If we vote for Brexit what happens

ruggedtoast

CLAPTON wrote: »

of course we need to control the number of people that come here : you believe that too
overseas students have to be housed and impose a burden on our infrastructure :

The other way of describing that is that overseas people share the use of our infrastructure. They also pay their share of maintaining and developing it.

But as you and your purple faced Kipper mates seem to see "foreigners" as an amorphous tide of locusts coming to consume everything in their wake, you obviously don't see it like that.

Personally I would swap every single UKIP voter for a Bulgarian undergraduate overnight, The country would be far better off and it would release a lot more housing too.

ruggedtoast

CLAPTON wrote: »

do you have any facts and figures and details of the housing burden student place especially in London?
Clearly you are one of the few people that think we have adequate housing and a good level of infrastructure



the billionaires he talks about, support unlimited immigration to keep wages down, just like toxic toasties does.

Astonishing as this may seem to you, the number of international students in London is exactly equal to the number of offers that universities give to international students, based on the number of places they have.

Most of us don't see the brightest and most adventurous of the world's young people coming here to study as a burden, and paying handsomely to do so, but then most of us aren't UKIP voting xenophobes.

CLAPTON

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Astonishing as this may seem to you, the number of international students in London is exactly equal to the number of offers that universities give to international students, based on the number of places they have.

Most of us don't see the brightest and most adventurous of the world's young people coming here to study as a burden, and paying handsomely to do so, but then most of us aren't UKIP voting xenophobes.

do you know any FACTS about anything at all ?
next you'll be telling us that boomers get free TV licenses

Herzlos

CLAPTON wrote: »

do you have any facts and figures and details of the housing burden student place especially in London?

I don't need to, I have something called reasoning. Foreign students are given no subsidies at all; it's all self funded. They pay way more for the university place than we do, and are in fact subsidizing UK places. They are also paying their own rent, and normally stay in custom built student accommodation, or in flat/house shares.

What makes you think that self funded students are causing the problems you see?

Clearly you are one of the few people that think we have adequate housing and a good level of infrastructure

I've been pretty vocal on the fact that housing and infrastructure in this country are a disgrace, but the problem lies with government and not with foreigners. Immigration should result in better infrastructure as the bill is being spread more widely.

the billionaires he talks about, support unlimited immigration to keep wages down, just like toxic toasties does.

Except that's not why he supports immigration.

CLAPTON

ruggedtoast wrote: »

The other way of describing that is that overseas people share the use of our infrastructure. They also pay their share of maintaining and developing it.

But as you and your purple faced Kipper mates seem to see "foreigners" as an amorphous tide of locusts coming to consume everything in their wake, you obviously don't see it like that.

Personally I would swap every single UKIP voter for a Bulgarian undergraduate overnight, The country would be far better off and it would release a lot more housing too.

you really believe that there is no housing shortage in London/SE or any stress and strains on NHS, transport etc.

by all means continue to live in your fantasy land but I guess it is a tribute to the Tory government that makes the country so well provided for.

Herzlos

CLAPTON wrote: »

do you know any FACTS about anything at all ?
next you'll be telling us that boomers get free TV licenses

So that's you run out of arguments, then?

TrickyTree83

Herzlos wrote: »

and are in fact subsidizing UK places.

This isn't correct. The universities fund themselves now by not failing students. I'm close friends with a former lecturer at a university in Birmingham who recently quit without a job to go to, because the university was doctoring test results/ignoring test results to maintain student numbers, and therefore loan payments.

CLAPTON

Herzlos wrote: »

I don't need to, I have something called reasoning. Foreign students are given no subsidies at all; it's all self funded. They pay way more for the university place than we do, and are in fact subsidizing UK places. They are also paying their own rent, and normally stay in custom built student accommodation, or in flat/house shares.

What makes you think that self funded students are causing the problems you see?

EU rules mean that EU students are treated like UK students and get UK loans just like us.
Non EU student do indeed pay the full account and doubtless unis make a lot of money out of them.

I'm glad you acknowledeg they do live in property that could otherwise be used by UK people.

I'm certainly not against overseas students studying in the UK and indeed consider it a good thing both from both their point of view and ours ; I do consider that we should be able to control the numbers.

I've been pretty vocal on the fact that housing and infrastructure in this country are a disgrace, but the problem lies with government and not with foreigners. Immigration should result in better infrastructure as the bill is being spread more widely.

improving our infrastrure to cater for the higher population means high levels of spending: this is expensive and requires large about of public money; either via increase in taxes or increase in borrowing , or cuts in other government spending: we should be totally open and honest and say how much extra tax we need over and above that already collected to fund the higher population.

In my view immigration has NOT resulted in better housing, better NHS or better infrastructure : maybe where you live that is true not not from where I am.

I don't understand you obsession about high population are 'good' and lower populations are bad : if you actually believed it I'm amased you don't comment on the EU policies that are leading to several countires having declining population and presumably facing poverty and collapse.

CLAPTON

Herzlos wrote: »

So that's you run out of arguments, then?

are you supporting toxic toasties 'facts'
do you believe that boomers receive free TV licenses?
do you believe the only foreign students in LOndon are at University?
do you believe that all boomers are sporn of the devil?

why not stick to trying to explain why increasing world population is a good thing and why global warming, food supply, water supply, pollution, etc are irrelevant and non issues?

Herzlos

CLAPTON wrote: »

EU rules mean that EU students are treated like UK students and get UK loans just like us.
Non EU student do indeed pay the full account and doubtless unis make a lot of money out of them.

Sorry, I've got that wrong. I forgot that English universities require fees paid. So EU students pay tuition fees which can be loan supported. They'll get loans which they'll need to repay eventually, without any free hand-outs.

I'm glad you acknowledeg they do live in property that could otherwise be used by UK people.

I didn't say they didn't, I said that they almost exclusively stay in dorms or HMO's, like all of the other students, so their impact on housing is minimal.

I'm certainly not against overseas students studying in the UK and indeed consider it a good thing both from both their point of view and ours ; I do consider that we should be able to control the numbers.

Their numbers are controlled - there are only so many places.

improving our infrastrure to cater for the higher population means high levels of spending: this is expensive and requires large about of public money; either via increase in taxes or increase in borrowing , or cuts in other government spending

Correct. But what you're willfully missing, is that with more people, the cost per-person of that funding is less.

In my view immigration has NOT resulted in better housing, better NHS or better infrastructure : maybe where you live that is true not not from where I am.

I figured that. Because you blame everything on foreigners instead of incompetent and corrupt politicians.

Take Japan for instance, huge population density, had a major street destroyed due to a sink hole. Had it completely repaired in 2 days; filled, surfaced, painted. In the UK, with councils that are criminally under-funded, they would barely have the cones down within 2 days, and the road would be closed for at least 6 months.

I don't understand you obsession about high population are 'good' and lower populations are bad : if you actually believed it I'm amased you don't comment on the EU policies that are leading to several countires having declining population and presumably facing poverty and collapse.

I don't, I'm refuting your claims that reducing populations will make anything better, when the problem is not the population.