Tommy Robinson Appreciation Thread

[a1ex2001]

1 hour ago, Weston Super Saint said:

In what way does our current process not align with our commitments under international treaty?

Where did I say the current process doesn’t?  The comment was in response to the implication that we shouldn’t process an asylum application from someone if France because ‘they are in France so they are safe’. Maybe read things twice before responding

[a1ex2001]

On 10/08/2024 at 16:15, Saint Fan CaM said:

You appear to have a very simplistic view of the World and your argument as a result has suffered to the point where you’re trying to 2nd guess what I think to win points! You don’t know immigrants wanting to enter the UK are all fleeing war torn countries - that’s plain wrong. Russia invading England is a daft repose - no relevance to the debate and you know it. If you’ve offered a valid explanation of why people want to come here and immigration is out of control I must have missed it.

Immigration isn’t ‘out of control’ it is almost fully in control of the elected government.  Small boat arrivals/asylum seekers make up a tiny percentage of the people arriving in the UK it is just blown out of all proportion by right wing media coverage and politicians looking for a convenient other.  The vast majority of immigrants arrive with either educational or work visas approved by the government because the first batch support our further education system and the second our economy and public services.

As for why they want to come here, the simple answer is the vast majority don’t the UK takes a vanishingly small percentage of the worlds displaced people. Those that do want to come here often site language, friends/family and opportunity as reasons.

[Whitey Grandad]

2 minutes ago, a1ex2001 said:

Immigration isn’t ‘out of control’ it is almost fully in control of the elected government.  Small boat arrivals/asylum seekers make up a tiny percentage of the people arriving in the UK it is just blown out of all proportion by right wing media coverage and politicians looking for a convenient other.  The vast majority of immigrants arrive with either educational or work visas approved by the government because the first batch support our further education system and the second our economy and public services.

As for why they want to come here, the simple answer is the vast majority don’t the UK takes a vanishingly small percentage of the worlds displaced people. Those that do want to come here often site language, friends/family and opportunity as reasons.

600,000 a year, every year? How many new houses is that?

[a1ex2001]

7 hours ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Yep. We’re full.

So we should instantly close the boarders to all migrants, including students, doctors, nurses and care home workers?  Who would you suggest fills the vacancies?

[Farmer Saint]

6 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

600,000 a year, every year? How many new houses is that?

Are you talking normal migration or asylum seekers? 

Again, as said previously on the thread, the infrastructure should be in place before people come over, but we have been so far behind on housing targets, investment in schools and NHS that the issue is now out of control. The problem is we drastically need doctors, nurses and careworkers, jobs that people in the UK don't want to fill. 

[a1ex2001]

2 hours ago, Whitey Grandad said:

600,000 a year, every year? How many new houses is that?

That is a controlled decision by your government, small boat arrivals is less than 30k a year of which 30/40% should be deported after processing asylum applications.

If you want to reduce legal migration ie the vast majority who arrive on visas as students or points based essential workers then you need to choose bettweeen the three options I’be explained and all the anti immigration people ignore!

1 stop reporting student arrivals as part of the net migration figures as most leave eventually so it just skews the number unnecessarily

2 reduce student visas this would then require either a significant increase in fee’s charged to domestic students or funding of higher education from general taxation (neither of which will be popular)

3 reduce the number of people arriving on essential worker visas and accept shortages in critical Industries and health care etc.

Which do you want?

[The Kraken]

2 minutes ago, a1ex2001 said:

3 reduce the number of people arriving on essential worker visas and accept shortages in critical Industries and health care etc.

I think you'll find that two and three are already well on their way.  It will satisfy those who look at the net migration numbers and say "net migration numbers down = good" but the effect it will have on universities will be damaging and in particular the damage to the care sector over the next few years could be catastrophic.  

[Weston Super Saint]

2 hours ago, a1ex2001 said:

Where did I say the current process doesn’t?  The comment was in response to the implication that we shouldn’t process an asylum application from someone if France because ‘they are in France so they are safe’. Maybe read things twice before responding

You haven't. I haven't suggested you have.

You have, though, suggested that the UK needs to do more.

Why does the UK need to do that if, as it seems that you agree, we are already satisfying our commitments under international treaty?

[Farmer Saint]

25 minutes ago, a1ex2001 said:

That is a controlled decision by your government, small boat arrivals is less than 30k a year of which 30/40% should be deported after processing asylum applications.

If you want to reduce legal migration ie the vast majority who arrive on visas as students or points based essential workers then you need to choose bettweeen the three options I’be explained and all the anti immigration people ignore!

1 stop reporting student arrivals as part of the net migration figures as most leave eventually so it just skews the number unnecessarily

2 reduce student visas this would then require either a significant increase in fee’s charged to domestic students or funding of higher education from general taxation (neither of which will be popular)

3 reduce the number of people arriving on essential worker visas and accept shortages in critical Industries and health care etc.

Which do you want?

Tbh, part 3 is assuming that these workers all go into those industries, which is untrue. I think the option is to remove immigration for all non-essential public services until we have the infrastructure to deal with it, alongside forcing some sort of apprenticeships in various low-populated industries for UK residents (manual trades which we are low on since Brexit). Bursaries should then be offered for nursing for UK residents, but with a tie in at the end of the qualification, and then a new minimum wage for care staff that doesn't follow the national minimum wage but tracks above it.

Edited August 12 by Farmer Saint

[badgerx16]

23 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

............, and then a new minimum wage for care staff that doesn't follow the national minimum wage but tracks above it.

And the costs of care go up. There is no easy answer to this issue. Whatever is done to reduce immigration will cost, but would people be willing to accept that ?

[hypochondriac]

Here's a good question: does ancestry, ethnicity and heritage have any role in the entitlement of the English, Welsh, Scottish and Irish to having a claim to their own homeland? 

[Whitey Grandad]

1 hour ago, The Kraken said:

I think you'll find that two and three are already well on their way.  It will satisfy those who look at the net migration numbers and say "net migration numbers down = good" but the effect it will have on universities will be damaging and in particular the damage to the care sector over the next few years could be catastrophic.  

And why is that a concern? Is it really a good idea to be training up the rest of the world to compete with us?

[Whitey Grandad]

1 hour ago, a1ex2001 said:

That is a controlled decision by your government, small boat arrivals is less than 30k a year of which 30/40% should be deported after processing asylum applications.

If you want to reduce legal migration ie the vast majority who arrive on visas as students or points based essential workers then you need to choose bettweeen the three options I’be explained and all the anti immigration people ignore!

1 stop reporting student arrivals as part of the net migration figures as most leave eventually so it just skews the number unnecessarily

2 reduce student visas this would then require either a significant increase in fee’s charged to domestic students or funding of higher education from general taxation (neither of which will be popular)

3 reduce the number of people arriving on essential worker visas and accept shortages in critical Industries and health care etc.

Which do you want?

But do they?

[Whitey Grandad]

3 hours ago, Farmer Saint said:

Are you talking normal migration or asylum seekers? 

Again, as said previously on the thread, the infrastructure should be in place before people come over, but we have been so far behind on housing targets, investment in schools and NHS that the issue is now out of control. The problem is we drastically need doctors, nurses and careworkers, jobs that people in the UK don't want to fill. 

In total. 

[badgerx16]

7 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Here's a good question: does ancestry, ethnicity and heritage have any role in the entitlement of the English, Welsh, Scottish and Irish to having a claim to their own homeland? 

But are they each a distinct group ? How many 'English' have Scots, Welsh, or Irish parents, grandparents, or great grandparents ? How many generations back must the bloodline be traceable ?

It is much easier to consider this in parts of Wales, or the more remote areas of Scotland, admittedly, but a lot of Britons are mongrels.

Edited August 12 by badgerx16

[hypochondriac]

2 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

But are they each a distinct group ? How many 'English' have Scots, Welsh, or Irish parents, grandparents, or great grandparents ? How many generations back must the bloodline be traceable ?

It is much easier to consider this in parts of Wales, or the more remote areas of Scotland, admittedly, but a lot of Britons are mongrels.

So if you had a 'mongrel' Japanese person would the same thing apply to them? Many people can trace at least part of their lineage back hundreds of years in the UK. 

[badgerx16]

16 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

So if you had a 'mongrel' Japanese person would the same thing apply to them? Many people can trace at least part of their lineage back hundreds of years in the UK. 

Indeed. I can trace mine back to before the Civil War, but part of that genealogy is Welsh, part English, snd part Scottish, and at some point a dash of Roma. Which 'homeland' should I aspire to ? Do we follow the American logic for declaring yourself "Irish" on St Patrick's Day, one great grandparent counts ?

[Gloucester Saint]

42 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

And why is that a concern? Is it really a good idea to be training up the rest of the world to compete with us?

That’s not the reason it’s a problem. UK higher education educational provision and R&D is one of our few remaining globally successful and recognised industries. Or it was until the last set of plastic MAGA politicians in the previous government dragged it into the culture wars.

The issue is two-fold:

1) Soft power around the world. It’s a key leverage in trade negotiations, and politically having access to train future world leaders means that we are less likely to have Putins and Trumps, and they have a relationship with us. Secondly, it means governance can improve in their nations of origin which reduces illegal migration which we don‘t need or want. As America has found out the hard way, isolationism doesn’t mean you can close the curtains on what’s outside or be immune from its impacts. Better to engaged and shaping things.

2) Domestic, regional and civic economics. Just on the raw figures from the HoL, you are talking 768k FT jobs, £71bn gross value added and £116bn overall economic output. So the latter is all of the SMEs who rely on long-term service contracts with their local university, hundreds and thousands of them. With home fees stagnant for a decade, most of the sector is bankrupt without overseas students. They should never have been in net migration figures in the first place and their accommodation is not an issue capacity-wise, and again landlords are reliant on that income in a lot of towns and cities. Housing capacity plus all of the new halls of residences built during the years of low interest rates means that’s not an issue and most don’t stay beyond their period of study so it’s not a constantly escalating figure either. We just need to be better at using CPOs as an ‘shit or get of off the potty’ and saying to owners ‘use it, renovate it or put it as an auction log within 18 months of notice for truly derelict properties’. The longer they are derelict the more expensive to return to use https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4ngzq91323o

If you want less overseas students, fine, but that will cost you circa £10bn extra taxes to close the gap because no government is going to make a fee hike for a while. Universities thought they had the ability to act as a true market but the Tories post-Cameron and Osborne didn’t understand what that was. And that’s with mergers and probably some closures in a slimmed down sector. 

Expensive business Brexit. Given we don’t make cars in the same numbers post-Brexit, and manufacturing isn’t recovering at scale, probably a sound idea not to destroy one of the new global industries we have left.

Edited August 12 by Gloucester Saint

[hypochondriac]

5 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Indeed. I can trace mine back to before the Civil War, but part of that genealogy is Welsh, part English, snd part Scottish, and at some point a dash of Roma. Which 'homeland' should I aspire to ? Do we follow the American logic for declaring yourself "Irish" on St Patrick's Day, one great grandparent counts ?

I'd say you'd have more of a claim to wales and England than someone with no previous ties to the country. We wouldn't for example say that you couldn't define a native American if that native American had married someone white and had a child. We'd still recognise the child's heritage and their claims.

[moonraker]

47 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

But do they?

yes

[Farmer Saint]

1 hour ago, badgerx16 said:

And the costs of care go up. There is no easy answer to this issue. Whatever is done to reduce immigration will cost, but would people be willing to accept that ?

Yep, costs need to go up if we want to improve provision of care. Less available for inheritance, but you want something good you have to pay for it. 

[Farmer Saint]

52 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

In total. 

But they're very different in relation to the process of how to apply, the type of Visa's awarded, rights on entry etc. They can't really be placed into one large pot as such. 

[Lord Duckhunter]

14 hours ago, a1ex2001 said:

but once they have fled to a third country they could if we chose permit them to apply for asylum in the UK

Surely if they’re in a safe country, but prefer to be in the UK, they’ve become economic migrants. There are easy ways for economic migrants to apply for a work visa  from abroad. 

Edited August 12 by Lord Duckhunter

[Farmer Saint]

16 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Surely if they’re in a safe country, but prefer to be in the UK, they’ve become economic migrants. There are easy ways for economic migrants to apply for a work visa  from abroad. 

But that would mean all Asylum seekers would only be able to reside in the first safe country next to them. How's that fair? 

[Lord Duckhunter]

18 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

But that would mean all Asylum seekers would only be able to reside in the first safe country next to them. How's that fair? 

So you’re confirming they are safe? 
 

 

[hypochondriac]

26 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

But that would mean all Asylum seekers would only be able to reside in the first safe country next to them. How's that fair? 

That's a separate debate. 

[Weston Super Saint]

3 hours ago, Farmer Saint said:

Tbh, part 3 is assuming that these workers all go into those industries, which is untrue. I think the option is to remove immigration for all non-essential public services until we have the infrastructure to deal with it, alongside forcing some sort of apprenticeships in various low-populated industries for UK residents (manual trades which we are low on since Brexit). Bursaries should then be offered for nursing for UK residents, but with a tie in at the end of the qualification, and then a new minimum wage for care staff that doesn't follow the national minimum wage but tracks above it.

What infrastructure are you looking for?

For student visas - they have to pay to use the NHS. 

For economic migrants - by their very nature they are working, so pay income tax, NI etc (unless working illegally, in which case deportation awaits).

For EU migrants - the vast majority are workers so pay NI etc. those that aren't are generally economically active so will pay some form of tax.

The money is there (and has been all along) it's just been spent on sweets and shiny shit by the previous morons on charge of it.

[Farmer Saint]

35 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

What infrastructure are you looking for?

For student visas - they have to pay to use the NHS. 

For economic migrants - by their very nature they are working, so pay income tax, NI etc (unless working illegally, in which case deportation awaits).

For EU migrants - the vast majority are workers so pay NI etc. those that aren't are generally economically active so will pay some form of tax.

The money is there (and has been all along) it's just been spent on sweets and shiny shit by the previous morons on charge of it.

We need more schools, more hospitals, more doctors and more housing to deal with the mess the Tories have left us in. Once that is done we will be able to expand again - we shouldn't be constantly chasing our tails. Foresight, planning and a coherent strategy is needed. 

[Farmer Saint]

1 hour ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

So you’re confirming they are safe? 
 

 

It depends if that country is happy to take them all - if they aren't then no, they're not, they're refugees. 

Edited August 12 by Farmer Saint

[OldNick]

28 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

We need more schools, more hospitals, more doctors and more housing to deal with the mess the Tories have left us in. Once that is done we will be able to expand again - we shouldn't be constantly chasing our tails. Foresight, planning and a coherent strategy is needed. 

where is the money coming from??You can only tax the middle class so much, super wealthy are leaving in droves, mainly to Italy, Malta are enjoying the extra tax and spending they bring. Any of the new taxes that have been already mooted will be swallowed up with the raft of wage increases the public services will demand. Especially after the 22% given to junior doctors. So we will have the same services just costing us more. People like myself will slow down their work ethic as we may feel victimised and so lose the ambition, 6 plus days a week working is already been reduced for me.

In 3-5 years this country will be down the wealth list in the world. Spend spend spend, its madness. People go on about the water companies pumping sewage, just think how much more we are creating in the last 10 years due to the increase of population, its impossible to keep up with and so be it water companies, power companies, food suppliers they all will be under massive strain.

[Farmer Saint]

17 minutes ago, OldNick said:

where is the money coming from??You can only tax the middle class so much, super wealthy are leaving in droves, mainly to Italy, Malta are enjoying the extra tax and spending they bring. Any of the new taxes that have been already mooted will be swallowed up with the raft of wage increases the public services will demand. Especially after the 22% given to junior doctors. So we will have the same services just costing us more. People like myself will slow down their work ethic as we may feel victimised and so lose the ambition, 6 plus days a week working is already been reduced for me.

In 3-5 years this country will be down the wealth list in the world. Spend spend spend, its madness. People go on about the water companies pumping sewage, just think how much more we are creating in the last 10 years due to the increase of population, its impossible to keep up with and so be it water companies, power companies, food suppliers they all will be under massive strain.

I agree, we don't have the money - gotta love Brexit haven't you? 

Cost us £140bn so far - imagine the infrastructure that could have got us.

This country is a sinking ship, and my kids are going to suffer because we have so many idiots that are scared of brown people, as evidenced by this thread. Was talking to a German woman last night and she was asking when we are planning to rejoin the EU - the EU want it to happen. 

But back to the points above - the doctors payrise will cost less than £600m, so peanuts really. As I said, we need to cut migration whilst investing in infrastructure. 

 

[rooney]

7 hours ago, a1ex2001 said:

So we should instantly close the boarders to all migrants, including students, doctors, nurses and care home workers?  Who would you suggest fills the vacancies?

From the ones that are already here and their offspring as they reach maturity. I believe Muslim families  have 2 more children per family than Christian ones.

[OldNick]

16 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

the doctors payrise will cost less than £600m, so peanuts really. As I said, we need to cut migration whilst investing in infrastructure. 

 

600m that we have to find of course that wasnt there a few weeks back. Brexit is a disaster but its done now. 

My customer as a major part of Camerons team and very pro remain, but he told me that we can never go back as weve lost face and credibility if we go with cap in hand. Perhaps also will be forced to take the Euro.

If we can run alongside great, but we without a vote or input would have to accept their rules

[AlexLaw76]

4 minutes ago, OldNick said:

600m that we have to find of course that wasnt there a few weeks back. Brexit is a disaster but its done now. 

My customer as a major part of Camerons team and very pro remain, but he told me that we can never go back as weve lost face and credibility if we go with cap in hand. Perhaps also will be forced to take the Euro.

If we can run alongside great, but we without a vote or input would have to accept their rules

Does this £600m include pension contributions (if any)?

Also, what about the inevitable demands for similar pay rises? Train drivers and teachers will be itching for further strike action

Edited August 12 by AlexLaw76

[Saint Fan CaM]

5 hours ago, Whitey Grandad said:

But do they?

Exactly, plus what about their ‘next of kin’ minders/friends that are allowed to stay also?

[Saint Fan CaM]

1 hour ago, OldNick said:

where is the money coming from??You can only tax the middle class so much, super wealthy are leaving in droves, mainly to Italy, Malta are enjoying the extra tax and spending they bring. Any of the new taxes that have been already mooted will be swallowed up with the raft of wage increases the public services will demand. Especially after the 22% given to junior doctors. So we will have the same services just costing us more. People like myself will slow down their work ethic as we may feel victimised and so lose the ambition, 6 plus days a week working is already been reduced for me.

In 3-5 years this country will be down the wealth list in the world. Spend spend spend, its madness. People go on about the water companies pumping sewage, just think how much more we are creating in the last 10 years due to the increase of population, its impossible to keep up with and so be it water companies, power companies, food suppliers they all will be under massive strain.

That’s what I loath about some of the political debates - nobody wants to come honest with the costs - I.e. what taxation is required to deliver all of the services we expect. There are dimwits who shout down the government about not spending enough, but in the same breath moan like crazy about taxes being too high - the Government’s money IS OUR money and it doesn’t grow on trees - you want more…pay more tax (and vote for a party that distributes it for the benefit of everyone).

Water companies - the worst privatisation in the history of Tory rule and there’s been some corkers. Ofwat should legislate so Water Companies are not allowed to provide one penny of profits to shareholders until the services are fixed, including as a priority the pollution of our waterways. Where did the money from the sale of the water companies go…has there been any form of forensic accounting of what happened to OUR money? Modern day ‘Robin Hood story’ of theft but in reverse!

[Weston Super Saint]

2 hours ago, Farmer Saint said:

We need more schools, more hospitals, more doctors and more housing to deal with the mess the Tories have left us in. Once that is done we will be able to expand again - we shouldn't be constantly chasing our tails. Foresight, planning and a coherent strategy is needed. 

Immigrants that are working, living and shopping in the UK are paying income tax, NI, VAT, alcohol, tobacco and fuel duty, as well as council tax etc etc etc.

They pay the same as anyone else living in the country, so, like I said, the money is already there. Successive governments have just pissed it up the wall.

[Saint Fan CaM]

7 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Immigrants that are working, living and shopping in the UK are paying income tax, NI, VAT, alcohol, tobacco and fuel duty, as well as council tax etc etc etc.

They pay the same as anyone else living in the country, so, like I said, the money is already there. Successive governments have just pissed it up the wall.

And what % of the immigrants from the last 14 years that are still in the country actually work and pay income tax etc?  I don’t know, but I bet you don’t either which makes your argument, while correct in theory, somewhat mute. They don’t pay the same as anyone else living in the country, but they do cost the taxpayer from the day they land in the country. Do you think they should pay back the benefits that they’ve received but not earned - a bit like UK resident students have to pay back their student fees?

You say the money is already there, but then say it’s not there because it’s been pissed up the wall. Which is it?

[Farmer Saint]

20 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Immigrants that are working, living and shopping in the UK are paying income tax, NI, VAT, alcohol, tobacco and fuel duty, as well as council tax etc etc etc.

They pay the same as anyone else living in the country, so, like I said, the money is already there. Successive governments have just pissed it up the wall.

Failing to see your point here, the infrastructure is not there. I've never said immigrants don't pay that money? Infrastructure needs to be there before we allow more in (apart from essential NHS, Civil service and Care jobs). 

Edited August 12 by Farmer Saint

[Weston Super Saint]

36 minutes ago, Saint Fan CaM said:

And what % of the immigrants from the last 14 years that are still in the country actually work and pay income tax etc?  I don’t know, but I bet you don’t either which makes your argument, while correct in theory, somewhat mute. They don’t pay the same as anyone else living in the country, but they do cost the taxpayer from the day they land in the country. Do you think they should pay back the benefits that they’ve received but not earned - a bit like UK resident students have to pay back their student fees?

You say the money is already there, but then say it’s not there because it’s been pissed up the wall. Which is it?

This is a narrow minded view that all immigrants are benefit scroungers.

[Weston Super Saint]

47 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Failing to see your point here, the infrastructure is not there. I've never said immigrants don't pay that money? Infrastructure needs to be there before we allow more in (apart from essential NHS, Civil service and Care jobs). 

I agree that infrastructure needs to be improved.

I don't agree that immigrants have caused the issues.

The population of the UK has grown by roughly 0.5% in the last ten years. Not unreasonable that the Government should have budgeted responsibility for this growth. It's not like there was a sudden surprise spike in the population that could never have been predicted.

[Saint Fan CaM]

24 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

This is a narrow minded view that all immigrants are benefit scroungers.

You said that, not me.

[Farmer Saint]

8 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

I agree that infrastructure needs to be improved.

I don't agree that immigrants have caused the issues.

The population of the UK has grown by roughly 0.5% in the last ten years. Not unreasonable that the Government should have budgeted responsibility for this growth. It's not like there was a sudden surprise spike in the population that could never have been predicted.

I never said immigrants caused the issues either? I blame the Tories for years of under investment. However, before we start accepting more we need to improve our infrastructure. 

[a1ex2001]

5 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

So you’re confirming they are safe? 
 

 

They are ‘safe’ the minute they leave the place where they are not safe, I fail to see your point?  

The international treaties we are signatories of say they can choose to pass through to another country before applying for asylum, this avoids neighbouring countries being over run during wars etc. even though most refugees do stop in neighbouring countries hence the vast number of Syrians in Turkey for example.

[ecuk268]

1 hour ago, Saint Fan CaM said:

And what % of the immigrants from the last 14 years that are still in the country actually work and pay income tax etc?  I don’t know, but I bet you don’t either which makes your argument, while correct in theory, somewhat mute. They don’t pay the same as anyone else living in the country, but they do cost the taxpayer from the day they land in the country. Do you think they should pay back the benefits that they’ve received but not earned - a bit like UK resident students have to pay back their student fees?

You say the money is already there, but then say it’s not there because it’s been pissed up the wall. Which is it?

The figure for migrant men is 82% compared with the figure for UK nationals of 78%.

This for all migrants between the ages of 16 to 64.

[a1ex2001]

5 hours ago, Saint Fan CaM said:

And what % of the immigrants from the last 14 years that are still in the country actually work and pay income tax etc?  I don’t know, but I bet you don’t either which makes your argument, while correct in theory, somewhat mute. They don’t pay the same as anyone else living in the country, but they do cost the taxpayer from the day they land in the country. Do you think they should pay back the benefits that they’ve received but not earned - a bit like UK resident students have to pay back their student fees?

You say the money is already there, but then say it’s not there because it’s been pissed up the wall. Which is it?

The vast majority of migrants arrive on visas, those on students visas don’t get benefits and fund the UK’s higher education system.  Those on work visas on the Brexit sun lite uplands points scheme arrive to work and start contributing from day one.  So are we back to the tiny numbers arriving by boats?  That should be processed quickly and fairly so they are either deported or integrated into society so they can start paying into the system.

[Whitey Grandad]

4 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

I agree that infrastructure needs to be improved.

I don't agree that immigrants have caused the issues.

The population of the UK has grown by roughly 0.5% in the last ten years. Not unreasonable that the Government should have budgeted responsibility for this growth. It's not like there was a sudden surprise spike in the population that could never have been predicted.

Try again. More like 7.5%

[Whitey Grandad]

23 minutes ago, a1ex2001 said:

The vast majority of migrants arrive on visas, those on students visas don’t get benefits and fund the UK’s higher education system.  Those on work visas on the Brexit sun lite uplands points scheme arrive to work and start contributing from day one.  So are we back to the tiny numbers arriving by boats?  That should be processed quickly and fairly so they are either deported or integrated into society so they can start paying into the system.

That doesn’t help the UK though.

[a1ex2001]

2 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

That doesn’t help the UK though.

Of course it does, foreign students play a huge part in keeping our universities afloat effectively subsidising the education of the native population.  If you remove the foreign students you either increase fees substantially of increase higher education funding from general taxation a modern economy requires a high quality higher education system which needs to be paid for.

2 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

[a1ex2001]

9 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Try again. More like 7.5%

The uk population has grown by 0.6% per year on average over the last 10 years which isn’t beyond the ability of a functioning government to plan for.  Migration has kept the age demographic of the UK roughly stable despite the boomer generation entering retirement and a birth rate below replacement levels.  Take migration out of the equation and the UK population likely goes into decline and with an ageing population that is an economic and social nightmare.