The Trade Implications of Brexit....

yessuz

CLAPTON wrote: »

I don't really understand what you are saying

you seem (and I apologise if I misunderstood) that you want to discriminate against all people who come from non white, non christian, non european countries:
have I understand that correctly?

Well, no.
1) you moan about huge immigration and that allegedly, UK, being inside EU, cannot control that.
2) Then I say, that actually, that it is not true, as definitely more than a half of the immigration in UK are actually from NON-EU countries and UK has all the means to control that.
3) Moreover, I actually claim, that EU migrants are not a burden on the state but an important contributor to it. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/ampp3d/britons-43-more-likely-claim-4669678

So now, having this in mind - Why are you so against immigration?

cells

CLAPTON wrote: »

I do not share your view that not being able to live a family sized house, where people in similar circumstance 20 years ago could do , is a 'subjective' thing.
Similarly having a long commute rather than living in London near one's workplace is NOT a subjective thing.
Again, I don't consider the difficulty of accessing the NHS as a subjective thing.
Again having to move away from where you were born and where your parents/family live isn't a 'subjective ' thing.



There have been many studies of whether or not immigrants pay sufficient tax to meet their share of the costs.
There is no clear consensus and the figures at best show a small positive and worse a small negative.
However NONE of the studies include the neccessary costs of the infractrucure that would be required to maintain standards.
Let me say it again NONE of the studies include the costs of building the necessary infrastrure.

Are you really serious when you say that the housing shortage transport issues, access to NHS etc are 'short term' issues : when do you estimate they will be resolved satisfactorially?
We haven't even caught up with the shortfall caused by historic immigration let alone started to work on the last few years worth.

of course there are the other economic but non-tax issues like wage restrainst, lack of incentives to invest in productivity due to unlimited supply of cheap labour, increase in essential imports.

Immigration, in general provides no benefits that balance the costs and drawbacks even on narrow financial terms.

your views on EU immigrants being a net cost to the uk is clearly bonkers. even if it were true it would be true after a ~30 year period as their profile goes from the positive working age heady to a more average uk picture

the infrastructure costs are BS too as there will be lots of infrastructure cost savings. My local overground station use has gone up ~20x over the last 10 years do you think the per passenger costs of that station are higher or much lower? clearly they are much lower what was probably a net subsidized station is probably now a net contributor to the network

yessuz

CLAPTON wrote: »

no more or less than people now are unable to live in decent family sized house, access health service, suffer poor schools for their children, suffer terrible pension returns due the the economic circumstances.

- What is a decent sized house? Last time, when I looked at the terraced house, it was extremely small. but it was built in 1900s. is it a decent size house? or it is not good for you?
- Well, the NHS accessibility, is actually mostly due to mismanagement and wrong practices. - Actually, there's a huge number of immigrant doctors and nurses, and to be fair, nHS would mail miserably without them.
- Poor schools - isn't it due to the quality of teaching and management?
- State pensions are poor, because with ageing population it is unsustainable.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

yessuz wrote: »

So now, having this in mind - Why are you so against immigration?

He'll never answer that question.

CLAPTON

cells wrote: »

your views on EU immigrants being a net cost to the uk is clearly bonkers. even if it were true it would be true after a ~30 year period as their profile goes from the positive working age heady to a more average uk picture

I've explained my thinking :

the infrastructure costs are BS too as there will be lots of infrastructure cost savings. My local overground station use has gone up ~20x over the last 10 years do you think the per passenger costs of that station are higher or much lower? clearly they are much lower what was probably a net subsidized station is probably now a net contributor to the network

What are the marginal cost savings of providing decent housing in London /SE

Obviously you can provide global evidence that countries with the highest populations (i.e low per capita infrastrucutre costs) are the richest per capita

CLAPTON

yessuz wrote: »

- What is a decent sized house? Last time, when I looked at the terraced house, it was extremely small. but it was built in 1900s. is it a decent size house? or it is not good for you?
- Well, the NHS accessibility, is actually mostly due to mismanagement and wrong practices. - Actually, there's a huge number of immigrant doctors and nurses, and to be fair, nHS would mail miserably without them.
- Poor schools - isn't it due to the quality of teaching and management?
- State pensions are poor, because with ageing population it is unsustainable.

I am referring to things on a like for like basis, with and without excessive immigration

yessuz

CLAPTON wrote: »

I am referring to things on a like for like basis, with and without excessive immigration

so you say, that people are coming to this country without any contacts, usually - from the poorer countries, and hence they can afford to buy decent house?!

CLAPTON

yessuz wrote: »

so you say, that people are coming to this country without any contacts, usually - from the poorer countries, and hence they can afford to buy decent house?!

that would be illogically

people coming to this country have to live somewhere
what they do in practice is to rent;
depending upon the level of the rent they may live in a 10 bed apartment in mayfair
or they may share a tatty room in bermonsey;

either way, the demand for property rises and with it the price
more rents means landlord will pay more fro property

the net result is that property prices rise, space available for each person decreases

Herzlos

CLAPTON wrote: »

so you are content with the access to NHS, housing, schools, transport etc

My interactions with them have been alright, but I'm in a more socialst part of the union to you. They can definitely be improved but the problem lays with the government (who waste money) and not foreigners (who generate money).

CLAPTON wrote: »

look its Herzlos that things are wonderful in Japan

No, I pointed out that large population doesn't mean inferior infrastructure. I was showing you that good planning and investment results in good infrastructure.

You then tried to cite Japan as an example of why reducing immigration was good, when in reality Japans lack of migrants is slowly killing it, just like will happen to us as our population ages and we don't have anyone to pay for it.

yessuz

CLAPTON wrote: »

that would be illogically

people coming to this country have to live somewhere
what they do in practice is to rent;
depending upon the level of the rent they may live in a 10 bed apartment in mayfair
or they may share a tatty room in bermonsey;

either way, the demand for property rises and with it the price
more rents means landlord will pay more fro property

the net result is that property prices rise, space available for each person decreases

just interesting. so you say, that on average, 3-4% of population increase crippled the rental market?! 3-4% because on average, there are probably immigrant 2 households of 2 people each, sharing one house.
see, you figures does not add up.

the bigger issue is that everyone want to live in london, instead of spending 1 hour a day one way to reach same London Euston... not thinking that they spend 50 minutes in underground while travel to Euston..

for example:
Tamworth - houses ale like 1/3 of London, maybe even more. But it takes just 1 hour to travel to Euston. and then, your employer, if you are valuable, most probably will subsidise at least half (if not all) cost.. if you compare that expenditure (mortgage in Tamworth + train ticket) vs mortgage in London + Travel card, you might be surprised.

but hey, who am I to teach