[....,,,,..,,..]

Originally Posted by abc123

Looking at the ICM poll, I was amazed at how pro-Brexit the C2 class was. MY guess is this the class who feels the migration issue most acutely. It's all very well the pro-globalisation elite thinking the EU is a wonderful thing but it is not them who bear the brunt of the globalisation.

The one problem with th se polls is the people asking the questions are even asking NON UK residents.

I know of a number of non UK girls asked to answer poll and explained they were from Lithuania etc, they still had details taken.

[antjos1]

Originally Posted by Tengocity

Except it's not a real problem in the uk as most EU immigrants come here to work (well over 90%), not for benefits. So they contribute significantly to our economy, but there are two major issues that come with them:

1) quite simply there are too many people on this little island and immigration adds to it, and this means affordable housing, health, infrastructure and public services are very stretched.

2) they take predominantly the lower paid jobs which keeps wages low at that level, hence the impact on the lower skilled workers of the U.K. In wage stagnation and decreasing standards of living

Issue 1 is not just an immigration issue though. For example, our island is overrun with elderly people that modern medicine can keep alive for many years after retirement. Walk in to any hospital and what you see is 80% elderly, not immigrants (except for the actual healthcare professionals!). Housing costs in this country aren't high because of just immigration, but our overly restrictive planning laws used by NIMBYs to block development, and also crazy low interest rates and government schemes which just stoke demand crazily high.

Issue 2 is one I have some sympathy for as its this people who also suffered during globalisation where the old industries that used to employ these people have been lost to cheap overseas countries - manufacturing, ship building, steel works, mining etc. So not only have we lost the semi skilled industry but it seems folk come over and then take what jobs are left. Not an easy problem for any government to solve, and if we exited the EU and kicked these people out I think we would be lucky to replace a lot of very good workers with just British ones.

I could argue quite easily for staying or going and against both too, and I think that in summation is why so many people have no idea which way to vote... Vote out and it may be better but also could be a disaster. Remain, and it will be better the mediocre devil you know.

So now it's our own senior citizens to blame for living to long ,they deserve to be looked after rather than these migrants who don't want work only our benefits .As for 90% contributing to our economy,that's bullhorn.

[Tengocity]

Originally Posted by antjos1

So now it's our own senior citizens to blame for living to long ,they deserve to be looked after rather than these migrants who don't want work only our benefits .As for 90% contributing to our economy,that's bullhorn.

Who said anything about blame? It's a matter of fact, and it's a good thing, but one has to accept that living long lives has knock-on effects, and they mainly fall on the younger generations to support them. And nursing homes and our NHS are full of hard-working immigrants doing many of the jobs to look after those elderly.

Haven't you noticed that pensioners get a minimum 2.5% increase in pensions each year, and yet the day you retire keeps getting further away as the government has to balance the books by making everyone else work longer instead?

If you've got any evidence to back up your assertions on what proportion of migrants are working and what proportion are claiming benefits then I'm happy to read it, but I won't hold my breath.

And don't get me wrong, personally speaking I don't care much for anyone getting benefits unless they are too ill to work, no matter where they come from.

[Tengocity]

And by the way, my information comes from here:

http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/fe...-about-welfare

Prospect is one of the most respected and impartial current affairs magazines in the UK.

to quote:

"The public misconceptions are clear from YouGov’s latest survey for Prospect. Most voters vastly overstate the amount that is spent on benefits for the unemployed, the level of fraud, the degree of “welfare tourism” by immigrants and the proportion of people who lose their jobs and go on to claim jobseeker’s allowance for more than a year"

"According to the Institute for Fiscal Studies, crunching data from the Office for National Statistics, Britain’s total welfare bill in 2013/14 was £205bn. This is almost a third of all government spending, and as much as it raises from income tax and corporation tax combined. By far the biggest component is state pensions. Together with pension credit, the total comes to £90bn. Benefits for families with children (mainly child benefit and child tax credit) total £37bn a year. Almost as much, £36bn, goes to sick and disabled people. A further £34bn helps people on low incomes; two-thirds of that takes the form of housing benefit.

By far the smallest category comprises benefits for unemployed men and women: just £4.5bn at the latest count, or a mere 2 per cent of all welfare spending—a far cry from the 34 per cent believed by the average voter."

"Likewise with “welfare tourism.”..... Recent immigrants comprise no more than 5 per cent of the population; academic studies indicate that they are less likely than British-born people to receive welfare benefits. This implies a total “welfare tourism” bill of 2 per cent of the £205bn total—possibly less, and certainly no more than 3 per cent. That compares with the public perception, which averages a whopping 23 per cent. Once again, this is not to justify the present state of affairs, just to put it into context."


“However you carve it up, the interaction of rising life expectancy (hooray) with our frighteningly expensive national welfare bill (oh dear) means that for big savings we need to look to the elderly, not scroungers, fraudsters or immigrants”

[antjos1]

Originally Posted by Tengocity

And by the way, my information comes from here:

http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/fe...-about-welfare

Prospect is one of the most respected and impartial current affairs magazines in the UK.

to quote:

"The public misconceptions are clear from YouGov’s latest survey for Prospect. Most voters vastly overstate the amount that is spent on benefits for the unemployed, the level of fraud, the degree of “welfare tourism” by immigrants and the proportion of people who lose their jobs and go on to claim jobseeker’s allowance for more than a year"

"According to the Institute for Fiscal Studies, crunching data from the Office for National Statistics, Britain’s total welfare bill in 2013/14 was £205bn. This is almost a third of all government spending, and as much as it raises from income tax and corporation tax combined. By far the biggest component is state pensions. Together with pension credit, the total comes to £90bn. Benefits for families with children (mainly child benefit and child tax credit) total £37bn a year. Almost as much, £36bn, goes to sick and disabled people. A further £34bn helps people on low incomes; two-thirds of that takes the form of housing benefit.

By far the smallest category comprises benefits for unemployed men and women: just £4.5bn at the latest count, or a mere 2 per cent of all welfare spending—a far cry from the 34 per cent believed by the average voter."

"Likewise with “welfare tourism.”..... Recent immigrants comprise no more than 5 per cent of the population; academic studies indicate that they are less likely than British-born people to receive welfare benefits. This implies a total “welfare tourism” bill of 2 per cent of the £205bn total—possibly less, and certainly no more than 3 per cent. That compares with the public perception, which averages a whopping 23 per cent. Once again, this is not to justify the present state of affairs, just to put it into context."


“However you carve it up, the interaction of rising life expectancy (hooray) with our frighteningly expensive national welfare bill (oh dear) means that for big savings we need to look to the elderly, not scroungers, fraudsters or immigrants”

So because this magazine says this does it mean that it is right.
Scaremongering comes to mind
I don't have to read any publication to see what's happening to our great British citizens
Shall we start putting our older citizens down once they reach a certain age.

[Tengocity]

Originally Posted by antjos1

So because this magazine says this does it mean that it is right.
Scaremongering comes to mind
I don't have to read any publication to see what's happening to our great British citizens
Shall we start putting our older citizens down once they reach a certain age.

Doesn't mean it's wrong, and I'll read anything credible you post that says otherwise, but I'm afraid your own observations are hardly compelling.

Did you even read the article?

[antjos1]

Originally Posted by Tengocity

Doesn't mean it's wrong, and I'll read anything credible you post that says otherwise, but I'm afraid your own observations are hardly compelling.

Did you even read the article?

Yes I read it
Still doesn't make its true.

[Tengocity]

Originally Posted by antjos1

Yes I read it
Still doesn't make its true.

You not liking what it says, because it contradicts your jingoistic views doesn't make it wrong either. As I said, let me know when you've found something even vaguely factual to back up your own view and I'll happily read it with an open mind.

An open mind is a willingness to try new things or to hear and consider new ideas. An example of an open minded person is one who listens to her opponent in a debate to see if the information makes sense or if he/she can change his/her mind.

You should try that sometime, it works wonders for appreciating the world, and humanity especially.

[antjos1]

Originally Posted by Tengocity

You not liking what it says, because it contradicts your jingoistic views doesn't make it wrong either. As I said, let me know when you've found something even vaguely factual to back up your own view and I'll happily read it with an open mind.

An open mind is a willingness to try new things or to hear and consider new ideas. An example of an open minded person is one who listens to her opponent in a debate to see if the information makes sense or if he/she can change his/her mind.

You should try that sometime, it works wonders for appreciating the world, and humanity especially.

All you have done is quote some figures from a magazine,I can easily go to any publication what has things printed what I like to hear and quote them like you have but it still doesn't make it true.

[....,,,,..,,..]

Originally Posted by Tengocity

And by the way, my information comes from here:

http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/fe...-about-welfare

Prospect is one of the most respected and impartial current affairs magazines in the UK.

to quote:

"The public misconceptions are clear from YouGov’s latest survey for Prospect. Most voters vastly overstate the amount that is spent on benefits for the unemployed, the level of fraud, the degree of “welfare tourism” by immigrants and the proportion of people who lose their jobs and go on to claim jobseeker’s allowance for more than a year"

"According to the Institute for Fiscal Studies, crunching data from the Office for National Statistics, Britain’s total welfare bill in 2013/14 was £205bn. This is almost a third of all government spending, and as much as it raises from income tax and corporation tax combined. By far the biggest component is state pensions. Together with pension credit, the total comes to £90bn. Benefits for families with children (mainly child benefit and child tax credit) total £37bn a year. Almost as much, £36bn, goes to sick and disabled people. A further £34bn helps people on low incomes; two-thirds of that takes the form of housing benefit.

By far the smallest category comprises benefits for unemployed men and women: just £4.5bn at the latest count, or a mere 2 per cent of all welfare spending—a far cry from the 34 per cent believed by the average voter."

"Likewise with “welfare tourism.”..... Recent immigrants comprise no more than 5 per cent of the population; academic studies indicate that they are less likely than British-born people to receive welfare benefits. This implies a total “welfare tourism” bill of 2 per cent of the £205bn total—possibly less, and certainly no more than 3 per cent. That compares with the public perception, which averages a whopping 23 per cent. Once again, this is not to justify the present state of affairs, just to put it into context."


“However you carve it up, the interaction of rising life expectancy (hooray) with our frighteningly expensive national welfare bill (oh dear) means that for big savings we need to look to the elderly, not scroungers, fraudsters or immigrants”

The big problem with these articles is how they tend to use statistics to prove a point.

Recent changes to what can be claimed etc has reduced the spending on unemployment by about 2bn.

Could that be attributed to preventing non uk citizens from claiming certain benefits etc?

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/ye...n_4045#ukgs302

https://fullfact.org/economy/migrati...fare-benefits/

Even going back 20 years, there are uk nationals milking the system.

However with EU imigration in the UK it is mainly Eastern European countries causing the 'visible' impact.

Having a job should be a requirement for access to the UK, no support at all should be made available.

[TimMcC]

Originally Posted by Tengocity

You not liking what it says, because it contradicts your jingoistic views doesn't make it wrong either. As I said, let me know when you've found something even vaguely factual to back up your own view and I'll happily read it with an open mind.

An open mind is a willingness to try new things or to hear and consider new ideas. An example of an open minded person is one who listens to her opponent in a debate to see if the information makes sense or if he/she can change his/her mind.

You should try that sometime, it works wonders for appreciating the world, and humanity especially.

[Tengocity]

Originally Posted by antjos1

All you have done is quote some figures from a magazine,I can easily go to any publication what has things printed what I like to hear and quote them like you have but it still doesn't make it true.

Yeah you're right, all I've done is kept myself abreast of current affairs, actually read some serious journalism on the matter, such that I can make informed decisions.

You've done nothing except make up some stuff. If it's so easy to go find some factual reporting to back yourself then why haven't you done it?

[Tengocity]

Originally Posted by Brigand

The big problem with these articles is how they tend to use statistics to prove a point.

Recent changes to what can be claimed etc has reduced the spending on unemployment by about 2bn.

Could that be attributed to preventing non uk citizens from claiming certain benefits etc?

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/ye...n_4045#ukgs302

https://fullfact.org/economy/migrati...fare-benefits/

Even going back 20 years, there are uk nationals milking the system.

However with EU imigration in the UK it is mainly Eastern European countries causing the 'visible' impact.

Having a job should be a requirement for access to the UK, no support at all should be made available.

Agreed, statistics can be misused considerably, but I'm making no more a point that many people massively overestimate the amount of people who partake in "welfare tourism", and therefore removing them will make little meaningful difference to the welfare budget.
I'm making no judgement on whether pensions are too high, only that (along with the sheer amount of pensioners) it's the real cause of the high welfare bill. I pay my taxes, and more tax than about 95% of the population, and I accept that's where it goes.
And then when you look at where the NHS spends it's money, it's mainly keeping elderly people alive, and that's a good thing. If we want a better health service then we better all accept it will cost us a serious amount more cash. But folk say one thing about what they want and then vote with their pockets when push comes to shove.

This excerpt from full-facts.org would seem to be back up the Kellner article in Prospect:

"Foreign-born people are less likely to be receiving key DWP out-of-work benefits than the UK born.

In February 2014, 7.7% of working-age individuals receiving 'key out-of-work benefits' were non-UK nationals at the time that they registered for a national insurance number (NiNo). The largest categories were jobseekers' allowance and incapacity benefits. The DWP figures do not include housing benefit, which is paid to working people as well as those out of work.

To determine whether migrants are over- or under-represented among benefits recipients, we can compare the DWP statistics to the share of migrants in the working-age population as a whole. We follow the approach used by the Migration Advisory Committee and compare the DWP statistics to the foreign-born population in the Labour Force Survey.

This comparison is only approximate, because migrants are counted slightly differently in the two datasets. The LFS measure includes all foreign-born people, including both noncitizens and naturalised citizens. The DWP statistics include both noncitizens and naturalised citizens who registered for a NiNo before they naturalised; people who naturalised after registering will not be counted.

People born outside of the UK (including—like the DWP data—those who subsequently became citizens) made up 16.2% of the working-age population in the first three months of 2014, according to Migration Observatory analysis of the Labour Force Survey. This suggests that the foreign born are underrepresented among out-of-work benefits recipients.

Both EU and non-EU migrants are underrepresented among the key out-of-work benefits recipients when compared to the share of the population born abroad. Claimants from new EU member states have increased in recent years but remain a small share of the total, rising from 0.5% of claimants in February 2011 to 1.3% in February 2014."

[....,,,,..,,..]

One of my big hates is how easy it is for pretty much anyone from the EU to come and live here.

However, do you know how hard it is for people from New Zealand, Australia, South Africa to live here?

Have worked with a number of people in our armed forces that have joined up from the Commonwealth.

You have situations where a Sqn Ldr pilot, 22 years service but as he is from New Zealand and is 'losing' his job, is not granted a right to remain.

This is repeated time and time again.

We are happy to have some Eastern European working at a car wash, just not someone from OUR Commonwealth, even if they have served in OUR Armed Forces.

I hate using the daily mail, however it highlights a point.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti..._campaign=1490

[Tengocity]

Originally Posted by Brigand

One of my big hates is how easy it is for pretty much anyone from the EU to come and live here.

However, do you know how hard it is for people from New Zealand, Australia, South Africa to live here?

Have worked with a number of people in our armed forces that have joined up from the Commonwealth.

You have situations where a Sqn Ldr pilot, 22 years service but as he is from New Zealand and is 'losing' his job, is not granted a right to remain.

This is repeated time and time again.

We are happy to have some Eastern European working at a car wash, just not someone from OUR Commonwealth, even if they have served in OUR Armed Forces.

I hate using the daily mail, however it highlights a point.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti..._campaign=1490

I've always been surprised that there weren't better reciprocal arrangements between the commonwealth countries, but just being devil's advocate there are some other issues to consider if you did so....

Others may not want other well educated and english speaking people coming here taking more jobs, especially the higher level ones?

Equally, making it easier to move between these countries may actually lead to a "brain drain" of British people to those countries! I know lots who would move down under if they could do so more easily.

As for the Daily Mail article.. whilst that individual's situation sucks, that's about citizenship, which is quite a lot harder to get for anyone, including EU citizens. Not impossible, but requires a bit of commitment and effort to the UK.

[TouringPleb]

Originally Posted by Brigand

One of my big hates is how easy it is for pretty much anyone from the EU to come and live here.

However, do you know how hard it is for people from New Zealand, Australia, South Africa to live here?

Have worked with a number of people in our armed forces that have joined up from the Commonwealth.

You have situations where a Sqn Ldr pilot, 22 years service but as he is from New Zealand and is 'losing' his job, is not granted a right to remain.

This is repeated time and time again.

We are happy to have some Eastern European working at a car wash, just not someone from OUR Commonwealth, even if they have served in OUR Armed Forces.

I hate using the daily mail, however it highlights a point.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti..._campaign=1490

Absolutely agree with this, if someone has served in our armed forces, whether they be Australians, from the Caribbean or Afghan translators, as long as they don't have criminal records they should be given citizenship or at least leave to remain after their service.

And for my tuppence worth, in my personal experience, the vast majority of East Europeans I meet are working and quite often doing crappy hard physical work a lot of young British people don't seem to want to do anymore as THEY can get more on benefits whilst blaming the East Europeans for not having a job. Just my opinion.

[Wills2]

Still undecided, out of all the protagonists I have more faith in Gideon than all the others and he wants to stay in, far too many what ifs to make an informed decision so it will probably come down to who I believe.

Boris is a joke and far too fickle for my liking, Gove is a fat cheeked know it all and Jacob Rees-Mogg is living in another century or ought to be.

So based on the above deep research I'm probably going to vote in

[Andrewthefirst]

Originally Posted by Wills2

Boris is a joke and far too fickle for my liking, Gove is a fat cheeked know it all and Jacob Rees-Mogg is living in another century or ought to be.

So based on the above deep research I'm probably going to vote in

Ahh....so you're with Salmond, Sturgeon, Corbyn, Obama, Blair, Merkel & co.

Based on that lot I'm voting to leave

[Wills2]

Originally Posted by Andrewthefirst

Ahh....so you're with Salmond, Sturgeon, Corbyn, Obama, Blair, Merkel & co.

Based on that lot I'm voting to leave

No that's the other issue agreeing with that lot! Apart from Obama I like him and his words on the subject have carried weight with me. But there is no one on the leave side that I can really believe in or who would be able to lead the country to this promised land in my opinion.

Rightly or wrongly I think that Gideon is the best of the bunch hence I'm probably going to have go with his opinion.

Don't get me wrong I'm not a fan of the EU per se but neither am I convinced of the capability of the leave campaign either and I would need to be as I'm not sat here hurting because of the EU.

[f1swk]

the person that has done more long term damage to europe than hitler ever managed,on record as saying she would not interfer in britians referendum,has now issued threats that britian wont get a good deal when we leave.
must be cacking it,not that britian ever got a good deal in the first place

[....,,,,..,,..]

Originally Posted by f1swk

the person that has done more long term damage to europe than hitler ever managed,on record as saying she would not interfer in britians referendum,has now issued threats that britian wont get a good deal when we leave.
must be cacking it,not that britian ever got a good deal in the first place

BRITAIN !

oh and no one has done more damage to Europe than Hitler, so don't talk utter bollox.

[isleaiw]

Originally Posted by Wills2

No that's the other issue agreeing with that lot! Apart from Obama I like him and his words on the subject have carried weight with me. But there is no one on the leave side that I can really believe in or who would be able to lead the country to this promised land in my opinion.

Rightly or wrongly I think that Gideon is the best of the bunch hence I'm probably going to have go with his opinion.

Don't get me wrong I'm not a fan of the EU per se but neither am I convinced of the capability of the leave campaign either and I would need to be as I'm not sat here hurting because of the EU.

If Corbyn says remain then that is a perfect reason to vote out. Labour born and bred, raised in a mining community but cant see anything he says as being good for the country.

I think Tengo has raised some good points. Whilst I am a waverer on economic grounds, as the vote gets closer I find myself more and more behind being in charge of our own destiny - if it ends up being a mess it is our mess and we can sort it. I have more faith in that than a lesser mess that we need the EU to help sort...