Farage Ltd and Similar Watch

[The Saturday Boy]

I would have thought so. My point is that low skilled, low paid migration is not be beneficial, it doesn't actually create wealth and more should be done to get those unemployed who can't be bothered back into work. Wouldn't it be better to increase the minimum wage and cut immigration? The service industry exists to service steady markets ie we will always spend x amount on food, always require x number of cleaners etc etc . I feel wealth has to be redistributed and if it means state assistance to top up wages so be it. If at the same time they can reduce demand on public services it is ultimately cost effective. Get the unemployed into work as a priority.

So you're saying that low paid, low skilled workers are effectively cattle fodder? Consultant surgeons don't produce wealth either but their work, like cleaners, enable others to create wealth. Therefore they are indirectly contributing to wealth creation.

As I have provided some numbers that say economic migration has had a net benefit in the region of £25 billion since 2000 and you have provided.....no numbers... How can you continue to argue that it is not beneficial to the economy.

You talked about your sums being "basic economics" but are now proposing increased wages as a means of reducing unemployment which certainly isn't consistent with basic economics. Or, you are proposing and end to immigration and forcing the current unemployed into jobs that would otherwise have been taken by economic migrants despite the fact that the links I provided suggest that there is no significant link between economic migration and the domestic labour market.

Further, it is widely accepted that a growing economy relies on economic migration - whether that is the UK or economies like Brazil. Choke off economic migration now, while the economy is growing (albeit slowly) would most likely have the impact of reversing the current trends which would in turn increase the levels of unemployment, reduce the tax income and increase the state expenditure of benefits.

 

[Papper]

The only way you'll be able to increase minimum wage substantially is by getting corporates to share their profits with SMEs. If you made someone like ASDA increase their minimum wage they'd screw their suppliers, which would mean that more of their suppliers would end up going to the wall and their employees would then earn less than minimum wage.

Until the large companies stop putting profits first the Country will never improve at the bottom. Some of the things I see and hear regarding health and safety items is short of astonishing.

I wouldn't disagree.

You have two families, one family is unemployed, exist on benefits and are not willing to work for ASDA. The other family are economic migrants and are willing to work for ASDA and get state assistance for the low wages. You have two families that use the NHS, schools and other public services ie funding has to increase. Wouldn't it be better to give the family in benefits incentives to work for ASDA rather than encouraging economic migration? I would see that as cost effective.

 

[Penk Wolf]

I wouldn't disagree.

You have two families, one family is unemployed, exist on benefits and are not willing to work for ASDA. The other family are economic migrants and are willing to work for ASDA and get state assistance for the low wages. You have two families that use the NHS, schools and other public services ie funding has to increase. Wouldn't it be better to give the family in benefits incentives to work for ASDA rather than encouraging economic migration? I would see that as cost effective.

Yes, it would, but I see two problems. 1, they don't want to work in the first place and 2, they wouldn't work at Asda even if they wanted to work.

 

[Papper]

Yes, it would, but I see two problems. 1, they don't want to work in the first place and 2, they wouldn't work at Asda even if they wanted to work.

And that I feel is the failing of the Politicians. An inability to empower this underclass.

 

[Penk Wolf]

And that I feel is the failing of the Politicians. An inability to empower this underclass.

So, again, how do you suggest they do it?

 

[Papper]

So you're saying that low paid, low skilled workers are effectively cattle fodder? Consultant surgeons don't produce wealth either but their work, like cleaners, enable others to create wealth. Therefore they are indirectly contributing to wealth creation.

No not at all but Consultant surgeons are far harder to replace and cost more to train. Although all these people perform essential roles and you are unlikely to have somebody long term unemployed train as a surgeon. I would welcome qualified/skilled migrants into this country and I believe we do.

As I have provided some numbers that say economic migration has had a net benefit in the region of £25 billion since 2000 and you have provided.....no numbers... How can you continue to argue that it is not beneficial to the economy.

How many schools and hospitals have been built to meet the increased demand since the mass immigration of recent years? Has funding for local government increased in line with this demand? How does somebody on minimum wage survive in London without state assistance? How do they survive anywhere in the country without state assistance? There is no true wealth creation when you have cheap labour filling essential roles that only need filling because the underclass have no work ethic.

You talked about your sums being "basic economics" but are now proposing increased wages as a means of reducing unemployment which certainly isn't consistent with basic economics. Or, you are proposing and end to immigration and forcing the current unemployed into jobs that would otherwise have been taken by economic migrants despite the fact that the links I provided suggest that there is no significant link between economic migration and the domestic labour market.

Yes I would increase increase working tax credits and if necessary cut benefits if it's an incentive to work. There would be no need to encourage economic migration for low paid unskilled work. You save on the welfare budget and reduce demand on services. Ultimately it pays for itself. Yes I would do all I could to force the unemployed into work especially those who hold no qualifications or are illiterate. I would do all I could to empower these people.

Further, it is widely accepted that a growing economy relies on economic migration - whether that is the UK or economies like Brazil. Choke off economic migration now, while the economy is growing (albeit slowly) would most likely have the impact of reversing the current trends which would in turn increase the levels of unemployment, reduce the tax income and increase the state expenditure of benefits.

All cheap migrant labour serves to do is lower wages, increased demand on public services and make the underclass even more unemployable. Brazil doesn't have the same welfare state as us and they do not have an unemployable underclass that amounts to 2.5M that has to be supported.

 

[Papper]

So, again, how do you suggest they do it?

Reform the welfare state. Get tough, remove the lifestyle choice. If there is work available make it their only option. I think it's far more difficult to improve a mindset and give people hope but Politicians are there to serve people and not only business. The loser mentality is ingrained in society - people made to feel pathetic and worthless.

 

[Penk Wolf]

Reform the welfare state. Get tough, remove the lifestyle choice. If there is work available make it their only option. I think it's far more difficult to improve a mindset and give people hope but Politicians are there to serve people and not only business. The loser mentality is ingrained in society - people made to feel pathetic and worthless.

And how would you do this? And what if they still chose not to work?

 

[Papper]

That assumes that the the labour supply curve is only impacted by the supply of labour, which it isn't, which is basic economics.

The factors are unskilled, low wage and a large supply of labour (most likely agency/temporary ) that is qualified and willing to work hard for low wage. The labour supply curve (in this case) is dictated by the employer and not the worker.

The alternative models of economic change are widely available to debate but they rarely get into the mainstream media. There is not just one kind of debt, the different types of debt are often reported interchangeably without any explanation. While this government argues it has to pay off it's debt as quickly as possible, there is no similar expectation on me to repay my mortgage which still has over 20 years to run and represents a sizeable chunk of my expenditure. Debt, in our economic model, is normal. Attempting to reduce the debt at the speed we are currently doing is not normal.

Yes, and that's why there are cuts to pay this debt off. The level of repayments to service this debt are astronomical and govt receipts get nowhere near it. You wouldn't give somebody who earns, say £40K pa a mortgage on a house valued at £4M. You have to service a debt and not let it run away. I'm quite hopeful of Miliband vastly increasing spending but how he funds it may lead him to be shot to pieces. The Tories have all the ammunition.

 

[Papper]

And how would you do this? And what if they still chose not to work?

I would cease any welfare payments to them. The way it's going we won't have a welfare state in a few years time anyway.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

Yes, and that's why there are cuts to pay this debt off. The level of repayments to service this debt are astronomical

They're really not. And our debt as a proportion of GDP was not a concern when the Tories took office. It was pretty much as low as it had been at any point over the last 200 years. It's a non sequitur used to prop up ideology.

 

[Papper]

They're really not. And our debt as a proportion of GDP was not a concern when the Tories took office. It was pretty much as low as it had been at any point over the last 200 years. It's a non sequitur used to prop up ideology.

Hey, if somebody can reassure me that the future of the welfare state is rock solid even if we continue in the current vein I am more than happy. Cynical me feels we will turn into the USA. I would be delighted if Labour increase spending but I can't see it unless they raise taxes.

 

[Hereford Wolf]

A UKIP prospective councillor who described gay sex as “disgusting” has defended his views and said that gay people should stop trying to ram it down his throat.

Douglas Denny, 66, who plans to stand for UKIP in Portsmouth City Council’s elections in May, insisted that he was entitled to his views and revealed that he’d been inundated with letters of support.

Just yesterday, the postman emptied his sack all over my kitchen floor,” he revealed.

“His load was so big that he’d been struggling to squeeze into my back door. I gave him a quick tug and the contents of his sack went everywhere.”

When asked about his homophobic remarks that gay people are “abnormal”, Mr Denny said that he would prefer to clarify his views in writing.

“I’m always writing letters expressing my disgust at homosexuality,” he explained.

“In fact, I only have to think about two men together and I knock one out.”

 

[The Saturday Boy]

Hey, if somebody can reassure me that the future of the welfare state is rock solid even if we continue in the current vein I am more than happy. Cynical me feels we will turn into the USA. I would be delighted if Labour increase spending but I can't see it unless they raise taxes.

It isn't, the Tories would have it dismantled and are using the debt as a smokescreen. DW has pointed out that the "debt bombshell" you referred to isn't all it is cracked up to be and only when it is used in isolation from all other factors and as a weapon of fear does it have any real effect.

None of which has anything to do with EU immigration.

 

[FrankMunro-371]

They're really not. And our debt as a proportion of GDP was not a concern when the Tories took office. It was pretty much as low as it had been at any point over the last 200 years. It's a non sequitur used to prop up ideology.

And that is todays word of the day.....

 

[Papper]

It isn't, the Tories would have it dismantled and are using the debt as a smokescreen. DW has pointed out that the "debt bombshell" you referred to isn't all it is cracked up to be and only when it is used in isolation from all other factors and as a weapon of fear does it have any real effect.

None of which has anything to do with EU immigration.

My concern is how we continue to fund the public services and the welfare state. If Ed Miliband can convince me that he can improve public services and can guarantee the future of the welfare state he will get my vote. If he can do that then it does not matter a jot to me how many economic migrants or workshy we have. Will the Labour Party reassure me and how will services be funded?

 

[The Saturday Boy]

My concern is how we continue to fund the public services and the welfare state. If Ed Miliband can convince me that he can improve public services and can guarantee the future of the welfare state he will get my vote. If he can do that then it does not matter a jot to me how many economic migrants or workshy we have. Will the Labour Party reassure me and how will services be funded?

I don't understand why it is a concern. It is a choice. We could have a much larger welfare state if we wanted. We could have less nuclear weapons, reduce our foreign trips to get involved in other people's wars. The Tories (and definitely UKIP) believe that the best way to improve public services is to sell them off. If you believe that, you have a choice about who to vote for.

EU migration won't be the cause of either the collapse of the welfare state or the demise of public services, that will be a political decision.

It is a bit of a cliche but this country created many elements of the welfare state when we were financially in a much worse situation that we are now. At the foundations, the UK is economically relatively healthy. Our loans are longer term, which is why we are different from many of the Eurozone countries that were used to scare us, and we were never, ever close to being bankrupt. But it has become a truth because it is convenient.

 

[Papper]

I don't understand why it is a concern. It is a choice. We could have a much larger welfare state if we wanted. We could have less nuclear weapons, reduce our foreign trips to get involved in other people's wars. The Tories (and definitely UKIP) believe that the best way to improve public services is to sell them off. If you believe that, you have a choice about who to vote for.

EU migration won't be the cause of either the collapse of the welfare state or the demise of public services, that will be a political decision.

It is a bit of a cliche but this country created many elements of the welfare state when we were financially in a much worse situation that we are now. At the foundations, the UK is economically relatively healthy. Our loans are longer term, which is why we are different from many of the Eurozone countries that were used to scare us, and we were never, ever close to being bankrupt. But it has become a truth because it is convenient.

So easy. A landslide for Miliband methinks. Thanks for reassuring me.

 

[arklowolf]

I don't understand why it is a concern. It is a choice. We could have a much larger welfare state if we wanted. We could have less nuclear weapons, reduce our foreign trips to get involved in other people's wars. The Tories (and definitely UKIP) believe that the best way to improve public services is to sell them off. If you believe that, you have a choice about who to vote for.

EU migration won't be the cause of either the collapse of the welfare state or the demise of public services, that will be a political decision.

It is a bit of a cliche but this country created many elements of the welfare state when we were financially in a much worse situation that we are now. At the foundations, the UK is economically relatively healthy. Our loans are longer term, which is why we are different from many of the Eurozone countries that were used to scare us, and we were never, ever close to being bankrupt. But it has become a truth because it is convenient.

Just out of interest; are Labour still in favour of a cap on Immigration? (as the last Labour administration were).

 

[The Saturday Boy]

Just out of interest; are Labour still in favour of a cap on Immigration? (as the last Labour administration were).

No idea. On the list of things that are important to me, immigration isn't even on the list.