EU, Immigration and UKIP

[Bishopstone]

In terms of trying to change minds, and bring people on-side, I'm not sure that suggesting they've been brainwashed by popular newspapers and are incapable of independent thought has proved very helpful. Especially when you've no idea what newspaper they actually take: if any.

 

[Monty]

I have mixed views on the situation, I think the idea of the European Union is a fantastic idea in principle. But in practice I fear it is a hopelessly bureaucratic and undemocratic entity. I agree with the practices of things like free trade and movement (though free movement and permanently relocating in my opinion should be two different things). But I do not condone increasingly intrusive and absurd directives (the recent one about vacuum cleaners is a good recent example of this) that are enforced upon us with very little say. That said the Right need to stop being so scared about the EU and do what they can to push for reform, but the Left must also accept that reform is needed and to stop labeling anyone who opposes the EU in it's current form as a racist etc.

 

[Johnuk123]

UKIP are racist because members of their party and Nigel Farage himself are racist. QUOTE]

Not a very sensible post on a public forum.

 

[Antman]

And how do you intend that the UK creates an equal society in the countries where these immigrants are from ?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


If you insist on the 'Maily Fail' rubbish why should anyone actually bother to read what you've written ?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Can you let us all now which right wing newspapers Antman reads, I'm sure we'd all be interested

I'd be interested to know myself

I don't think anyone is objecting to a reasonable amount of immigration but the volumes that have been coming here are just unsustainable and the fact is they are driving wages down and housing costs up, if we didn't have a minimum wage I suspect that there would be jobs on offer at £2-£3 an hour, because someone would take them.

 

[muz379]

Crazy open door immigration policy? You know about 12% of the population is in fact foreign born, the majority of so called 'foreigners' are in fact British because they've had parents and even grandparents who were born here. You know Britain has some of the most stringent border controls in the EU.

The worrying thing though is I was reading in the guardian blog the other day that IPSOS mori did a poll and apparently people thought imigrants made up 24% of the population . So the issue really is skewed by parties like UKIP and the right wing hate press
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

This 'racist' allegation against UKIP or anybody else that puts British subjects first is as tiresome as it is absurd.

I wouldargue that the accusation of racism as well as homophobia and complete intolerance from UKIP is well founded . Not because it wants to put Britain first , if you listen to all political parties they will say something along those lines . I dont have an issue with that as a principle .

The reason the accusation is well leveled is because so many of the parties members and candidates for election have said or tweeted things that manny people would take to be racist , homophobic or just downright intolerant .

In my local area, there is a big family/group of Romanians, they do not work, their children do not go to school. They claim from the goverment, and yet they are climbing through people's gardens, rubbish, skips and stealing bikes and anything metal to scrap. I always see the women doing it, walking around with a pram full of pipes and cable, and the men driving around in dangerous, clapped out vans stealing from people's gardens and sheds.

That makes the prejudice worse, and all of a sudden all the Romanians are like that 'apparently'.

This is the problem , there are romanian families like that near me as well . However there is also white indigenous people that live near me that go out and get drunk and smash up phone boxes and engage in other antisocial behavior so its six of one and half a dozen of the other . Thats a police issue though .

 

[Manchester77]

housing costs up, if we didn't have a minimum wage I suspect that there would be jobs on offer at £2-£3 an hour, because someone would take them.

- Housing costs are going up because the government is not building new houses at a decent rate. Its clear that we cannot rely upon the private sector to deliver the numbers of homes we need now so why doesn't the government take action and give local authorities the money to build houses themselves on brownfield sites in their areas. Surely this government has had enough bad experiences with the private sector to see that it cannot do everything and shouldn't be the sole provider for key assets.

- But surely thats due to the system we live in as opposed to those who work because if an employer chooses to pay low wages then surely it signifies to the masses that the value of their labour is not appreciated by the employer. Just like revenue protection officers which when outsourced are used to win a contract and make a profit for the outsourcing agency whereas when directly employed by a unionised company the value of their labour is forced to be recognised and they're payed more.

 

[richw]

Personally I'm split on the EU. Their are many positives but also many negatives.
To me the positives marginally outweigh the negatives, simply because of the freedom of movement and being a regular traveller.

 

[Antman]

- Housing costs are going up because the government is not building new houses at a decent rate. Its clear that we cannot rely upon the private sector to deliver the numbers of homes we need now so why doesn't the government take action and give local authorities the money to build houses themselves on brownfield sites in their areas. Surely this government has had enough bad experiences with the private sector to see that it cannot do everything and shouldn't be the sole provider for key assets.

- But surely thats due to the system we live in as opposed to those who work because if an employer chooses to pay low wages then surely it signifies to the masses that the value of their labour is not appreciated by the employer. Just like revenue protection officers which when outsourced are used to win a contract and make a profit for the outsourcing agency whereas when directly employed by a unionised company the value of their labour is forced to be recognised and they're payed more.

Plenty of house building going on in the south east, problem is there is not enough infrastructure to support them, schools, healthcare etc.

Most employers won't pay anymore than they have to, much like the rest of us, and the more applicants the more it strengthens their hand.

 

[43021HST]

I would say housing costs are rising because of the lack of new council housing, I live in a council flat and I must say it's extremely liberating not having to worry about being tied to a private landlord or mortgage.

 

[Manchester77]

I would say housing costs are rising because of the lack of new council housing, I live in a council flat and I must say it's extremely liberating not having to worry about being tied to a private landlord or mortgage.

Exactly! Its all well and good giving people the 'right to buy' but make sure you replace all your privatised housing for those who can't afford to buy!

 

[meridian2]

The reason the accusation is well leveled is because so many of the parties members and candidates for election have said or tweeted things that manny people would take to be racist , homophobic or just downright intolerant .

That doesn't make the party, as a whole 'racist'; merely people have taken umbrage to those tweets that they themselves see as 'racist'. It's quite a blurry distinction, but it's an important one.

 

[Bishopstone]

- Housing costs are going up because the government is not building new houses at a decent rate.

In part, and I agree we need to build more homes.

However, demand is also part of the equation. If you're going to expand the population by 240,000 per annum (net) through immigration, then you need to be building 120,000 new units a year just to cope with that pressure, assuming migrants house themselves in couples/pairs, on average.

That's before you start considering other housing pressures such as an increasing birth rate; increasing longevity and old homes which are becoming uneconomic to maintain. Put all of that together, and we probably need to build 200,000 units a year to keep housing costs stable. In fact, we are building about 120,000 units a year, which barely covers the impact of migration and does nothing at all for domestic demand.

Whilst the big private housebuilders (Taylor Wimpey etc) remain active, the smaller guys vanished in 2008 and haven't come back, because the banks won't lend to them. In turn, this is because the banks have been told to stay away from risky exposures, and small housebuilders are particularly risky.

Putting public money into new housing isn't a bad idea, because the debt is repaid through the rental income stream the asset generates. However, at present there is quite a serious shortage of qualified labour and materials (eg bricks), which would need to be resolved before you ramped-up production. Almost certainly, you would end-up importing skilled labour to ease the housing shortage, whilst at the same time contributing to it!

 

[AM9]

In part, and I agree we need to build more homes.

However, demand is also part of the equation. If you're going to expand the population by 240,000 per annum (net) through immigration, then you need to be building 120,000 new units a year just to cope with that pressure, assuming migrants house themselves in couples/pairs, on average.

That's before you start considering other housing pressures such as an increasing birth rate; increasing longevity and old homes which are becoming uneconomic to maintain. Put all of that together, and we probably need to build 200,000 units a year to keep housing costs stable. In fact, we are building about 120,000 units a year, which barely covers the impact of migration and does nothing at all for domestic demand.

Or another way to put it is that 120,000 just about addresses the domestic demand but does nothing at all for the impact of migration. It all depends if you want it to look like all the new housing goes to immigrants or the existing population.
Incidentally, the England and Wales birth rate in 2013 dropped by 4.3%, the biggest fall since 1975. Also the total fertility rate in the UK dropped from 1.94 to 1.85 in the same year. The long term impact of these falls will seriously affect the state's ability to pay for health and pensions in about 20-30 years.

Whilst the big private housebuilders (Taylor Wimpey etc) remain active, the smaller guys vanished in 2008 and haven't come back, because the banks won't lend to them. In turn, this is because the banks have been told to stay away from risky exposures, and small housebuilders are particularly risky.

Putting public money into new housing isn't a bad idea, because the debt is repaid through the rental income stream the asset generates. However, at present there is quite a serious shortage of qualified labour and materials (eg bricks), which would need to be resolved before you ramped-up production. Almost certainly, you would end-up importing skilled labour to ease the housing shortage, whilst at the same time contributing to it!

So what happened to all the 'smaller guys', are they jobless or pseudo-entrepreneurs selling imported goods on Ebay supplemented by their in-work benefits?
Yes we have Thatcher to thank for the selling of houses at below replacement prices and deliberately preventing councils from replenishing housuing stock. So public funding of housebuilding for rental is definitely the only true solution rather than creating houses for private speculators to let at prices above what the government admits is reasonable.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

You only have to use public transport in the London suburbs (the parts where tourists don't venture) to realise just how swamped this country has become.

Eh? If you're referring to how crowded public transport is, then all that proves is that TfL/the rail companies/etc. are providing insufficient buses or trains to meet demand. You'd need a lot more data and analysis to work out what the root cause of that is.

 

[radamfi]

If anything, the current immigration policy is intended to reduce the racial diversity of the country.

Immigrants from within the EU are almost exclusively white and Christian. Immigration from outside the EU is now more restricted than ever. So I would guess that the % of white Christians in the UK is now higher than it was before 2004.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Incidentally, the England and Wales birth rate in 2013 dropped by 4.3%, the biggest fall since 1975. Also the total fertility rate in the UK dropped from 1.94 to 1.85 in the same year. The long term impact of these falls will seriously affect the state's ability to pay for health and pensions in about 20-30 years.

Fertility rates in most of the western world are well below the 2.1 replacement level so, despite rhetoric from politicians, governments in the west want and need immigration to avoid demographic problems and a shrinking economy.

 

[Antman]

Eh? If you're referring to how crowded public transport is, then all that proves is that TfL/the rail companies/etc. are providing insufficient buses or trains to meet demand. You'd need a lot more data and analysis to work out what the root cause of that is.

It is obvious what he meant, London is grossly overpopulated

 

[Amberley54]

Fertility rates in most of the western world are well below the 2.1 replacement level so, despite rhetoric from politicians, governments in the west want and need immigration to avoid demographic problems and a shrinking economy.[/QUOTE]

It isn't just in the western economies where falling fertility rates are an increasing cause for concern.

Japan, South Korea and now even China have slipped below the replacement level. In China the positive impact is the abandonment of the 'one child' policy and upward pressure on labour costs (wages), whilst in South Korea and Japan there simply isn't enough economically active adults to sustain the financial cost of caring for a growing elderly populations needs and both Governments are exploring novel/desperate ways to address the issue.

 

[radamfi]

It isn't just in the western economies where falling fertility rates are an increasing cause for concern.

Japan, South Korea and now even China have slipped below the replacement level. In China the positive impact is the abandonment of the 'one child' policy and upward pressure on labour costs (wages), whilst in South Korea and Japan there simply isn't enough economically active adults to sustain the financial cost of caring for a growing elderly populations needs and both Governments are exploring novel/desperate ways to address the issue.

I really mean 'developed' when I used the term 'western'. Japan in particular does not really have immigration, so the falling numbers and ageing population is particularly extreme there.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It is obvious what he meant, London is grossly overpopulated

Immigrants could go anywhere in the country, but a lot of them choose the most crowded and expensive part of the country.

 

[Searle]

UKIP are racist because members of their party and Nigel Farage himself are racist. QUOTE]

Not a very sensible post on a public forum.

Why's that?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Eh? If you're referring to how crowded public transport is, then all that proves is that TfL/the rail companies/etc. are providing insufficient buses or trains to meet demand. You'd need a lot more data and analysis to work out what the root cause of that is.

I think he's trying to say how many "foreigners" there are on the tubes, all of which have as much right to be on the trains as anyone else does :roll:

 

[EM2]

You only have to use public transport in the London suburbs (the parts where tourists don't venture) to realise just how swamped this country has become.

I've seen no massive increase in transport patronage in my area since I returned to London in 2007.
EDIT - except on the GOBLin and that's because of new, clean, comfortable, more frequent trains and staffed stations, with CCTV and decent lighing.

 

[Antman]

Why's that?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---



I think he's trying to say how many "foreigners" there are on the tubes, all of which have as much right to be on the trains as anyone else does :roll:

Whether they have a right to be in the country is a greater concern

 

[radamfi]

Immigration of fully grown, young, educated adults is preferable to having home grown children, and also better for the environment. The immense cost to the state of pregnancy, infant health care costs, child benefit and education is avoided.

 

[ExRes]

Immigration of fully grown, young, educated adults is preferable to having home grown children, and also better for the environment. The immense cost to the state of pregnancy, infant health care costs, child benefit and education is avoided.

Great idea, enforced sterilisation for all UK passport holders then, have you got a date for your move abroad ?

:roll:
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Why's that?

Would I be right in thinking that an accusation like that could lead to legal action against both the poster and the RailUKforums ?

 

[Johnuk123]

Would I be right in thinking that an accusation like that could lead to legal action against both the poster and the RailUKforums ?

You would be, it also breaks 2 forum rules.

 

[Searle]

Whether they have a right to be in the country is a greater concern

They have every right to be in this country as much as we do. Gentle reminder that somewhere down your family tree that one of your relatives would have immigrated into the UK. Do you have problems with Americans immigrating to the UK, out of interest?

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Would I be right in thinking that an accusation like that could lead to legal action against both the poster and the RailUKforums ?

Nope. It is however a nice little tactic to intimidate other posters into not airing uncomfortable truths.


Sent from my iPhone 4 using Tapatalk

 

[MidnightFlyer]

No, (I think) UKIP are racist because members of their party and Nigel Farage himself are racist,

I would be grateful if you could clarify if you are referring to all members or specific ones. I think whilst making such claims it is also advisable to remember no other party in the UK is free from this either (for example the former vice Fuhrer of a Nazi sympathiser group in Milton Keynes who's now a Labour councillor) - are Labour racist too then? Don't forget also Ukip have a blanket life ban on any former members of the National Front, BNP or other far right groups from joining, so the most actively racist of potential supporters are unlikely to be members.

 

[Johnuk123]

Nope. It is however a nice little tactic to intimidate other posters into not airing uncomfortable truths.


Sent from my iPhone 4 using Tapatalk

Wrong of course, because if you make a defamatory allegation about someone you can be sued for libel.

Accusing an individual of being a racist is defamatory unless of course you can prove it.

 

[43021HST]

I've always wondered why people place immigration as a higher concern than the wrong doings of the financial sector. It's well known the reason why Britain got into this mess in the first place, is because of the ongoing deregulation of the financial markets and the nefarious activities of bankers, of which is the background Nigel Farage Comes from.

The biggest threat to Britain doesn't come from immigrants or so called benefit scroungers, but from the free market. The next logical step now, rather than supporting some far right party that only exists to divide the people and transfer more money to private hands. Is to move towards more public utilities being in the hands of the state, thus reducing the amount of meddling the free market has in ordinary peoples lives.

We need to be heading away from this neoliberal agenda that the three main parties and UKIP support and back towards playing proper politics, when there was such thing as an opposition.

 

[ExRes]

Nope. It is however a nice little tactic to intimidate other posters into not airing uncomfortable truths.


Sent from my iPhone 4 using Tapatalk

Forget it, no comment