We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
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!
Swiss offer EU solution for Britain
Options
Comments
-
1% a year is 20% in 20 years and 30% in 30 years
that level would totally transform the country
What you mean like having a country where 27.5% of babies are born to mothers who were not born in that country with a capital where the figure is 58% and 78% in some districts?
That would certainly result in a country that would feel very unfamiliar to its native residents.I think....0 -
What you mean like having a country where 27.5% of babies are born to mothers who were not born in that country with a capital where the figure is 58% and 78% in some districts?
That would certainly result in a country that would feel very unfamiliar to its native residents.
Except of course that all those newborns are by definition 'native residents'...;)“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 -
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »Except of course that all those newborns are by definition 'native residents'...;)
but what is the positive point you want to make?0 -
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »Except of course that all those newborns are by definition 'native residents'...;)
I'm a great believer in multiculturalism, but many of those 'native residents' will,unfortunately, only mix / marry with their own ethnic 'native residents' You only have to visit the East End, to realise there's no such thing as an 'Eastender' My mother was a cockney, there are few now left.:(0 -
Sometimes Hamish you produce more spin than the pre-referendum lot - of either side!HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »The research on this topic has naff all to do with academics interviewing people.
It's simply the figures of how many people who were an EU citizen when they were first issued their NI number (even if they have since become a UK citizen) that claim benefits or tax credits.
By the way - around 90% of EU migrants do not claim tax credits. *1
Less than 5% claim out of work benefits. 2*
And they are less likely to live in council housing than the native born. *3
TBH I am not concerned too much by the numbers, rather by your repeated (and deliberate?) inaccuracies.
So here are some other figures for you:
*1 - -
; andAvailable data suggest that roughly 10-20% of recently arrived EU adults were receiving tax credits in early 2014.
- which suggests a greater overall number of EU claimants than the 10-20% in the previous quote.Most EU tax credit recipients in the UK did not arrive within the past four years
http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/reports/eu-migration-welfare-benefits-and-eu-membership/#kp5
2* - Indeed, the whole point for many is the desire to work and so to repatriate funds to family elsewhere.
Besides, out of work benefits are "peanuts" compared to in work benefits, Child Benefit etc.
*3 Besides the fact that there is far less social housing?
Also, not according to this:
http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/236
UK born in Social Housing = 17%
EEA born in Social Housing = 16%
Hardly a huge difference, is it?0 -
It would be a limit, not a requirement, and 1% was figurative please don't go on about it. It could be 1/1000 it doesn't really matter. The point was the other EU countries might fancy some kind of limit too.1% a year is 20% in 20 years and 30% in 30 years
that level would totally transform the country
Obviously the Tories would like to get it under 100,000 per year for their own political purposes, but even 200,000 per year would be a success and worthwhile for access to the free market.Changing the world, one sarcastic comment at a time.0 -
It would be a limit, not a requirement, and 1% was figurative please don't go on about it. It could be 1/1000 it doesn't really matter. The point was the other EU countries might fancy some kind of limit too.
Obviously the Tories would like to get it under 100,000 per year for their own political purposes, but even 200,000 per year would be a success and worthwhile for access to the free market.
bizarre................0 -
Tells us all we need to know about that.shared a common purposeI do Contracts, all day every day.0 -
Free movement of people is vital to a single state solution....
Yes but the UK and others outside of EU would not be a single state.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 -
What makes an administrative entity a state rather than a region?Yes but the UK and others outside of EU would not be a single state.
Is it whether they control their own highest court?
Is it having complete control over fiscal and monetary policy?
Is it having control of borders?
Anything else a characteristic of a state as opposed to a region?I think....0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.7K Spending & Discounts
- 244.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177K Life & Family
- 257.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards