We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
If we vote for Brexit what happens
Comments
-
Who cares on the reason?
We should all care.
EU migration is critical to our economic success and ability fund the care of the massively increasing elderly population.
If the UK government is failing to do it's job in providing simple things like school places or train carriages vote them out and replace them with one that will.
Don't cut off your nose to spite your face.“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0 -
what is quite clear is the the extra infrastructure costs (schools, road, housing NHS etc) have NOT been included in these figures
a honest 'remain' campaign would be upfront about the need to spend a lot more taxpayers money and admit we need an extra 5 p in the pound to pay for necessary infrastructure.
I'd make it a regional tax to reflect where migrants want to move to.
If London wants more migrants then they can afford the extra costs.0 -
what is quite clear is the the extra infrastructure costs (schools, road, housing NHS etc) have NOT been included in these figures
a honest 'remain' campaign would be upfront about the need to spend a lot more taxpayers money and admit we need an extra 5 p in the pound to pay for necessary infrastructure.
An honest leave campaign would admit that as immigrants contribute as much to the economy as anyone else, it behoves the Government of the day to invest the extra revenue they get on improving the infrastructure.
Why should these costs be included in the "these figures"? Anyone living in an area has the right to expect that their taxes are used to provide the infrastructure we need. Nobody builds immigrant roads, immigrant schools, immigrant houses, or immigrant hospitals. Government ensures that the capacity of these things meet the needs of those who live there. The pejorative use of terms like influx ignores the fact that immigration is just one of many reasons why a Government needs to improve infrastructure. In any area of the country, populations grow by birth rates and people choosing to move there (immigrants or not). Populations fall by death rates and people choosing to leave there.
I doubt that immigration is more that a small % of those population changes that impact an area. If a family chose to relocate themselves from Doncaster to Bristol, Bristol does not say "Stop! You cannot come here until we have built some more infrastructure, so you must wait 5 years. And we will not let you come here unless you start paying for Bristol's infrastructure." Yet this is the way some seem to treat immigrants.
This is a simple case of blaming the EU and immigration for poor planning.Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are incapable of forming such opinions.0 -
I'd make it a regional tax to reflect where migrants want to move to.
If London wants more migrants then they can afford the extra costs.
This is the way it works already. Immigrants pay taxes like everyone else. This is why we have Government.Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are incapable of forming such opinions.0 -
From you many posts, it is obvious that you hate the institutions of this country which is probably why you love the IRA loving labour leadership.
Again I request that you stop trolling me!! You distort all my posts with your own spin of hate and accusation even when the subject being discussed is different. I find this bullying and highly offensive. By the way look at my posting number compared to yours....hypocrite!0 -
An honest leave campaign would admit that as immigrants contribute as much to the economy as anyone else, it behoves the Government of the day to invest the extra revenue they get on improving the infrastructure.
Why should these costs be included in the "these figures"? Anyone living in an area has the right to expect that their taxes are used to provide the infrastructure we need. Nobody builds immigrant roads, immigrant schools, immigrant houses, or immigrant hospitals. Government ensures that the capacity of these things meet the needs of those who live there. The pejorative use of terms like influx ignores the fact that immigration is just one of many reasons why a Government needs to improve infrastructure. In any area of the country, populations grow by birth rates and people choosing to move there (immigrants or not). Populations fall by death rates and people choosing to leave there.
I doubt that immigration is more that a small % of those population changes that impact an area. If a family chose to relocate themselves from Doncaster to Bristol, Bristol does not say "Stop! You cannot come here until we have built some more infrastructure, so you must wait 5 years. And we will not let you come here unless you start paying for Bristol's infrastructure." Yet this is the way some seem to treat immigrants.
This is a simple case of blaming the EU and immigration for poor planning.
Only you 'blame ' immigrants and of course you blame the government
I merely note that increase in population (partly caused by immigration ) has consequences
and some of these consequence require money to be spent
and that money doesn't, in general, grow on trees so it will need either /or increases in taxation or reduced spending elsewhere
so ignoring BLAME and noting we are where we are :
do you favour
-doing nothing and just accepting worse public services
-spending more to improve public service by more borrowing
-spending more on public services by increasing taxation
-spending more on public infrastructure by cutting other public spending (pensions, disability allowance, unemployment benefits etc)
- or of course a combination of these
or is there another way?0 -
I find it weird that the Leave campaign argues that experts cannot be trusted. I can accept that they can be wrong on an individual basis but when the vast majority agree why do we continue to question their conclusions as with economic experts.
If someone goes to a solicitor and is told they are unlikely to win a claim for damages they might doubt that opinion particularly if they have a friend who said the same solicitor made a wrong call 5 years before. But if they get a second and third opinion and those solicitors agree with the first, most people would accept the experts are right.
How many people would say "These three solicitors agree but I will pursue the case? How many would say they are wrong because their MP disagrees?
Experts can be wrong yes but why do non-experts offer a more credible answer than experts?Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are incapable of forming such opinions.0 -
This is the way it works already. Immigrants pay taxes like everyone else. This is why we have Government.
I don't believe many of the low paid jobs, immigrant or not, are net contributors.
Interestingly, when I speak to people up here, they don't either. Hamish can have his 5 year old stats and figures but if people don't believe them they don't amount to much.0 -
I find it weird that the Leave campaign argues that experts cannot be trusted. I can accept that they can be wrong on an individual basis but when the vast majority agree why do we continue to question their conclusions as with economic experts.
If someone goes to a solicitor and is told they are unlikely to win a claim for damages they might doubt that opinion particularly if they have a friend who said the same solicitor made a wrong call 5 years before. But if they get a second and third opinion and those solicitors agree with the first, most people would accept the experts are right.
How many people would say "These three solicitors agree but I will pursue the case? How many would say they are wrong because their MP disagrees?
Experts can be wrong yes but why do non-experts offer a more credible answer than experts?
.....because the Brexiteers say all the experts are all part of a vast establishment conspiracy!:rotfl:0 -
I don't believe many of the low paid jobs, immigrant or not, are net contributors.
Interestingly, when I speak to people up here, they don't either. Hamish can have his 5 year old stats and figures but if people don't believe them they don't amount to much.
Fantasy stats my friend, fantasy.
Between then and now on the thread he's spectacularly managed to dodge the points I put to him. Perhaps he is a politician?0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards