EU, Immigration and UKIP

[Antman]

A 2 bed flat, less than a mile from the station, for £825 a month seems a decent deal to me:
http://www.zoopla.co.uk/to-rent/details/34682936#omVZatmBZL4shEt3.97

More than £200 a week for a two bedroom flat:cry:
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'm not sure how the closure of three lanes because of a surface defect causing a lot of traffic proves that the south east is overcrowded?

The infrastructure just cannot cope, road, rail, housing etc etc

 

[ralphchadkirk]

The infrastructure just cannot cope, road, rail, housing etc etc

No, what we've seen is that the road infrastructure cannot cope in rush hour when three lanes of four are closed, and surrounding avoiding routes are partly affecting by other incidents. This doesn't prove that SE England is overcrowded. It just proves that the M25 is a vital artery operating at capacity because a lot of commuters and long distance travellers choose to drive rather than get public transport.

 

[Antman]

No, what we've seen is that the road infrastructure cannot cope in rush hour when three lanes of four are closed, and surrounding avoiding routes are partly affecting by other incidents. This doesn't prove that SE England is overcrowded. It just proves that the M25 is a vital artery operating at capacity because a lot of commuters and long distance travellers choose to drive rather than get public transport.

The M25 is a nightmare most days and many journeys are just not practical by public transport

 

[EM2]

More than £200 a week for a two bedroom flat:cry:

Brighton has a number of factors that push up housing costs.
Coastal towns attract a premium anyway, it has excellent communications to Gatwick, Croydon and London, it has a reputation for fun and enjoyment.

Move along the coast to Newhaven and save £100 a month.

 

[Butts]

Brighton has a number of factors that push up housing costs.
Coastal towns attract a premium anyway, it has excellent communications to Gatwick, Croydon and London, it has a reputation for fun and enjoyment.

Move along the coast to Newhaven and save £100 a month.

Hmmmm...... What's that a euphemism for !!!

 

[BlythPower]

The infrastructure just cannot cope, road, rail, housing etc etc

Then why not move jobs and people away from the south-east..? :?

 

[21C101]

Then why not move jobs and people away from the south-east..? :?

Better than that, build HS2 so that the north and south east are only an hour or so apart?

 

[EM2]

Better than that, build HS2 so that the north and south east are only an hour or so apart?

Something that UKIP have said they won't do if elected.

 

[Robertj21a]

The M25 is a nightmare most days and many journeys are just not practical by public transport

The M25 is only a nightmare at certain times of certain days, and in certain locations in certain directions. If you drive on it enough you soon realise that you can avoid most (not all) of the major delays.

 

[BlythPower]

Better than that, build HS2 so that the north and south east are only an hour or so apart?

That just draws more people, jobs and money into the south east.

 

[21C101]

That just draws more people, jobs and money into the south east.

Maybe the question needs to be asked as to why employers don't want to be in the North (Yorkshire/Cheshire/Lancs northwards), especially given that wages are lower and rental is far cheaper and there is far less congestion. It should be a no brainer.

Is there a difference in worker culture/attitude that puts employers off?

 

[EM2]

Is there a difference in worker culture/attitude that puts employers off?

In days of yore, it was the Northerner that was portrayed as the hard worker, putting in hours of slog and toil down t'pit or at t'mill.
I wonder if it's the decline of these industries that has given rise to a different work ethic, not willing to put themselves through those privations? If it is, it's been a very quick change (less than two generations, I'd say).
I heard a very brief clip on the radio this afternoon that said migration from the North is at its highest for two hundred years?

 

[jon0844]

The M25 is only a nightmare at certain times of certain days, and in certain locations in certain directions. If you drive on it enough you soon realise that you can avoid most (not all) of the major delays.

Two sections of the M25 today. First time using it in months too!!

Both were cleared relatively quickly, but neither likely anything related to an increase in population.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Maybe the question needs to be asked as to why employers don't want to be in the North (Yorkshire/Cheshire/Lancs northwards), especially given that wages are lower and rental is far cheaper and there is far less congestion. It should be a no brainer.

Is there a difference in worker culture/attitude that puts employers off?

I think in part it has to do with the increasing specialization of jobs. Increasing specialization means that fewer people are able to do any given job, while people looking for a (skilled, professional) job will find only a relatively small proportion of vacancies match their particular skills. That relative scarcity on both sides (employers and employees) gives a strong incentive for companies to move to where the most people are, to maximize their chances of suitably skilled specialists living in the area, and similarly causes people to try to move to where the most companies are, which basically means everyone ends up trying to live in the same town - and London has become the main (un?)lucky beneficiary of that status.

To use my field (computer programming) as an example, if a company needs a computer programmer, they won't be able to employ just any programmer - there are dozens of branches of programming, which means that for any given vacancy, only a small proportion of computer programmers would be suitable. So you'll find it hard to recruit unless your office is within commuting distance of a very large number of programmers. The result... Companies that need programmers find they need to be located near London (because that's where most programmers live) and most programmers find they need to live near London because that's where the most jobs are.

And since almost every large company needs programmers... And that then feeds through to less specialized occupations: If a company wants to be near London so that it can find employees for its crucial very specialized positions, then of course all the less specialized staff who could more plausibly have been recruited from smaller population centres end up needing to work in London too just because that's where the office now is.

My understanding is that this is a part of the case for building the proposed HS3 Liverpool-Hull rail line: If you can make it so that people can easily commute longer distances along the Liverpool-Manchester-Leeds-Hull corridor, then you create a bigger pool of both companies and potential employees within mutual commuting distance - and that would make it much easier for companies to be located in that area (rather than needing to relocate to near London).

 

[Tetchytyke]

Maybe the question needs to be asked as to why employers don't want to be in the North (Yorkshire/Cheshire/Lancs northwards), especially given that wages are lower and rental is far cheaper and there is far less congestion. It should be a no brainer.

Is there a difference in worker culture/attitude that puts employers off?

Yeah, everyone in the north is bone idle, that's why they're poor :roll:

Companies cluster together, they always have done and always will do.

You saw this in years past too; brewing in Burton, steel in Sheffield, wool in Manchester. But the economy was diverse so the effects were less noticeable, because not everyone was clustering in London. At the moment there is very little diversification in the economy, essentially everything either revolves around IT or banking, and both of those industries are predominantly based in London and the Thames Valley.

 

[muz379]

Yeah, everyone in the north is bone idle, that's why they're poor :roll:

I Thought we where poor in the North because we are only good at working with tools . And now all the tools have migrated down south
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

In days of yore, it was the Northerner that was portrayed as the hard worker, putting in hours of slog and toil down t'pit or at t'mill.
I wonder if it's the decline of these industries that has given rise to a different work ethic, not willing to put themselves through those privations? If it is, it's been a very quick change (less than two generations, I'd say).
I heard a very brief clip on the radio this afternoon that said migration from the North is at its highest for two hundred years?

I think there is some mileage in the fact that people used to put themselves through that and in times gone by would have had enough to pay the mortgage and a bit left over to go down the pub on a friday .

Now you can put yourself through all of that and not even have enough money to pay your rent . Let alone think about a mortgage and going down the pub .

 

[Butts]

I Thought we where poor in the North because we are only good at working with tools . And now all the tools have migrated down south --- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I think there is some mileage in the fact that people used to put themselves through that and in times gone by would have had enough to pay the mortgage and a bit left over to go down the pub on a friday .

Now you can put yourself through all of that and not even have enough money to pay your rent . Let alone think about a mortgage and going down the pub .

I hope Darlorich is not monitoring this thread ....Darlington to Milton Keynes..hee hee

 

[mikeg]

I do like how as soon as the facts are outed, they are dismissed by the kippers as being 'left-wing', please, attack the argument not the characteristics of the institution/person. If you have your own reliable facts and figures and chain of causation (if necessary), please do share it with us.

So much flawed thinking going on, UKIP is symptomatic of the fact-free politics peddled by the tabloid media today. Personally, I think there does need to be a new political party and I say this as a Labour supporter who may or may not join up to such a party were it formed. I'm thinking something along the lines of the Dutch D66 party, which would be the polar opposite of UKIP in all but one respect: Radical democratisation. How that democratisation may be achieved however would still be up for debate.

 

[Antman]

The M25 is only a nightmare at certain times of certain days, and in certain locations in certain directions. If you drive on it enough you soon realise that you can avoid most (not all) of the major delays.

Perhaps you can let me into your secret?

With the volume of traffic on the M25 it only takes one incident to bring everything to a standstill and cause traffic chaos for miles around:cry:

 

[EM2]

Perhaps you can let me into your secret?

With the volume of traffic on the M25 it only takes one incident to bring everything to a standstill and cause traffic chaos for miles around:cry:

And it's the same on any road, anywhere. And any rail line (see the thread about a failed freight in the Marches, hardly a bustling metropolis).

 

[Butts]

Perhaps you can let me into your secret?

With the volume of traffic on the M25 it only takes one incident to bring everything to a standstill and cause traffic chaos for miles around:cry:

To everyone on here moaning about the M25 - I can remember what it was like before it existed....not good trying to make certain journeys :cry:

The volume of traffic and the hours it operates at are overwhelming for a lot of the structure. I wonder how much the traffic has increased since it's inception?

 

[21C101]

This M25 dosen't grind to a halt very often.

 

[EM2]

This M25 dosen't grind to a halt very often.

In my experience, drivers in Ireland would rather put up with traffic queues and longer journeys than pay the tolls.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
To those that say UKIP are the only party willing to do something about the 'overcrowding' caused by immigration, I'd be interested on your thoughts on what is happening in Spain (924,000 registered immigrants in 2000, to 5.6 million nine years later), where the newly-formed left-wing Podemos party is thriving, and those parties that have prioritised clampdowns on immigrants are not.

http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...os-left-crisis-ukip-anti-immigrant?CMP=twt_gu

It’s almost a political cliche. If a country is battered by economic disaster, its ever poorer citizens will turn in droves to the crude xenophobia of the populist right. A lack of secure jobs and affordable homes, plummeting living standards: Johnny Foreigner proves an all-too-convenient scapegoat. This is a script that seems to have been followed to the letter in austerity Britain. Anti-establishment fury has been funnelled into an anti-immigration party led by an ex-City broker who wants to stick it to the man by privatising public services, slashing taxes on the rich, and attacking hard-won British workers’ rights. But, as Spain shows us, it doesn’t have to be this way.

Spain is in a mess, with unemployment at almost 25%, and over half its young people without work, a plight that can damage an individual for life. And in comparison with Britain it has been transformed by immigration at lightning speed: in the early 90s fewer than one in every hundred Spaniards were immigrants; in the noughties, the number surged sixfold, from 924,000 immigrants officially registered in 2000 to 5.6 million in 2009. Yet, despite rampant joblessness, poverty and insecurity, parties that have prioritised clampdowns on immigrants have failed to thrive. Instead, disaffection has found a different expression: a party whose premise is that ordinary Spaniards should not have to pay for a crisis they had nothing to do with.

Podemos is founded on the politics of hope: its English translation is “we can”. It was founded only this year but won 1.2m votes and five seats in May’s European elections. And now it has topped opinion polls, eclipsing the governing rightwing People’s party and the ostensibly centre-left PSOE – the Spanish Socialist Workers’ party. There are few precedents for such an explosive political ascent in modern western Europe; in Spain, a discredited political elite appears to be tottering.

Not that Podemos simply materialised out of nowhere. In the buildup to Spain’s 2011 general election, hundreds of thousands of indignados took to the streets in protest at the political elite. Yet without political leadership and direction, such movements – although they can mobilise the disengaged – invariably fizzle out. As Iñigo Errejón, the Podemos election supremo, has written, before May’s European elections, “social mobilisation had been in retreat. Among large sections of the left the most pessimistic assumptions prevailed.” But Podemos was the child of the indignados movement, a party that emphasises bottom-up democratic participation: where the indignados had neighbourhood assemblies, Podemos has “circles” that take similar forms. There are even circles among Britain’s Spanish diaspora in London and Manchester. The funding for its European campaign was largely crowdsourced, and its policies and priorities are decided partly through online voting.

While older voters are more likely to remain loyal to a decaying PSOE, it is younger, educated voters who flock to Podemos. In part this is the “graduate without a future”, to use the journalist Paul Mason’s characterisation, on the march. As Errejón has put it, Podemos rests on the assumption that Spain’s two-party regime – founded in the aftermath of Franco’s death in 1975 – is in crisis, resulting in a “breakdown in consensus and the dislocation of traditional political identities”.

But Podemos has undoubtedly thrived only because it has shredded the old left rulebook. Spain’s traditional Communist-led United Left has itself received a boost, winning 10% of the votes in the European elections, and even beating Podemos. But it’s clear that Podemos is now surging because it eschews standard leftwing terminology. “In order to do politics differently, we need to do language differently,” Podemos’s Eduardo Maura tells me. “When you do politics, one of the things you have to ask yourselves is – what are you aiming at? You could aim at people who already have a political identity, who are an already signed-up leftist. We are trying to talk to people who don’t necessarily have this kind of identity.”

Instead, Podemos talks of rescuing Spain’s democracy from la casta, or the establishment; of winning over “social majorities” who oppose cuts, including people who don’t identify with the left. Rather than talk of nationalisations, Podemos preaches public control and accountability.

It is a strategy that makes sense. Across western Europe, the old industrial working class – with its relatively stable jobs and cohesive communities based around workplaces – has given way to a more fragmented and insecure service-sector workforce. The decline of trade unionism and the ingenious spinning of the climax of the cold war to mean “the end of history” means that the new generations grew up without the old culture of the traditional left. That means the forms of organising and communicating that often defined the old left and labour movements are now out of date. Podemos’s message is: adapt and thrive.

Other approaches have upset the more traditional left. Podemos has focused much of its appeal on its charismatic frontman, Pablo Iglesias, an academic who rose to prominence as a panellist on TV political debates. It was a pragmatic decision – Iglesias was far more recognisable than the party – but it represents a departure from the left’s traditional collective approach. They have learned, too, from the wave of progressive governments that have swept to power in Latin America.

Podemos is not alone. In Greece Syriza has long eclipsed Pasok, the country’s social democratic party that turned on its own supporters by implementing disastrous austerity policies. Slovenia’s newly formed United Left has risen to prominence this year. And in the Netherlands the Socialist party has experienced occasional surges in popularity.

For those of us in Britain exasperated by the channelling of anti-establishment sentiment into the pro-rich xenophobia of Ukip, it is impossible not to admire the Podemos experience. But such parties cannot simply be transplanted from one country to another: cultural and political contexts differ; the problems of Britain and Spain are often similar, but differ in scale and specifics. Britain’s first-past-the-post electoral system represents a formidable block on any new party emerging.

But our political system is in crisis too. Discontent is bubbling away. The combined totals of the two main parties are plummeting. If the political elite continues to fail to meet people’s needs and aspirations while wealth and power are redistributed to the top, then who knows? Maybe – just maybe – a party that sets its sights on the powerful, rather than the poor, will end up thriving instead.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
How much do immigrants really claim in benefits?
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/telegr...-much-do-immigrants-really-claim-in-benefits/
It's a pretty long, stats-heavy article, so I won't quote all of it, but:

Between 2008 and 2014, the number of benefit claimants increased by more than 130,000. The total number of migrants receiving working age benefits also increased in the last five years from 288,000 in 2008 to 395,000.

But only 113,700 EU migrants were on key out-of-work benefits in February this year of which only 65,000 were on Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA). In February, more than 1.1 million were unemployed although the DWP said last month the figure dropped to below a million for the whole of the UK.

What does this all mean? It suggests that whatever the arguments for and against reducing the number of EU migrants receiving British benefits, delivering such a reduction wouldn’t make a significant difference to the overall welfare bill which is estimated to be £208 billion for the year 2013-14. And seeing as the take-up of benefits among migrants is so small, it’s also worth asking how big of a draw Britain’s welfare system really is.

 

[gordonthemoron]

it's all about being seen to do something about a perceived problem. The solution will probably backfire on some other group

 

[Antman]

To everyone on here moaning about the M25 - I can remember what it was like before it existed....not good trying to make certain journeys :cry:

The volume of traffic and the hours it operates at are overwhelming for a lot of the structure. I wonder how much the traffic has increased since it's inception?

Exactly, that was the whole point, the over population of the south east

 

[Oswyntail]

Exactly, that was the whole point, the over population of the south east

Which is caused only in part by immigration, but chiefly by the migration from other parts of the UK because of the ridiculous concentration of enterprises there. Dramatic rebalancing required

 

[Butts]

In my experience, drivers in Ireland would rather put up with traffic queues and longer journeys than pay the tolls.

When I lived in The Midlands The M6 Toll was always empty whilst the nearby M6 often jammed up - so the UK would appear to be similar in relation to this matter.

 

[NSEFAN]

it's all about being seen to do something about a perceived problem. The solution will probably backfire on some other group

That's how we seem to run the country. Cutting of our nose to spite our face.

 

[gordonthemoron]

M6 Toll is great, I get it paid on expenses, v.light traffic, few lorries and I've not seen any police on it

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Exactly, that was the whole point, the over population of the south east

You keep asserting that the SouthEast is overpopulated, but I don't recall you ever providing any evidence to back up that assertion. Sure, the population in the SE has increased considerably over the last 20 years or so (as Oswyntail and others have pointed out, that's partly due to immigration from abroad, but also in part, thanks to migration from other parts of the UK), but a population increase doesn't by itself automatically make the area 'overpopulated'.

In fact, I'm not even sure what you mean by the term. Do you mean that you think the population density has somehow reached a point at which it is impossible even in principle to provide adequate infrastructure? (And if so, where's your evidence?). Do you mean that the population is too big for the current infrastructure? (In which case, why don't you simply support improving the infrastructure?) Or do you simply mean there are more people living here than you personally would prefer? Or do you mean something different?