If we vote for Brexit what happens

CLAPTON

whatmichaelsays wrote: »

I haven't got time to dig out the stats, but I'm sure it was largely the case (aside from a few outliers) that the areas that tended to vote most heavily for Brexit were the ones that were least impacted by migration.

As for the infrastructure argument, for me the classic one is GPs. I've heard the argument thousands of times that the reason you can't get a GP appointment is because of "all them immigrants".

what sort of people do you mix that where you have heard that 1000s of times?

Of course, I would argue that being in a position where around one third of our GPs plan to retire by 2020, coupled with 40% of GP training places are going unfilled (meaning that we will have around 1,000 fewer GPs each year than the 3,500 target), is a much bigger reason for the problem of long waiting times to see a GP.

What sort of bet would be place on the likelihood that 1/3 of GP will retire by 2020?

You KNOW the 40% figure is WRONG

Unfortunately, solving that problem requires some effort and some critical thinking - it's much easier and much more populist to just blame those foreigners again.

agreed : it does require some critical thinking.
how much should we increase income tax rates by, to fund the extra infrastructure

whatmichaelsays

michaels wrote: »

But if we assume that politically there is a maximum number of migrants we can take each year (even before considering infrastructure such as housing) surely it makes more sense if we can choose to admit more Australian GPs and fewer Romanian car wash operatives within this overall total?

We can choose to admit more Australian GPs already - we have a points system already in place to achieve that.

And it's dangerous to assume that most EU migrants are un or low skilled. The stats show that they are actually typically educated and skilled to a high level (source) - the issue is that they usually come to the UK via agencies who recuit for low-skilled positions.

My issue is not necessarily about taking a pro or anti-migration stance, it's about finding the right solutions to the problems that we have. Blaming migration for problems such as the pressure on GP services, when we have an aging population and a skills gap of 1,000 GPs a year, is not solving the problem.

Rinoa

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37352312

Interview with James Dyson explaining why we need to be completely out of the single market.

whatmichaelsays

what sort of people do you mix that where you have heard that 1000s of times?

I know a lot of hypochondriacs

CLAPTON wrote: »

You KNOW the 40% figure is WRONG

It's customary to provide a source to the actual figure when you're debunking the arguments of another.

Admittedly, I should have added "in some areas of the UK, but for the record, http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/your-practice/practice-topics/education/almost-40-of-gp-training-places-unfilled-in-some-areas-of-uk/

kabayiri

whatmichaelsays wrote: »

...
And it's dangerous to assume that most EU migrants are un or low skilled. The stats show that they are actually typically educated and skilled to a high level (source) - the issue is that they usually come to the UK via agencies who recuit for low-skilled positions.
...

It's the type of jobs and economy we are trying to create which we need to decide on. Coffee shops have seen a twentyfold increase in under 2 decades. I'm not sure they will ever be high value jobs.

Places like Mike Ashley's warehouse in Shirebrook have had a clear policy to attract a lot of relatively unskilled Eastern European labour. It probably does not bother him that the applicants are over skilled.

TrickyTree83

Rinoa wrote: »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37352312

Interview with James Dyson explaining why we need to be completely out of the single market.

Really like this last one.

CLAPTON

whatmichaelsays wrote: »

I know a lot of hypochondriacs



It's customary to provide a source to the actual figure when you're debunking the arguments of another.

Admittedly, I should have added "in some areas of the UK, but for the record, http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/your-practice/practice-topics/education/almost-40-of-gp-training-places-unfilled-in-some-areas-of-uk/

so
you haven't actually heard that 1000s of times about immigrant
you don't believe that 1/3 of GP will retire by 2020
and the figures for the shortfall in training places is UP TO 40% in SOME places

for whatever reason your link doesn't work for me

and you haven't a view about how much more income tax you are willing to pay for improving infrastructre

cells

michaels wrote: »

But if we assume that politically there is a maximum number of migrants we can take each year (even before considering infrastructure such as housing) surely it makes more sense if we can choose to admit more Australian GPs and fewer Romanian car wash operatives within this overall total?

that would be a bad idea for the locals. the labor force is fluid, if you import a million low skill migrants who take low skill low pay jobs at the bottom then the existing workforce is pushed up a grade or two and can take higher payed and skilled jobs.

If you import high skilled migrants the opposite happens and the existing workforce needs to down skill.

If there is a cap the best thing for the locals is to simply take in the youngest migrants with maybe age 20 as the prime and falling off post that point for obvious reasons of #of years workable age before retirement. If skills are to be a factor the aim should be for medium or lower end skilled migrants

whatmichaelsays

kabayiri wrote: »

It's the type of jobs and economy we are trying to create which we need to decide on. Coffee shops have seen a twentyfold increase in under 2 decades. I'm not sure they will ever be high value jobs.

Places like Mike Ashley's warehouse in Shirebrook have had a clear policy to attract a lot of relatively unskilled Eastern European labour. It probably does not bother him that the applicants are over skilled.

I agree with the sentiment, (that said, I don't think Mike Ashley really cares about the nationality of his warehouse operatives) but I would suggest that in terms of skilled roles, it's B2B and creative industries we need to focus on - and they invariably favour cross-border trade.

Coffee shops are a great example, and are a symptom of how retail has changed over the years - due to a combination of factors including online retailing and automation.

Online retail has seen shopping centres transform into leisure destinations, whilst automation has historically freed up people to pursue more creative vocations - you can use the same argument to explain the growth of tattoo parlours or chain restaurants.

At the moment we have skills gaps in industries that are going to be very important to our economy - and not a lot is really being done to address that.

TrickyTree83

cells wrote: »

that would be a bad idea for the locals. the labor force is fluid, if you import a million low skill migrants who take low skill low pay jobs at the bottom then the existing workforce is pushed up a grade or two and can take higher payed and skilled jobs.

If you import high skilled migrants the opposite happens and the existing workforce needs to down skill.

If there is a cap the best thing for the locals is to simply take in the youngest migrants with maybe age 20 as the prime and falling off post that point for obvious reasons of #of years workable age before retirement. If skills are to be a factor the aim should be for medium or lower end skilled migrants

My only point of reference for this which I can count on as being conclusive is the warehouse attached to our operation.

Importing Poles, Bulgarians, Romanians, etc.. has pushed out our UK workers, not moved them up.