Stay or go? EU poll - Oh the irony.

ruggedtoast

leveller2911 wrote: »

Nice one Hamish, just ignore the pieces of my post that are difficult for you to fit into your jigsaw.............

How "tiny" is the proportion who claim benefits?.

THE REPORT WAS FUNDED BY THE EU........................

Hamish its smoke and mirrors.

Good grief. I just received an electricity bill telling me the amount of electricity I have benefited from this quarter. But the bill is from the electricity company that supplied the electricity.

It must all be... LIES!

:mad:

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

leveller2911 wrote: »

smoke and mirrors.

Seriously, what is wrong with you lot?

All the evidence, from academics, economists, university research papers, think tanks, government studies, etc etc etc shows a range of outcomes from EU migration ranging from barely perceptible to massive net benefit.

Not a single credible report shows any significant net cost to the UK from EU migration.

Yet you insist on frothing away about it like a red-top tabloid editor on crack.

Why do you hate immigration so much?

Bantex_2

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Seriously, what is wrong with you lot?

All the evidence, from academics, economists, university research papers, think tanks, government studies, etc etc etc shows a range of outcomes from EU migration ranging from barely perceptible to massive net benefit.

Not a single credible report shows any significant net cost to the UK from EU migration.

Yet you insist on frothing away about it like a red top tabloid editor on crack.

Why do you hate immigrants so much?

No problem with immigrants, just wary of uncontrolled immigration.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Bantex wrote: »

No problem with immigrants, just wary of uncontrolled immigration.

Now there's a UKIP talking point designed to confuse the masses if ever there was one....

The 'uncontrolled' migration from the EU has delivered billions of pounds of surplus for the UK and has subsidised the native population.

The 'controlled' migration from non-EU countries has cost us over £100bn....

We're not very good at 'picking and choosing' immigrants, are we?

zagubov

Interesting infographic, although it probably won't please everybody here.
http://uk.businessinsider.com/the-second-languages-in-every-part-of-the-world-infographic-2014-10?r=US

CLAPTON

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Seriously, what is wrong with you lot?

All the evidence, from academics, economists, university research papers, think tanks, government studies, etc etc etc shows a range of outcomes from EU migration ranging from barely perceptible to massive net benefit.

Not a single credible report shows any significant net cost to the UK from EU migration.

Yet you insist on frothing away about it like a red top tabloid editor on crack.

Why do you hate immigrants so much?

of course 'credible' reports are those that are funded by the EU or left wing think tanks and show that EU migration is a good thing
and of course they make the following assumptions


- EU migrants never will have children
- EU migrants will never grow old
- increase in population requires no new infrastructure
- increase in population causes no shortages or bottlenecks in access to NHS service (because they are so healthy they never need them)
- there is no economic costs associated with traffic bottlenecks and other shortages
- the extra imports, especially of fuel and food has no economic consequences
- there are no consequences to the lack of investment by businesses because it is cheaper to use the massive amount of EU migrant labour than improving productivity by investing
- the huge increase in house prices in London and the SE due to the population increase has no economic or social consequences


plus a few more I've forgotten


apart from that Aberdeen is not experiencing any downsides to the massive increase in population in England

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

CLAPTON wrote: »

left wing think tanks

I'm right of centre both politically and economically.

Reports only get my attention when they are credible.

Only the most biased of posters would try and discredit every major university and economist in the UK just because their pro-immigration viewpoints don't match your anti-immigration agenda.

Anyway, lets debunk these UKIP myths you keep trying to propagate....

- EU migrants never will have children

God I hope not.

We need millions more children to rebalance the age profile.

- EU migrants will never grow old

Many will return to their home countries before retirement.

But regardless, the average adult EU migrant will still be a net contributor, even if they stay.

- increase in population requires no new infrastructure

We need new infrastructure anyway.

It's not EU immigrants fault that the UK government has blown the surplus they created on subsidising the native born instead of investing in infrastructure.

- increase in population causes no shortages or bottlenecks in access to NHS service (because they are so healthy they never need them)

The NHS recently listed the top causes of stress on their system.

Unsurprisingly, EU migrants weren't on the list.

Young healthy people hardly ever use the healthcare system.

The millions of new pensioners use it all the time, and it's only EU immigrants that subsidise paying for this care. All other groups take out more than they put in.

- there is no economic costs associated with traffic bottlenecks and other shortages

The greenies and nimbys have blocked new roads for decades.

Time to build some more.....

- the extra imports, especially of fuel and food has no economic consequences

Correct. There are no consequences of note.

- there are no consequences to the lack of investment by businesses because it is cheaper to use the massive amount of EU migrant

Utter Nonsense.

EU migrants DO NOT drive down wages, they increase them on average.

I have no idea why you persist in repeating such lies and disparagements when you must surely know by now it's a load of rubbish.

- the huge increase in house prices in London and the SE due to the population increase has no economic or social consequences

Better get building then....

As throttling economic growth by starving business of employees, in an effort to keep down prices, would truly be the economics of the madhouse.

apart from that Aberdeen is not experiencing any downsides to the massive increase in population in England

England doesn't have a "massive" increase in population, nor does it experience any downsides on average that outweigh the benefits.

We need MORE immigrants, MORE EU countries, MORE integration, and LESS restrictions on freedom and movement.

zagubov

CLAPTON wrote: »

of course 'credible' reports are those that are funded by the EU or left wing think tanks and show that EU migration is a good thing
and of course they make the following assumptions


- EU migrants never will have children
- EU migrants will never grow old
- increase in population requires no new infrastructure
- increase in population causes no shortages or bottlenecks in access to NHS service (because they are so healthy they never need them)
- there is no economic costs associated with traffic bottlenecks and other shortages
- the extra imports, especially of fuel and food has no economic consequences
- there are no consequences to the lack of investment by businesses because it is cheaper to use the massive amount of EU migrant labour than improving productivity by investing
- the huge increase in house prices in London and the SE due to the population increase has no economic or social consequences


plus a few more I've forgotten


apart from that Aberdeen is not experiencing any downsides to the massive increase in population in England

Population increase in a country has to be pretty lop-sided/ disproportionate/ poorly-distributed before it's a problem. In which case, re-directing immigration should perhaps be made a priority rather than stopping it.

That's my tentative suggestion, not my confident assertion, just so you know.;)

Generali

Macroeconomic impacts of Migration from the BoE (not EU Funded or Left Wing):

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Documents/quarterlybulletin/qb070103.pdf

..an inflow of migrants will increase both aggregate supply and demand

One for the DWP:
http://www.iza.org/conference_files/amm2006/lemos_s1613.pdf

We have found no discernible statistical evidence to suggest that A8 migration has been a contributor to the rise in claimant unemployment in the UK....

danothy

CLAPTON wrote: »

of course 'credible' reports are those that are funded by the EU

Speaking as someone who has and does perform research with funding from the EU I can assure you that no-one tells me what the outcomes or conclusion should have been or should be before, during, or after the work was or is carried out. Your implicit accusation that EU funded research is somehow corrupt is both very serious in nature and completely unfounded.