Net migration

[pap]

Where's your evidence for this? In the absence of any, you're scapegoating immigrants.

 

According to recent research, new migrants have little choice of the type and location of housing theylive in during the early years of settlement. Theircircumstances are dominated by constraining factors and often bear little relation to the settlement patterns of long-standing residents.

 

 

 

Migrant workers may initially arrive in large numbers in a neighbourhood due to the actions of one local employment agency, employer or large landlord. The impact of migrant workers on a local housing market will vary from place to place. In some areas, new migrants have filled the vacancies in the local housing market, often created by other residents moving to more desirable areas. However, in areas of high housing demand, vacancies are few and far between. There is intense competition for a scarce resource and migrant workers compete with other low-waged workers for properties at the bottomend of the PRS.

 

 

In some areas, employers have increased the available housing stock by dividing up houses to accommodate several workers. The Housing Act 2004 introduced mandatory licensing of some houses in multiple occupation (HMOs), yet duties to licence and inspect are not fully enforced. Shelter is concerned that some local authorities may be unable to keep up with inspections due to lack of resources

and the rapidly increasing number of new multiple occupancy properties appearing in their areas. An investigation by the Local Authorities Coordinators of Regulatory Services has found that more than half of all local authorities have noted problems with private landlords exploiting migrant workers. The survey results came as early findings of an evaluation of the new licensing powers given to local authorities for HMOs. Most councils expressed concerns about the housing conditions of migrant workers, and this was particularly prevalent in rural areas. For example, 93 per cent of councils in Yorkshire said that they had an issue with the housing of migrant workers, as did 75 per cent of councils in the North West. The survey described some officers finding: ‘appallingand overcrowded conditions in which some workers are forced to live, exceeding the legal occupancy limit and endangering the safety of those living there.’

 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/08/wisbech-migrant-workers-exploited-gangmasters-eastern-europe

https://england.shelter.org.uk/professional_resources/policy_library/policy_library_folder?a=88331

 

Clear enough? I've emboldened bits to account for your severe cerebral atrophy.

[Lord Duckhunter]

IMO unskilled wages are kept low by too much supply and government subsidies . Why on earth will anyone pay unskilled labour anymore when government will top low wages up and immigration will ensure the supply . Nobody is blaming immigrants , however you have to face the fact that they affect wages. Now you could think having immigrants keeping wage levels down is a good thing as it boosts the economy and helps business profits . That's fine and a legitimate argument , just don't call people who disagree with you racists or little englanders . The more immigrants prepared to work for low wages will have a direct effect on the amount employers are willing to pay

[pap]

IMO unskilled wages are kept low by too much supply and government subsidies . Why on earth will anyone pay unskilled labour anymore when government will top low wages up and immigration will ensure the supply . Nobody is blaming immigrants , however you have to face the fact that they affect wages. Now you could think having immigrants keeping wage levels down is a good thing as it boosts the economy and helps business profits . That's fine and a legitimate argument , just don't call people who disagree with you racists or little englanders . The more immigrants prepared to work for low wages will have a direct effect on the amount employers are willing to pay

 

The government has got no business subsidising business with taxpayer cash. Working Tax Credits. Market rate housing benefit. Every penny that is spent on those things is the public donating to big business or banking.

 

That doesn't mean that immigrants aren't a factor in wage pressure, nor does it mean that immigrants are the only factor. We run a country in which the low-paid are unable to survive without public assistance. That is an ongoing scandal that demands some kind of action, hopefully in the form of some reform that'll benefit those affected. The EU-provided solution is cheaper people. Guess what business prefers?

[Lord Duckhunter]

The government has got no business subsidising business with taxpayer cash. Working Tax Credits. Market rate housing benefit. Every penny that is spent on those things is the public donating to big business

 

I don't share your politics Pap , but you are spot on here . Nail on head .

[Verbal]

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/08/wisbech-migrant-workers-exploited-gangmasters-eastern-europe

https://england.shelter.org.uk/professional_resources/policy_library/policy_library_folder?a=88331

 

Clear enough? I've emboldened bits to account for your severe cerebral atrophy.

 

Let me try one more time, in the hope that you might understand the question.

 

You said:

 

It's those who are prepared to live ten to a house on a short-term basis to benefit from economies of scale which create real pressure on British wages, because it sets a baseline that is simply unrealistic for anyone with real British expenses to contend with.

 

Where is your evidence for that? None of the above talks about 'real pressures on British wages'. That was your contention, not Shelter's.

 

Without that evidence, it's reasonable to conclude that you're scapegoating immigrants.

 

What also leads me to think that you are engaged in scapegoating is your suggestion that some migrants are - in your words - 'benefiting' from overcrowded housing conditions. Those like you who play the immigration card need to understand the real reasons why wages are under pressure. It has nothing to do with immigrants and some of their appalling liveing conditions. It has everything to do with such trends as financialisation (I enjoyed your suggestion that you already knew what that meant - quite amusing - well done), the impact of technology and the wider consequences of globalisation.

 

So try again.

[pap]

Let me try one more time, in the hope that you might understand the question.

 

You said:

 

Where is your evidence for that? None of the above talks about 'real pressures on British wages'. That was your contention, not Shelter's.

 

Without that evidence, it's reasonable to conclude that you're scapegoating immigrants.

 

What also leads me to think that you are engaged in scapegoating is your suggestion that some migrants are - in your words - 'benefiting' from overcrowded housing conditions. Those like you who play the immigration card need to understand the real reasons why wages are under pressure. It has nothing to do with immigrants and some of their appalling liveing conditions. It has everything to do with such trends as financialisation (I enjoyed your suggestion that you already knew what that meant - quite amusing - well done), the impact of technology and the wider consequences of globalisation.

 

So try again.

 

You're right. I'm scape-goating immigrants. I'd like to declare that every post I've ever made supporting them, and the attempts to deflect anger at infrastructure issues towards the politicians that helped create the conditions, as a gigantic facade, all leading up to this moment.

 

Alas, my attempt to stunningly cross the floor of the house, become a gigantic racist and start some kind of far right organisation now lies in tatters.

 

My immigrant family are happy though. They've even offered to pay for the laser surgery to get the swastika tattoo removed from my forehead.

 

Well done, Verbal.

Edited 4 March, 2015 by pap

[Special K]

IMO unskilled wages are kept low by too much supply and government subsidies . Why on earth will anyone pay unskilled labour anymore when government will top low wages up and immigration will ensure the supply . Nobody is blaming immigrants , however you have to face the fact that they affect wages. Now you could think having immigrants keeping wage levels down is a good thing as it boosts the economy and helps business profits . That's fine and a legitimate argument , just don't call people who disagree with you racists or little englanders . The more immigrants prepared to work for low wages will have a direct effect on the amount employers are willing to pay

 

I can only talk from what I have seen in the Construction industry which chiefly uses migrant labour from the EU. Migrant workers are initially prepared to work for lower wages than the "average" but they will not be retained if they don't produce. Mix that in with the realisation after a period of time that the migrant worker will then demand higher wages to reach the average or above the average that can be expected for their specialism and low wages are not perpetual. This has been skewed by the recession, but add in a sharp upturn in work and a sudden decline in supply of available skilled or unskilled labour and there is no way a continued low wage for migrant workers, certainly those with a trade, will exist. Market forces are the much bigger driver here.

 

I've met loads of migrant workers over the last 15 years and i'd say well over 90% of them are top lads who graft hard, pay their tax and love living in the UK (quite a few are now Saints fans too!). The same can be said of British lads, but with about 20%, the work ethic is sadly not there and they spend more time tossing it off than grafting, moving from one place to another. The (approx) 10% of migrant workers who aren't any good tend to return home as they can't get work - bad rep, not liked by their colleagues, etc. So I think it's a myth that they perpetually suppress wages, certainly in the building industry. I have seen a good few instances of migrant lads turfed out by their colleagues, who then generally return home. I have no experience in other industries though, so would like to hear about others experiences.

[Sour Mash]

I can only talk from what I have seen in the Construction industry which chiefly uses migrant labour from the EU. Migrant workers are initially prepared to work for lower wages than the "average" but they will not be retained if they don't produce. Mix that in with the realisation after a period of time that the migrant worker will then demand higher wages to reach the average or above the average that can be expected for their specialism and low wages are not perpetual. This has been skewed by the recession, but add in a sharp upturn in work and a sudden decline in supply of available skilled or unskilled labour and there is no way a continued low wage for migrant workers, certainly those with a trade, will exist. Market forces are the much bigger driver here.

 

I've met loads of migrant workers over the last 15 years and i'd say well over 90% of them are top lads who graft hard, pay their tax and love living in the UK (quite a few are now Saints fans too!). The same can be said of British lads, but with about 20%, the work ethic is sadly not there and they spend more time tossing it off than grafting, moving from one place to another. The (approx) 10% of migrant workers who aren't any good tend to return home as they can't get work - bad rep, not liked by their colleagues, etc. So I think it's a myth that they perpetually suppress wages, certainly in the building industry. I have seen a good few instances of migrant lads turfed out by their colleagues, who then generally return home. I have no experience in other industries though, so would like to hear about others experiences.

You've missed the point. Immigration continues to happen year on year, and so therefore does wage suppresion (as well as increased demand for housing etc). Your theory would only make sense if immigration had stopped outright.

[COMEONYOUREDS]

The root cause of all our problems. I'm surprised you can't see that.

 

jesus christ

[Special K]

You've missed the point. Immigration continues to happen year on year, and so therefore does wage suppresion (as well as increased demand for housing etc). Your theory would only make sense if immigration had stopped outright.

 

Your theory doesn't take into account increased economic output or at least assumes a constant labour supply to meet a constant economic demand, which doesn't exist, particularly at the moment.

 

I don't think I've missed any point at all. As I said, I have posted about the industry I have knowledge of and my experiences within it. I did also ask for the experience of others as I assume things will differ in other sectors, perhaps you'd care to contribute? My experience is that wage suppression from migrant workers is largely a myth. Market forces are far more influential. The lads that choose to stay don't purposely want to earn less to satisfy someone else's agenda.

[Sour Mash]

Migrant workers are initially prepared to work for lower wages than the "average"

 

My experience is that wage suppression from migrant workers is largely a myth.

Which one is it?

 

If you significantly increase the labour supply (city the size of Southampton each year) you need a huge amount of increased demand to stop earnings being suppressed.

[saint si]

Your theory doesn't take into account increased economic output or at least assumes a constant labour supply to meet a constant economic demand, which doesn't exist, particularly at the moment.

 

I don't think I've missed any point at all. As I said, I have posted about the industry I have knowledge of and my experiences within it. I did also ask for the experience of others as I assume things will differ in other sectors, perhaps you'd care to contribute? My experience is that wage suppression from migrant workers is largely a myth. Market forces are far more influential. The lads that choose to stay don't purposely want to earn less to satisfy someone else's agenda.

 

And don't forget that any productive workers coming to the country are also then consumers creating additional demand in the economy - directly and indirectly.

[Whitey Grandad]

jesus christ

 

It causes overcrowing which impacts on transport, the NHS, education...

 

There is none so blind as he who will not see.

[Special K]

Which one is it?

 

If you significantly increase the labour supply (city the size of Southampton each year) you need a huge amount of increased demand to stop earnings being suppressed.

 

The key is in the word "initially", in this case meaning the first job they have, before finding their feet, gaining more confidence with living here and moving onward and upward. The remainder of my post confirmed this.

 

Your second point is, of course, entirely correct. I can only assume that what with bricklayers and the like now earning up to 35% a day more than 2 years ago, that this demand is currently there.

[Sour Mash]

The key is in the word "initially", in this case meaning the first job they have, before finding their feet, gaining more confidence with living here and moving onward and upward. The remainder of my post confirmed this.

 

Your second point is, of course, entirely correct. I can only assume that what with bricklayers and the like now earning up to 35% a day more than 2 years ago, that this demand is currently there.

But real wages have fallen across the board. Whilst property prices increase exponentially.

 

Regardless, 250k net immigration isn't sustainable, that's 1 million people every four years, 2.5 million people in a ten year period, the majority in the South and East of England.

[Verbal]

You're right. I'm scape-goating immigrants. I'd like to declare that every post I've ever made supporting them, and the attempts to deflect anger at infrastructure issues towards the politicians that helped create the conditions, as a gigantic facade, all leading up to this moment.

 

Alas, my attempt to stunningly cross the floor of the house, become a gigantic racist and start some kind of far right organisation now lies in tatters.

 

My immigrant family are happy though. They've even offered to pay for the laser surgery to get the swastika tattoo removed from my forehead.

 

Well done, Verbal.

 

You still haven't come close to grasping a simple question. I wasn't inviting you to have a name-calling hissy fit. I was asking for evidence to back up your scapegoating claim that immigrants are, in your words, 'creating real pressure on British wages.'

 

So, for the third time of asking, what's your evidence for this claim? If none, then you are scapegoating immigrants - notably the ones you quite bizarrely say 'benefit' from appalling living conditions.

[pap]

One of the biggest claims that people make in support of immigration is the amount of useful work that immigrants achieve while here. A related claim is that the country wouldn't work without them, due to the various shortages we have in certain sectors.

 

It does raise an interesting question though. What would happen to the labour market if we didn't have them?

[Unbelievable Jeff]

One of the biggest claims that people make in support of immigration is the amount of useful work that immigrants achieve while here. A related claim is that the country wouldn't work without them, due to the various shortages we have in certain sectors.

 

It does raise an interesting question though. What would happen to the labour market if we didn't have them?

 

Well, there will never be a situation where that just suddenly happens, luckily imho, as I think parts of the public sector would come to an absolute standstill.

[pap]

Well, there will never be a situation where that just suddenly happens, luckily imho, as I think parts of the public sector would come to an absolute standstill.

 

Surely an in/out EU referendum would present that situation?

 

With no ready supply of EU migrants to fill the positions, there would be more demand for British employees. A lot of that demand will go unfulfilled, either because people don't want to do the work at the going rate, or because they don't like the job on offer.

 

I'm not saying it would give employees the whip hand, but the basic rules of supply and demand would suggest a rebalancing in the relationship between employee and employer in favour of the employee.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Surely an in/out EU referendum would present that situation?

 

With no ready supply of EU migrants to fill the positions, there would be more demand for British employees. A lot of that demand will go unfulfilled, either because people don't want to do the work at the going rate, or because they don't like the job on offer.

 

I'm not saying it would give employees the whip hand, but the basic rules of supply and demand would suggest a rebalancing in the relationship between employee and employer in favour of the employee.

 

I thought you meant if we just shipped out all immigrants - not stopped the in/out.

 

We would still allow immigrants but it would be a points based system, where we could still take in the people we need. It'd likely be the unskilled excess we'd remove.

[pap]

I thought you meant if we just shipped out all immigrants - not stopped the in/out.

 

We would still allow immigrants but it would be a points based system, where we could still take in the people we need. It'd likely be the unskilled excess we'd remove.

 

It's the unskilled work that'll be most difficult to comprehensively fill.

[Whitey Grandad]

One of the biggest claims that people make in support of immigration is the amount of useful work that immigrants achieve while here. A related claim is that the country wouldn't work without them, due to the various shortages we have in certain sectors.

 

It does raise an interesting question though. What would happen to the labour market if we didn't have them?

 

A very good question. We can import goods produced by cheap labour which undercuts our native manufacturers but where the work needs to be done here, as in service or construction, we end up importing the workers themselves.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

It's the unskilled work that'll be most difficult to comprehensively fill.

 

All those people that complain there's no job will have theirs back...

[pap]

All those people that complain there's no job will have theirs back...

 

Well, possibly. Many of them aren't going to be able to escape the benefits trap, or will only be a few quid better off for forty hours work. That is a problem we've had for decades now, and the minimum wage jobs that would be vacated by unskilled EU migrants aren't going to change the situation one bit, especially as Cameron is already giving away millions of hours of unpaid work anyway.

 

Immigrant labour has helped to paper over the cracks of a broken economy. On the illegal side, you've got people working for a couple of quid an hour. Legally, there are plenty of takers for low-paid unskilled work, even on a zero hour contract basis. The EU has created a huge employer's market. Don't like the conditions? Fine. We'll have 300,000 new people coming in this year. I'm sure one of them will want your job.

 

The situation erodes creates instability and erodes security for all workers, because the availability of labour means that employers get to avoid the consequences of the contracts they issue. Similarly, the demand for housing is going to keep prices high there too.

 

Something has to give. As I said in the OP, there are two broad paths we take on this. Take the plunge with chancers like Farage, or acknowledge the sort of country we are and start building the infrastructure for it. The country is far from full up, territorially speaking. Most of us live in urban areas, and many of those are very poorly designed and/or utilised. We're too centralised, and haven't got appropriate infrastructure in place for the demands on our country. I retain concerns about the political entanglements the EU can get us into, the way that legislation is created or the way the executive is formed, but I'm not particularly arsed about foreigners coming to live here. It has happened for centuries. That said, there are practical matters of capacity that just aren't being addressed, and are unlikely to be under a period of austerity.

[Whitey Grandad]

Well, possibly. Many of them aren't going to be able to escape the benefits trap, or will only be a few quid better off for forty hours work. That is a problem we've had for decades now, and the minimum wage jobs that would be vacated by unskilled EU migrants aren't going to change the situation one bit, especially as Cameron is already giving away millions of hours of unpaid work anyway.

 

Immigrant labour has helped to paper over the cracks of a broken economy. On the illegal side, you've got people working for a couple of quid an hour. Legally, there are plenty of takers for low-paid unskilled work, even on a zero hour contract basis. The EU has created a huge employer's market. Don't like the conditions? Fine. We'll have 300,000 new people coming in this year. I'm sure one of them will want your job.

 

The situation erodes creates instability and erodes security for all workers, because the availability of labour means that employers get to avoid the consequences of the contracts they issue. Similarly, the demand for housing is going to keep prices high there too.

 

Something has to give. As I said in the OP, there are two broad paths we take on this. Take the plunge with chancers like Farage, or acknowledge the sort of country we are and start building the infrastructure for it. The country is far from full up, territorially speaking. Most of us live in urban areas, and many of those are very poorly designed and/or utilised. We're too centralised, and haven't got appropriate infrastructure in place for the demands on our country. I retain concerns about the political entanglements the EU can get us into, the way that legislation is created or the way the executive is formed, but I'm not particularly arsed about foreigners coming to live here. It has happened for centuries. That said, there are practical matters of capacity that just aren't being addressed, and are unlikely to be under a period of austerity.

 

Much of this is very true. I disagree with you on us not being full up and although people have been coming for centuries we have never seen anything on the scale that we have now. As for austerity, we'd better get used to it because that's all there is, I'm afraid.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Well, possibly. Many of them aren't going to be able to escape the benefits trap, or will only be a few quid better off for forty hours work. That is a problem we've had for decades now, and the minimum wage jobs that would be vacated by unskilled EU migrants aren't going to change the situation one bit, especially as Cameron is already giving away millions of hours of unpaid work anyway.

 

Immigrant labour has helped to paper over the cracks of a broken economy. On the illegal side, you've got people working for a couple of quid an hour. Legally, there are plenty of takers for low-paid unskilled work, even on a zero hour contract basis. The EU has created a huge employer's market. Don't like the conditions? Fine. We'll have 300,000 new people coming in this year. I'm sure one of them will want your job.

 

The situation erodes creates instability and erodes security for all workers, because the availability of labour means that employers get to avoid the consequences of the contracts they issue. Similarly, the demand for housing is going to keep prices high there too.

 

Something has to give. As I said in the OP, there are two broad paths we take on this. Take the plunge with chancers like Farage, or acknowledge the sort of country we are and start building the infrastructure for it. The country is far from full up, territorially speaking. Most of us live in urban areas, and many of those are very poorly designed and/or utilised. We're too centralised, and haven't got appropriate infrastructure in place for the demands on our country. I retain concerns about the political entanglements the EU can get us into, the way that legislation is created or the way the executive is formed, but I'm not particularly arsed about foreigners coming to live here. It has happened for centuries. That said, there are practical matters of capacity that just aren't being addressed, and are unlikely to be under a period of austerity.

 

Or option 3, hold the EU to ransom instead of leaving, and re-negotiate the deal to include caps on immigration.

[pap]

Or option 3, hold the EU to ransom instead of leaving, and re-negotiate the deal to include caps on immigration.

 

I don't know how much scope there is for that, genuinely. I suspect that as an English speaking nation, we're a bridge to a huge part of the world and the EU outpost for that particular language. That said, the EU can't be seen to offer terms like that to us without compromising its long term political objectives.

 

Float this idea to an EU true believer, and it'd be akin to suggesting that Sussex implements border controls to people getting in from Hampshire.

[Kingsbridge Saint]

Dan Browns new book should cheer you all up.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Dan Browns new book should cheer you all up.

 

Which one? The one about world over-population isn't particularly cheery.

[COMEONYOUREDS]

It causes overcrowing which impacts on transport, the NHS, education...

 

There is none so blind as he who will not see.

 

Yep, you're right, its all the immigrants' fault there's traffic on the M4. Where have I heard that before..

[Whitey Grandad]

Yep, you're right, its all the immigrants' fault there's traffic on the M4. Where have I heard that before..

 

There is, of course, a lot of truth in this. I carry no torch for Mr. NF but all our motorways are crowded, whcih is not surprsing if the population increases by 10 million over a decade or so.

[COMEONYOUREDS]

There is, of course, a lot of truth in this. I carry no torch for Mr. NF but all our motorways are crowded, whcih is not surprsing if the population increases by 10 million over a decade or so.

 

i'm struggling to see how the immigrants are personally to blame here, sorry

[hypochondriac]

i'm struggling to see how the immigrants are personally to blame here, sorry

 

I don't think any immigrants are to blame. If I were in their shoes I would do the same thing. It's the system that is at fault.

[COMEONYOUREDS]

I don't think any immigrants are to blame. If I were in their shoes I would do the same thing. It's the system that is at fault.

 

Couldn't agree more, but Whitey seems to suggest that immigrants are the 'root source of all our problems', including overcrowded motorways

 

Perhaps if our government invested in improving our infrastructure to cope with the demand, using the additional taxes that these immigrants have brought to the treasury, we'd be in a better place. I'm not sure how many immigrants want to get from London to Birmingham/Manchester half an hour faster, but I reckon that £50+bn spend on HS2 could be better spent elsewhere in this country.

 

I'd also say that being 53rd in the table on population density indicates this country is far from 'full up'

 

As for 10 million in a decade, we can all make up figures to make our point sound more convincing

[Whitey Grandad]

Couldn't agree more, but Whitey seems to suggest that immigrants are the 'root source of all our problems', including overcrowded motorways

 

Perhaps if our government invested in improving our infrastructure to cope with the demand, using the additional taxes that these immigrants have brought to the treasury, we'd be in a better place. I'm not sure how many immigrants want to get from London to Birmingham/Manchester half an hour faster, but I reckon that £50+bn spend on HS2 could be better spent elsewhere in this country.

 

I'd also say that being 53rd in the table on population density indicates this country is far from 'full up'

 

As for 10 million in a decade, we can all make up figures to make our point sound more convincing

 

There is nowhere near enough money to pay for the extra infrastructure. It doesn't even pay for their 'running costs', especially since very few of these arrivals are bringing large capital sums into the economy. Indeed, many are sending money out of the country to relatives abroad.

 

Overcrowding is the problem and that has not come about because of indigenous population increase.

 

53rd is not correct, we've been through all this before. The official figure for the population is recognised as too low and I have been talking about England, not the UK which includes the highland areas of Scotland.

There are several credible estimates that estimated our total population (UK) at around 80 milllion, and this was around 10 years ago.

 

As I have argued above, the actual numbers are only relevant as a comparison, the effects are plain for all to see, at least, for those of us who are old enough to have noticed the increases. The demands on housing, transport, education, health, even the prison population. And no, I'm not saying that immigrants are more likely to end up in prison, just that as the population increases so does the number of prisoners.

[Sour Mash]

Couldn't agree more, but Whitey seems to suggest that immigrants are the 'root source of all our problems', including overcrowded motorways

 

Perhaps if our government invested in improving our infrastructure to cope with the demand, using the additional taxes that these immigrants have brought to the treasury, we'd be in a better place. I'm not sure how many immigrants want to get from London to Birmingham/Manchester half an hour faster, but I reckon that £50+bn spend on HS2 could be better spent elsewhere in this country.

 

I'd also say that being 53rd in the table on population density indicates this country is far from 'full up'

 

As for 10 million in a decade, we can all make up figures to make our point sound more convincing

Why don't you list the countries above us in terms of population density to illustrate your point? Not to mention that most of the UK's population is crowded into England, particularly the south and east.

 

Net migration of 250k per year isn't sustainable.

[Whitey Grandad]

i'm struggling to see how the immigrants are personally to blame here, sorry

 

One or two don't make a difference but several million do.

[COMEONYOUREDS]

Why don't you list the countries above us in terms of population density to illustrate your point? Not to mention that most of the UK's population is crowded into England, particularly the south and east.

 

Net migration of 250k per year isn't sustainable.

 

Why don't you list the countries above us in terms of population density to illustrate your point? Not to mention that most of the UK's population is crowded into England, particularly the south and east.

 

Net migration of 250k per year isn't sustainable.

 

No thanks sour grapes. You could if you want to? Have a look at the motorway network in Germany compared to ours, with a lower density. Is it the immigrants fault the M27 stopped where it did instead of being built to Eastbourne?

 

I never said 250k was, but as we are a member of the EU, we can't control it at the moment. Instead of sitting around whinging about immigrants, we could be whinging about the fact our national roads and railways are the laughing stock of Western Europe, but perhaps the island mentality is too ingrained to accept 'outsiders'

 

As for most of the population being crammed into England/ the South East. Is it also the immigrants fault that's where all the jobs are? The government could be trying to spread the wealth evenly throughout the UK, but it seems we're all obsessed with London

Edited 6 March, 2015 by COMEONYOUREDS

[COMEONYOUREDS]

There is nowhere near enough money to pay for the extra infrastructure. It doesn't even pay for their 'running costs', especially since very few of these arrivals are bringing large capital sums into the economy. Indeed, many are sending money out of the country to relatives abroad.

 

Overcrowding is the problem and that has not come about because of indigenous population increase.

 

53rd is not correct, we've been through all this before. The official figure for the population is recognised as too low and I have been talking about England, not the UK which includes the highland areas of Scotland.

There are several credible estimates that estimated our total population (UK) at around 80 milllion, and this was around 10 years ago.

 

As I have argued above, the actual numbers are only relevant as a comparison, the effects are plain for all to see, at least, for those of us who are old enough to have noticed the increases. The demands on housing, transport, education, health, even the prison population. And no, I'm not saying that immigrants are more likely to end up in prison, just that as the population increases so does the number of prisoners.

 

Sorry, but I'm more likely to believe figures published by the ONS than something you've picked off the top your head to suit your agenda

[Orange]

No thanks sour grapes. You could if you want to? Have a look at the motorway network in Germany compared to ours, with a lower density. Is it the immigrants fault the M27 stopped where it did instead of being built to Eastbourne?

 

I never said 250k was, but as we are a member of the EU, we can't control it at the moment. Instead of sitting around whinging about immigrants, we could be whinging about the fact our national roads and railways are the laughing stock of Western Europe, but perhaps the island mentality is too ingrained to accept 'outsiders'

 

As for most of the population being crammed into England/ the South East. Is it also the immigrants fault that's where all the jobs are? The government could be trying to spread the wealth evenly throughout the UK, but it seems we're all obsessed with London

 

If that's a dig at the British for not being 'accepting' enough, have you not had much experience in mainland Europe, France for starters?

[COMEONYOUREDS]

If that's a dig at the British for not being 'accepting' enough, have you not had much experience in mainland Europe, France for starters?

 

I've spent lots of time around various parts of the world, and to be honest I've never had a problem being 'accepted' anywhere.

 

Why would I have a dig at my own nationality? Weird.

 

Maybe those who do tend to have a problem being 'accepted', need to take a look in the mirror

[Orange]

I've spent lots of time around various parts of the world, and to be honest I've never had a problem being 'accepted' anywhere.

 

Why would I have a dig at my own nationality? Weird.

 

Maybe those who do tend to have a problem being 'accepted', need to take a look in the mirror

 

Sorry, misunderstood. I thought you were saying we have an island mentality and aren't good at accepting outsiders. What i was saying was, when you look at someone like France/Italy etc for comparison, i don't think we do a bad job at all.

[Sour Mash]

No thanks sour grapes. You could if you want to? Have a look at the motorway network in Germany compared to ours, with a lower density. Is it the immigrants fault the M27 stopped where it did instead of being built to Eastbourne?

 

I never said 250k was, but as we are a member of the EU, we can't control it at the moment. Instead of sitting around whinging about immigrants, we could be whinging about the fact our national roads and railways are the laughing stock of Western Europe, but perhaps the island mentality is too ingrained to accept 'outsiders'

 

As for most of the population being crammed into England/ the South East. Is it also the immigrants fault that's where all the jobs are? The government could be trying to spread the wealth evenly throughout the UK, but it seems we're all obsessed with London

Why won't you post up a list of countries above us in terms of population density to support your key point? Strange.

 

So you agree that the current immigration rate isn't sustainable, so everyone agrees on that anyway.

[COMEONYOUREDS]

Why won't you post up a list of countries above us in terms of population density to support your key point? Strange.

 

So you agree that the current immigration rate isn't sustainable, so everyone agrees on that anyway.

 

Well, because it's already been posted on this thread once, which is where I got it from, and also I can't be bothered. All it does is illustrate the point that we're not 'full up'. We're not.

 

Yes I do, I never said it wasn't. All i said was it wasn't the immigrants fault for wanting to come here, and they didn't personally cause the problems with traffic, the nhs and whatever else Whitey was on about. Its not that hard to understand. Whilst they are free to come here at will the only thing we can do is invest to cope with extra demand. However, its not the bursting at the seems situation some people want to make out. Glad you agree

[COMEONYOUREDS]

Sorry, misunderstood. I thought you were saying we have an island mentality and aren't good at accepting outsiders. What i was saying was, when you look at someone like France/Italy etc for comparison, i don't think we do a bad job at all.

 

No worries, I don't make sweeping generalisations about any nationality, let alone the British

[Whitey Grandad]

Sorry, but I'm more likely to believe figures published by the ONS than something you've picked off the top your head to suit your agenda

 

I refer you to the links I gave further above. I don't like the figures, but anuybody who believes that there are 'only' 62 million people in this country is a gullible sucker. Do you really think the ONS is accurate?

 

These are old links:

 

http://cornerstone-group.org.uk/2008/02/25/how-many-people-live-in-britain-%E2%80%93-by-greg-hands-mp/

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/comment/city-eye-facts-on-a-plate-our-population-is-at-least-77-million-395428.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18854762

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2174300/Record-levels-immigration-lead-jam-packed-England-population-rockets-56m.html

https://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110222021843AAqgHpR&page=2

http://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/leo-mckinstry/333097/Tories-fail-to-solve-immigration-crisis-that-blights-Britain

 

'Between 2004 and 2007, 270,000 work permits were issued by the Government to non-European nationals, yet over 900,000 National Insurance numbers were issued. As a graphic illustration of this farce, just 1455 Nigerians were given leave to enter Britain in this period, yet 35,900 Nigerians got NI numbers.'

 

But as I say, the actual number is not relevant to my arguments. The effects of the overcrowding are all around us and plain to see.

[Whitey Grandad]

Well, because it's already been posted on this thread once, which is where I got it from, and also I can't be bothered. All it does is illustrate the point that we're not 'full up'. We're not.

 

Yes I do, I never said it wasn't. All i said was it wasn't the immigrants fault for wanting to come here, and they didn't personally cause the problems with traffic, the nhs and whatever else Whitey was on about. Its not that hard to understand. Whilst they are free to come here at will the only thing we can do is invest to cope with extra demand. However, its not the bursting at the seems situation some people want to make out. Glad you agree

 

No, it's not their personal fault, but it's an unavoidable result. We also disproved your figure of 53rd earlier.

[Sour Mash]

Well, because it's already been posted on this thread once, which is where I got it from, and also I can't be bothered. All it does is illustrate the point that we're not 'full up'. We're not.

 

Yes I do, I never said it wasn't. All i said was it wasn't the immigrants fault for wanting to come here, and they didn't personally cause the problems with traffic, the nhs and whatever else Whitey was on about. Its not that hard to understand. Whilst they are free to come here at will the only thing we can do is invest to cope with extra demand. However, its not the bursting at the seems situation some people want to make out. Glad you agree

It's not the only thing we can do. We can leave the EU. Or reduce the numbers that enter from outside the EU. I am glad to see you think one of these things should happen.

 

That population density list

[COMEONYOUREDS]

I refer you to the links I gave further above. I don't like the figures, but anuybody who believes that there are 'only' 62 million people in this country is a gullible sucker. Do you really think the ONS is accurate?

 

These are old links:

 

http://cornerstone-group.org.uk/2008/02/25/how-many-people-live-in-britain-%E2%80%93-by-greg-hands-mp/

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/comment/city-eye-facts-on-a-plate-our-population-is-at-least-77-million-395428.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18854762

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2174300/Record-levels-immigration-lead-jam-packed-England-population-rockets-56m.html

https://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110222021843AAqgHpR&page=2

http://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/leo-mckinstry/333097/Tories-fail-to-solve-immigration-crisis-that-blights-Britain

 

'Between 2004 and 2007, 270,000 work permits were issued by the Government to non-European nationals, yet over 900,000 National Insurance numbers were issued. As a graphic illustration of this farce, just 1455 Nigerians were given leave to enter Britain in this period, yet 35,900 Nigerians got NI numbers.'

 

But as I say, the actual number is not relevant to my arguments. The effects of the overcrowding are all around us and plain to see.

 

Well for a start, I reckon the ONS is going to be more believable than sources like the Cornerstone Group, Daily Express and the Daily Mail

 

Given that you are quoting articles containing data from as long ago as 2004, I'm not sure how any of this is really relevant to your argument about the issues that affect us now

[COMEONYOUREDS]

No, it's not their personal fault, but it's an unavoidable result. We also disproved your figure of 53rd earlier.

 

With links from the Daily Express :lol: