I do think that some people need to grow up and realise just because the outcome wasn't what some people argued for, they do still have the right to make that argument.

Moreso when the leading figures of the leave campaign have gone quietly into the night leaving them rudderless.

comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 7 minutes ago
What many drumming to the beat of limited immigration fail to realise is that their "controlled migration of skilled workers" is ultimately flawed in achieving only the acceptance of migrant workers who we "want" to have from the world over.

Here's why.. take for example a nuclear physicist. Yes we are building new power plants, and we will need some of these scientists say 10 out of 100 are from outside the UK.

We are out of the EU so we can't employ anyone conveniently as we might have done. However we have the whole world to choose from, great.

Nuclear physicist from France - £70k a year. Same from India £45k a year... hmm £45k a year will get the gig.

Nuclear physicist from France, could easily travel back and forth weekly. From India - not so easy.

What happens?

Dependents and spouse come over. So for each skilled person from outside the EU, the propensity for dependents to come with them is increased - kids, possibly aged parents, along with the spouse too.

Like I said, I look forward, and dread, in equal measure, just who will be blamed next.

Picking and choosing who we want in the country is not as easy as picking teams for a kickabout in the park.
----------------------------------------------------------------------


We could still pick the fella from France.

Just as we could pick the guy from India whilst in the EU.

One does not stop, when the other flows.

Both streams flow, only the tap does not work on one.

We could still pick the fella from France.

Just as we could pick the guy from India whilst in the EU.
---------
You've just missed the point.

comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 8 minutes ago
We could still pick the fella from France.

Just as we could pick the guy from India whilst in the EU.
---------
You've just missed the point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I do not think you have one.

We already have migrants from India, and dependants. Always have done

I do not think you have one.

We already have migrants from India, and dependants
----------
So you don't think this would increase outside the EU?

What happens?

Dependents and spouse come over. So for each skilled person from outside the EU, the propensity for dependents to come with them is increased - kids, possibly aged parents, along with the spouse too.

_______________________

Last year, 47.9% of EU citizens immigrated to the UK for a definite job or study. That means 52.1% immigrated for other reasons (accompany family, find work, sponge).

69% percent of non-EU citizens, immigrated to the UK for a definite job or study. That means only 31% immigrated for other reasons.

52.1% to 31% suggest that not so many Indian Nuclear Technicians are bringing over their unemployed family, but in fact, the French Nuclear Technician is inviting all of is unemployed EU friends over.

comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 59 seconds ago
I do not think you have one.

We already have migrants from India, and dependants
----------
So you don't think this would increase outside the EU?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Who knows. It can be planned for if so though. He may be a really ugly orphan

Your Frenchman, he may also want to have his family with him. Which we would know nothing of until they required services.

comment by RonAlvinho (U6117)
posted 37 minutes ago
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 2 hours, 3 minutes ago
------------
For the record, immigration thus far has provided a net benefit to the UK.

The impact has been between 0.5 - 1% of GDP.. in layperson terms that's at least £10bn
----------------------------------------------------------------------
JUst seen this comment from someone elses reply. Dont immigrants make up about 5% of the population? So that 5% add up to 1% of GDP. SO that means migrants are reducing GDP oper population which is how wealth is measured, is it not?

Switzerland have the 2nd highest GDP per population in the world and have the type of relationship with the EU a lot of leave campaigners used as an example of what they wanted.

Last year, 47.9% of EU citizens immigrated to the UK for a definite job or study. That means 52.1% immigrated for other reasons (accompany family, find work, sponge).

69% percent of non-EU citizens, immigrated to the UK for a definite job or study. That means only 31% immigrated for other reasons.

52.1% to 31% suggest that not so many Indian Nuclear Technicians are bringing over their unemployed family, but in fact, the French Nuclear Technician is inviting all of is unemployed EU friends over

-----------------------
You're looking to compare % but not actual figures. It's a flawed analysis. When you have the actual figures to hand you can state your case again.. A previous comment relayed the following :

The highest proportion of our immigration in recent years has come from China. The 3rd highest India, the 4th highest Australia and the 6th highest America

comment by I am gooner now (U16927)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by RonAlvinho (U6117)
posted 37 minutes ago
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 2 hours, 3 minutes ago
------------
For the record, immigration thus far has provided a net benefit to the UK.

The impact has been between 0.5 - 1% of GDP.. in layperson terms that's at least £10bn
----------------------------------------------------------------------
JUst seen this comment from someone elses reply. Dont immigrants make up about 5% of the population? So that 5% add up to 1% of GDP. SO that means migrants are reducing GDP oper population which is how wealth is measured, is it not?

----------
Depends whether you would rather have that £10bn or not.

Stupid man will say not.

comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted less than a minute ago
Last year, 47.9% of EU citizens immigrated to the UK for a definite job or study. That means 52.1% immigrated for other reasons (accompany family, find work, sponge).

69% percent of non-EU citizens, immigrated to the UK for a definite job or study. That means only 31% immigrated for other reasons.

52.1% to 31% suggest that not so many Indian Nuclear Technicians are bringing over their unemployed family, but in fact, the French Nuclear Technician is inviting all of is unemployed EU friends over

-----------------------
You're looking to compare % but not actual figures. It's a flawed analysis. When you have the actual figures to hand you can state your case again.. A previous comment relayed the following :

The highest proportion of our immigration in recent years has come from China. The 3rd highest India, the 4th highest Australia and the 6th highest America
----------------------------------------------------------------------

That was my comment.

The actual figures from the Office of National Statistics study are:

EU Citizens net - 121,000 - 58,000 in definite work or study

Non-EU Citizens - 126,000 - 87,000 in definite work or study.

Comparing actual figures paints the same picture.

Ok so there's more migration from outside the EU.

However unless the "study" element can be age ranged, you cannot accurately see any drain on resources.

However, as immigration is adding £10bn to the economy, it will be enough to support those dependants among the 237,000 people the ONS are displaying.

Regarding the France/India scenario. The ONS study recorded an average 4,000 people for both EU and non-EU immigrant's coming specifically to accompany/join somebody in the UK.

Considering more non-EU citizens immigrated, that very specific data proves your theory to be wrong.

The ONS study recorded an average 4,000 people for both EU and non-EU immigrant's

-----------
An average of what? Per year?

A rounded figure over the 12 months recorded I believe. I was specifically replying to your theory about the Indian worker in comparison to the French worker btw, which I disagree with.

The Indian worker is more likely to bring dependants. That's my view. (Indian worker can be read as migrant from outside the EU)

More migrants from outside the EU, greater distance from dependents = more likely to bring them with.

What the ONS doesn't say though is how many immigrants are neither in work or study, eg the spouse/partner.

That's why the figures put forward need to have those in study recorded separately.

Those figures have pretty much blown your theory out of the water.

Perhaps the Frenchman's family is more likely to move here because they can easily travel home as they wish.

We can safely assume neither man will be manning a till at SportDirect though

One thing is for sure, I would rather have migrants working in the UK, rather than the work leave the Uk.

comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted about an hour ago

----------
Depends whether you would rather have that £10bn or not.

Stupid man will say not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You say a stupid man, but if that 4% of the popultion who dont contribute must be taking rather than giving. The reduction on GDP per population means that those that are contributing are having their contributions streched further and geting less for their taxes.

To put it in simple terms, would you rather have a share of £20m between twenty of you or a share of £21m between 25 of you, because thats the principle here. You

comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 27 minutes ago

What the ONS doesn't say though is how many immigrants are neither in work or study, eg the spouse/partner
----------------------------------------------------------------------

It does, by simply detracting the numbers.

"EU Citizens net - 121,000 - 58,000 in definite work or study."

- So 121,000 minus 58,000 = 63,000 immigrating without a definite job or study.

"Non-EU Citizens - 126,000 - 87,000 in definite work or study."

- 126,000 minus 87,000 = 59,000 immigrating without definite work or study.

I disagree that distance is such a factor in bringing dependants. When you consider London to Marseille is 600 miles, why would anyone from Marseille feel any less inclined to bring dependants than an employee from India? Especially considering under the EU Freedom of Movement their dependants would not need to apply for a Visa to live here? The man in India doesn't have that luxury.

comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 10 minutes ago
One thing is for sure, I would rather have migrants working in the UK, rather than the work leave the Uk.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

That's a very fair worry and point.

In my opinion, the work only leaves if their is a lack of confidence in the country. That lack of confidence isn't down to being in or out, its down to how our government managed the decision. As a leave voter I have to say that I am very disappointed in the immediate handling, it's as if all those in parliament campaigning to remain did not even plan for what might (and eventually did) happen. I find it very unfair to lay all the blame on Leave "not having a plan", when every MP knew that come the day after the result it would still be them governing and regulating our country.

Hopefully Labour and Conservative quickly sort themselves out, so that that confidence in our country can be restored and maintained.

Work leaves the country if it is in the business interest to be so.

comment by I am gooner now (U16927)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted about an hour ago

----------
Depends whether you would rather have that £10bn or not.

Stupid man will say not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You say a stupid man, but if that 4% of the popultion who dont contribute must be taking rather than giving. The reduction on GDP per population means that those that are contributing are having their contributions streched further and geting less for their taxes.

To put it in simple terms, would you rather have a share of £20m between twenty of you or a share of £21m between 25 of you, because thats the principle here. You

-------
You're mistaken in your reasoning.

Immigration ADDS between 0.5 and 1% to GDP of the U.K.
0.5% is around £10bn added.

I'd rather have the £10bn thanks.

Of course a stupid man will say he doesn't.