be to say "enforcing existing EU legislation that allows the UK and other countries to deport non-working citizens from other EU countries."
(The criteria is that have not worked for six months and cannot produce compelling evidence that they are continuing to seek employment and have a genuine chance of being engaged.)

Spot on.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

The Government should trawl through them all and get rid of any that aren't bringing anything to the table. Those that are have nothing to fear.

An utterly objectionable post on the scale that’s difficult to describe. I had intended to avoid the thread but can’t let this one go.

When you find yourself on the opposite side of Sephiroth and myself on the Brexit thread it’s quite an astonishing feat.

Yes, the Nazis had the same idea and no that doesn’t mean Sephiroth loses the argument. EU citizens resident here were promised that their status here would remain the same automatically. If we can’t stand by that then what do we have?

Where do we draw the line?

I’ve no personal affinity to anyone born here that doesn’t “contribute” as you put it. Why don’t we just do away with the principles of universal school education, healthcare, the welfare system? If people can’t pay their way they should live on the streets? In extreme poverty?

It’s an absolutely ridiculous and offensive assertion.

It also ignores the obvious step of the EU deporting UK citizens who don’t work back here. Many in their well earned retirements sent home to use our care system, our NHS and buy properties here. They’re entitled to do all of the above but is anyone better off at the end of this if it’s forced?

This isn’t a game it’s the lives of millions of people. British people and European people.

[heero_yuy]

Quote from The Sun:


Theresa May is at the centre of a cronyism row after New Year Honours were doled out to leading backers of the UK's withdrawal from the EU.

Some MPs have even accused the PM of weakness after one of Parliament's most prominent Brexiters was made a knight on the list of gongs.

[cynical] So that's the reason for delaying the vote on her plan so she can bribe dissenters with the honours list.[/cynical]

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by jfman

An utterly objectionable post on the scale that’s difficult to describe. I had intended to avoid the thread but can’t let this one go.

When you find yourself on the opposite side of Sephiroth and myself on the Brexit thread it’s quite an astonishing feat.

Yes, the Nazis had the same idea and no that doesn’t mean Sephiroth loses the argument. EU citizens resident here were promised that their status here would remain the same automatically. If we can’t stand by that then what do we have?

Where do we draw the line?

I’ve no personal affinity to anyone born here that doesn’t “contribute” as you put it. Why don’t we just do away with the principles of universal school education, healthcare, the welfare system? If people can’t pay their way they should live on the streets? In extreme poverty?

It’s an absolutely ridiculous and offensive assertion.

It also ignores the obvious step of the EU deporting UK citizens who don’t work back here. Many in their well earned retirements sent home to use our care system, our NHS and buy properties here. They’re entitled to do all of the above but is anyone better off at the end of this if it’s forced?

This isn’t a game it’s the lives of millions of people. British people and European people.

Get over yourself and grow up.

---------- Post added at 17:08 ---------- Previous post was at 17:07 ----------

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

[cynical] So that's the reason for delaying the vote on her plan so she can bribe dissenters with the honours list.[/cynical]

That's Sir dissenter to you

[jfman]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

Get over yourself and grow up.
That's Sir dissenter to you

I don’t believe calling out xenophobia for what it is requires me to either grow up nor get over myself.

I note you didn’t contend any of the points in my post presumably because you are incapable of offering any opposite view.

[Angua]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

There's a whole planet out there to recruit from.
And those from the EU can still apply if their paper work is in order.

Problem is, the roles that need filling in the NHS do not pay enough to meet the threshold.

Should UK NHS staff be passed over for promotion just so someone from overseas can be brought in, because that pay band is high enough to meet the criteria?

[RichardCoulter]

There are approximately one million British people living in other EU countries and approx three million of them living here, so that shows who benefits the most from this EU policy.

Those that come here are able to take full advantage of our superior health, education, social security etc systems. They will also usually need rented housing, a job and/or benefits and are likely to have children that need maternity care, education etc.

Most of those who have moved from Britain will be pensioners wanting a warmer climate.
They usually purchase a new build in an English community with the proceeds from their house sale, their pension is paid for by the British Government ie they bring money into their host country (providing employment, whilst needing none themselves) and take little out. For obvious reasons, they are unlikely to have any young children.

Other EU countries may well decide to reciprocate our decision, but it wouldn't be in their financial interests to do so.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inves...duk/2017-09-05

I don't think that our welfare state should be dismantled, nor do I have any problem paying taxes to help those less fortunate than myself. I do have a problem with others coming over from abroad who, intentionally or otherwise, milk our system.

Our welfare state isn't an international system open to everybody, it's paid for and meant for people who are legally and morally entitled to it in the UK.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Angua

Problem is, the roles that need filling in the NHS do not pay enough to meet the threshold.

Should UK NHS staff be passed over for promotion just so someone from overseas can be brought in, because that pay band is high enough to meet the criteria?

I don't see this threshold lasting, it's a bad idea, people are more worried about the influx of unskilled labour flooding into factories etc.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

There are approximately one million British people living in other EU countries and approx three million of them living here, so that shows who benefits the most from this EU policy.

Those that come here are able to take full advantage of our superior health, education, social security etc systems. They will also usually need rented housing, a job and/or benefits and are likely to have children that need maternity care, education etc.

Most of those who have moved from Britain will be pensioners wanting a warmer climate.
They usually purchase a place in an English community with the proceeds from their house sale, their pension is paid for by the British Government ie they bring money into their host country and take little out. For obvious reasons, they are unlikely to have any young children.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inves...duk/2017-09-05

I don't think that our welfare state should be dismantled, nor do I have any problem paying taxes to help those less fortunate than myself. I do have a problem with others coming over from abroad who, intentionally or otherwise, milk our system.

Our welfare state isn't an international system open to everybody, it's paid for and meant for people who are legally and morally entitled to it in the UK.

The other spin on it is that EU citizens of working age - so we didn’t educate them - and enter our workforce. Immediately being net positives to the Treasury as opposed to someone born here who has had at least 11 years of education out.

The evidence simply doesn’t exist to support that there is wholesale abuse of our welfare system by people from abroad any more that the population in general. According to the newspapers the benefit system is awful anyway, maybe it needs to be cut further if it’s attracting foreigners to travel here - it’s a safety net not a lifestyle choice.

While UK citizens abroad do contribute, you ignore that EU citizens contribute here. For example in our NHS and other areas with skills our workforce doesn’t have. Once you roll the dice of racism and xenophobia it’s entirely likely that nationalist forces in other countries will do the same. Can the UK cope with a million pensioners being sent home? Even if not, do we want to facilitate our citizens losing rights in Spain and elsewhere? Increased taxation, medical costs, any other areas they see fit. They can be selective too, send home the poorest, the most ill, etc. Could we cope with that?

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

I don't see this threshold lasting, it's a bad idea, people are more worried about the influx of unskilled labour flooding into factories etc.

Factories ? What factories ? We don't make anything any longer, Thatcher saw to that . Most migrants are doing work we don't want or won't do eg. care sector, cleaning. There isn't a mass of UK people waiting for these jobs.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Mr K

Factories ? What factories ? We don't make anything any longer, Thatcher saw to that . Most migrants are doing work we don't want or won't do eg. care sector, cleaning. There isn't a mass of UK people waiting for these jobs.

The good news for the few factories that do exist is they will have the lazy Brits who are dossing around on Universal Credit to decide between in future recruitment exercises. No skills, no experience, no work ethic, nothing. If you are losing a job to an unskilled foreigner you aren’t going to be the cream of the crop are you?

As well as that to reduce your competitiveness the Pound will probably slide further. The glorious British manufacturing sector.

More being exhumed just to bury closer to the core of the Earth than a Phoenix from the flames.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by jfman

The other spin on it is that EU citizens of working age - so we didn’t educate them - and enter our workforce. Immediately being net positives to the Treasury as opposed to someone born here who has had at least 11 years of education out.

The evidence simply doesn’t exist to support that there is wholesale abuse of our welfare system by people from abroad any more that the population in general. According to the newspapers the benefit system is awful anyway, maybe it needs to be cut further if it’s attracting foreigners to travel here - it’s a safety net not a lifestyle choice.

While UK citizens abroad do contribute, you ignore that EU citizens contribute here. For example in our NHS and other areas with skills our workforce doesn’t have. Once you roll the dice of racism and xenophobia it’s entirely likely that nationalist forces in other countries will do the same. Can the UK cope with a million pensioners being sent home? Even if not, do we want to facilitate our citizens losing rights in Spain and elsewhere? Increased taxation, medical costs, any other areas they see fit. They can be selective too, send home the poorest, the most ill, etc. Could we cope with that?

Your first point is a good one. The Government has slashed support for people with children e.g. only the first two can now usually be claimed for.

When Family Allowance (now named Child Benefit) was first introduced, it was essentially a bribe to encourage people to reproduce after the war. No payment was made for the first child, only the second and any subsequent children.

It's always being said that we need more workers to pay for and look after us when we are elderly, so why limit the help available? I think it might very well be a deliberate policy of the Government to import labour to save on the expenditure that you mentioned.

There are certainly cases of welfare abuse by foreigners, but I have no evidence to hand to say whether they are any better or worse than our own people. However, I think it will annoy people more if it's done by those from abroad.

The Government changed the rules so that EU immigrants could no longer come here and sign on straight away, they have to have a job of over 16 hours a week before benefuts can be claimed. One of the ruses that they use to get round this is to become 'self employed' as taxi drivers earning £1 an hour, or a scrap metal collector who hardly finds anything (officially). This entitles them to claim the maximum amount of in work benefits.

It has been claimed that most immigrants contribute positively to the economy, but I dont accept the way that this is calculated. On paper, if someone comes here and gets a job, they may well be taking out less than they are putting in, however, what if they have taken a job that an unemployed person over here would have obtained? In this case, the continuing benefit payments to the third party must be taken into consideration and would usually negate any profit made by letting them live here.

Then there is also the impact of them being here on our public services, housing, resentment caused by a perceived loss of culture by the indigenous population etc.

You also make a good point about the consequences of an army of pensioners being forced to return to the UK. In Spain, for example, if not entitled to free healthcare, pensioners have to pay a basic monthly fee of €157 a month and receive little or nothing in the way of help with prescription costs. If they returned to the UK, all this would have to be met by the UK taxpayer, but I think that overall we would still be better off financially and otherwise.

Perhaps we could exempt pensioners from the trawl as they may have health conditions that benefit from a warmer climate or who have settled abroad?

I personally think that there are pros and cons to staying or leaving the EU, but if we are to leave then ridding ourselves of those who aren't doing anything positive for the UK (or are actually participating in activities that are detrimental to the UK) should be done ASAP.

After talking to various different people from all walks of life, I firmly believe that it is the amount and quality of immigrants that led to most people voting to leave the EU above any other reason.

One of the good things about Mays deal is that those who pass the test to come and work here will still be able to come here, but not indefinitely.

I cannot stress how much automation will change our society and we will face a real problem working out a solution to providing a means of support for much of the indigenous population, let alone those from abroad whose Government's will be facing exactly the same predicament.

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

There are approximately one million British people living in other EU countries and approx three million of them living here, so that shows who benefits the most from this EU policy.

Those that come here are able to take full advantage of our superior health, education, social security etc systems. They will also usually need rented housing, a job and/or benefits and are likely to have children that need maternity care, education etc.

Most of those who have moved from Britain will be pensioners wanting a warmer climate.
They usually purchase a new build in an English community with the proceeds from their house sale, their pension is paid for by the British Government ie they bring money into their host country (providing employment, whilst needing none themselves) and take little out. For obvious reasons, they are unlikely to have any young children.

Other EU countries may well decide to reciprocate our decision, but it wouldn't be in their financial interests to do so.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inves...duk/2017-09-05

I don't think that our welfare state should be dismantled, nor do I have any problem paying taxes to help those less fortunate than myself. I do have a problem with others coming over from abroad who, intentionally or otherwise, milk our system.

Our welfare state isn't an international system open to everybody, it's paid for and meant for people who are legally and morally entitled to it in the UK.

There are approximately 66 million people in the UK and 456 million people in the rest of the EU, so your comparison that their 3 million here versus our 1 million there doesn’t really add up, proportionally...

Also, France, Germany, Spain, Belgium, Netherlands, Austria, Sweden, and Finland have been rated higher than the U.K. for healthcare.

Our older U.K. citizens living abroad, as you state, as pensioners will not be paying local income tax, and as older people, on average, require more medical care, they will in fact be more likely to have a negative effect on the local economies.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Your first point is a good one. The Government has slashed support for people with children e.g. only the first two can now usually be claimed for.

When Family Allowance (now named Child Benefit) was first introduced, it was essentially a bribe to encourage people to reproduce after the war. No payment was made for the first child, only the second and any subsequent children.

It's always being said that we need more workers to pay for and look after us when we are elderly, so why limit the help available? I think it might very well be a deliberate policy of the Government to import labour to save on the expenditure that you mentioned.

There are certainly cases of welfare abuse by foreigners, but I have no evidence to hand to say whether they are any better or worse than our own people. However, I think it will annoy people more if it's done by those from abroad.

The Government changed the rules so that EU immigrants could no longer come here and sign on straight away, they have to have a job of over 16 hours a week before benefuts can be claimed. One of the ruses that they use to get round this is to become 'self employed' as taxi drivers earning £1 an hour, or a scrap metal collector who hardly finds anything (officially). This entitles them to claim the maximum amount of in work benefits.

It has been claimed that most immigrants contribute positively to the economy, but I dont accept the way that this is calculated. On paper, if someone comes here and gets a job, they may well be taking out less than they are putting in, however, what if they have taken a job that an unemployed person over here would have obtained? In this case, the continuing benefit payments to the third party must be taken into consideration and would usually negate any profit made by letting them live here.

Then there is also the impact of them being here on our public services, housing, resentment caused by a perceived loss of culture by the indigenous population etc.

You also make a good point about the consequences of an army of pensioners being forced to return to the UK. In Spain, for example, if not entitled to free healthcare, pensioners have to pay a basic monthly fee of €157 a month and receive little or nothing in the way of help with prescription costs. If they returned to the UK, all this would have to be met by the UK taxpayer, but I think that overall we would still be better off financially and otherwise.

Perhaps we could exempt pensioners from the trawl as they may have health conditions that benefit from a warmer climate or who have settled abroad?

I personally think that there are pros and cons to staying or leaving the EU, but if we are to leave then ridding ourselves of those who aren't doing anything positive for the UK (or are actually participating in activities that are detrimental to the UK) should be done ASAP.

After talking to various different people from all walks of life, I firmly believe that it is the amount and quality of immigrants that led to most people voting to leave the EU above any other reason.

One of the good things about Mays deal is that those who pass the test to come and work here will still be able to come here, but not indefinitely.

I cannot stress how much automation will change our society and we will face a real problem working out a solution to providing a means of support for much of the indigenous population, let alone those from abroad whose Government's will be facing exactly the same predicament.

You pretty much don’t agree because you are xenophobic. That’s fine, but let’s just call it what it is. You don’t agree with how calculations are done proving the benefits of migration because you don’t like it. You “think” we might not be so bad off if pensioners returned but, as ever, you have no meaningful way of quantifying this. You have spoken to some people, which is reasonable enough, but not of any meaningful value if you live your life in an echo chamber who, for whatever reason, feel the same way as you.

We should exempt pensioners from the trawl? It’s still disgusting you speak in these terms contradicting a promise this country made to 3 million people, but there’s nothing to assume the EU would reciprocate because it suits us. Would the pensioners even be able to afford property in the UK any more? If they’ve sold up, spent some and shared a little with their families they could be coming back to be equally as much a burden on the state as the tiny minority of EU migrants you seek to remove.

I don’t know what you mean by people carrying out activities detrimental to the UK? If you know anyone committing a crime I suggest you report it.

If you believe that a UK government is more likely to save us, either through capability or an active choice, from the downsides of automation then I think you are being naive. No UK government, of either colour, did anything for the people who lost jobs in manufacturing sectors in the 80s and 90s.