The EU: IN or OUT?

Ballard

There was a documentary (either BBC or c4 I think) five or so years ago based in Peterborough. It started by interviewing some unemployed youngsters and asking if they'd seen any suitable work. None of them had.

What were they looking for? 'Absolutely anything'.
How much money did they want? 'I'd be happy with £x per hour'

It then showed the advert for fruit picking and some migrants getting the job. It paid £x per hour.

The following week/fortnight the cameras returned and interviewed the same youngsters.

Anything out there? 'No. There's absolutely no work whatsoever'

There were still fruit picking jobs being advertised and this was shown to the lads. The reply was effectively that fruit picking was below them.

This has stayed with me and makes me think that a great many number of unemployed don't have any interest in this sort of work.

The whole 'we survived the war' argument is nonsensical. Those were different times and bear no relation to our modern country. Pol Pot thought that Cambodia could be self sufficient and that wasn't exactly a roaring success. That's about as relevant comparison to modern Britain as the 1940s.

talexuser

treemachine wrote: »

If farmers paid a decent wage they would get British workers.

And possibly the stuff in the supermarket would then cost twice as much. This is the problem and we go round the circular argument again. But there surely has to be an end to unlimited immigration.

Whatever the politicians say, the results speak for themselves. Big business (who pay for them) want the cheap labour, and politicians probably too as a means of upping the stats for "growth". Neither of them living in their gated communities have to live with the consequences forced on the majority of the rest of the country and I do wonder if they even care.

aspiration_2

It is true that Brits do not want to do fruit picking etc.

Successive govts have failed to force the people on benefits to work.

This is because, since the eighties, there has been a very rapid increase in desk jobs in Civil service, Local govt service, BBC, NHS and all other quangos. There has been a significant increase in desk job salaries as well. Whilst in industries employee numbers have gone down due to computers and automation the opposite is true for the desk job industry. I have seen where there used to be just two desk jobs now have seven or eight. Thanks to fast computers and high quality communication equipment!

So anyone now with the minimal qualification is expecting the govt to subsidise them with yet another desk job.

When a simple desk job worker in a dubious position earns as much as a teacher or a nurse then there is a problem. Only way is to freeze their pay and increase the salary of skilled workers.

Like the pre 2004 system, fruit pickers from the eastern block must be given six month work visa. There is no need to allow permanent migration.

bigadaj

Inflation is very low and there's a strong argument that many things should be more expensive. Apart from housing costs and probably child care then most things appear to be too cheap really. Food, clothes and most essentials are now low cost, and the proportion of discretionary spend is huge.

The real problem is housing as it forms such a large proportion of either people's spending on rent or mortgage, or the value of benefits received as housing benefit.

As stated abive I think a workfare system would do some good, given the potential for competition with commercial operations at minimum wage then I'd propose only one to two days per week doing community type work, but it would mean that people couldn't sit at home every day, would probably prove their quality of life and leaves plenty of time for job searching on the other days. Government wouldn't be keen as it could be administratively costly, but it would mean that long term unemployed have some incentive to do some work and look for employment.

Housing is a real issue and has been exacerbated for many years now. Increasing prices and rents, needing the bank of mum and dad to be able to raise a deposit, and with elevated values any reductions will lead to a shock to the system with people being made homeless and banks viability being threatened.

AnotherJoe

aspiration wrote: »

It is true that Brits do not want to do fruit picking etc.

Successive govts have failed to force the people on benefits to work.

This is because, since the eighties, there has been a very rapid increase in desk jobs in Civil service, Local govt service, BBC, NHS and all other quangos.

Allow me to express my extreme scepticism that the "yoofs" without qualifications are not picking fruit and vegetables because they are all busy working at a desk job in the NHS, civil service etc.

I came across a phrase the other day that explains whats going on in these communities with these unemployed unemployables - "crab bucket". Look it up.

treemachine

talexuser wrote: »

And possibly the stuff in the supermarket would then cost twice as much. This is the problem and we go round the circular argument again. But there surely has to be an end to unlimited immigration.

The price you pay for a punnet of strawberries in the supermarket isn't the full cost though..


I get a train through a main fruit growing area of the UK. I see crowds of circa 40 people picking strawberries. These people are likely migrants and will pay little in tax. It's safe to say they are a drain to the tax payer.


So the farming industry is effectively being subsidised by the taxpayer who are paying for the labour that the farmers use. Where does the money come from to subsidise the farmers? The taxpayers pocket.


If we reduced migrant labour some supermarket prices are likely to rise. However we'd also be paying less tax as we wouldn't need to subsidise the labour that farmers use.

treemachine

Ballard wrote: »

The whole 'we survived the war' argument is nonsensical. Those were different times and bear no relation to our modern country. Pol Pot thought that Cambodia could be self sufficient and that wasn't exactly a roaring success. That's about as relevant comparison to modern Britain as the 1940s.

From pre history to about the 1950's we never had migrants come to the UK to help us pick our crops. I find your attitude that "Brits are too lazy to pick our own fruit" as offensive and racist.

AnotherJoe

treemachine wrote: »

The price you pay for a punnet of strawberries in the supermarket isn't the full cost though..


I get a train through a main fruit growing area of the UK. I see crowds of circa 40 people picking strawberries. These people are likely migrants and will pay little in tax. It's safe to say they are a drain to the tax payer.

Its not safe at all to say that. Can you back that up with statistics? Why are they a "drain on the tax payer" ? They are healthy young people so they arent using the NHS, they wont in the main have kids so they arent sending their kids to local schools. Where's the subsidy ?

bigadaj

treemachine wrote: »

From pre history to about the 1950's we never had migrants come to the UK to help us pick our crops. I find your attitude that "Brits are too lazy to pick our own fruit" as offensive and racist.

So what happened after the 1950s?

Ballard

treemachine wrote: »

From pre history to about the 1950's we never had migrants come to the UK to help us pick our crops. I find your attitude that "Brits are too lazy to pick our own fruit" as offensive and racist.

I have said nothing that's either offensive or racist so I ask you to use the report button under my post to alert the forum admin if you feel so strongly that I've crossed some sort of boundary.