Brexit vote: The breakdown

mwpt

kabayiri wrote: »

We have had a good few million migrants in the last decade or so, since Poland and others joined fully.

I am frequently told by Hamish this bring in much needed billions to spend on the core things we need.

Yet...I don't see it.

In this same period we have borrowed to fund NHS via expensive PFI. There has been little major transport infrastructure development outside London. There hasn't been a year where the number of houses built has kept up with demand.

So why on earth should I believe that bringing in yet more millions will change anything?

It sounds like a desperate sales pitch to me.

The figures for our tax take and our expenditure are available. I think you'll find that pensions spend is the biggest expenditure overall and also has seen a large increase as a percent of GDP in several decades. Health spending is also large and growing, while welfare has also grown (until recently).

Basically, just looking after our citizens in the form of health and social care is eating up a larger and larger chunk of our budget, while other services must suffer. Since the vast majority of EU immigrants are young, healthy and in jobs, I doubt they account for much of this, and this is true according to published stats.

I do take your point that the situation doesn't seem to be improving by having more immigration. I guess the question then is, would it be worse or better without EU immigration right now?

I guess we all know which way various posters will answer that question

mwpt

kabayiri wrote: »

It is the other EU countries who hold all the cards here.

What can Greece do other than suffer continued contraction of her economy?

I'd be genuinely interested to know. You believe this club is beneficial, so explain to me how it turns Greece around.

Without levers such as a currency to devalue, just what does she do?

She defaults. This is what other countries do. I've said this any number of times. Or she goes to the IMF and accepts whatever austerity terms the IMF imposes, and then perhaps you guys can turn your displeasure on the IMF?

I've explained this above, in the following post:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/71764484#Comment_71764484

CLAPTON

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Life clearly isn't a meritocracy and hard work and ingenuity don't always get you to the top. As George Montbiot points out, if it did then every African woman would be a millionaire.

indeed so we can agree on that.
one huge benefit to the African women, working hard, would have been the ability to export to the protectionist EU. :

As a Left winger I find it a great shame that all those people who feel themselves to be struggling financially blame Europe, rather than the Tories, when the European versions of them aren't struggling at all.

really could you explain how the poor of Greece aren't struggling or maybe why so many come to the UK : presumably from not struggling in their homeland to poverty in the UK

It defies belief how many people local to me who are the epitome of the battling low wagers, vote Tory at every possible opportunity. Then they wail in disbelief at the inevitable cuts in services, housing, and in work benefits that come from Tory governments, then vote Tory again the next chance they get.

Every single time. Its this weird victim mentality the Right seems to be able to stoke in people who will blame their problems on everything other than how they keep voting.

Not a victim mentality: sadly your delusional understanding of the relative lifes in different EU countries

kabayiri

mwpt wrote: »

She defaults. This is what other countries do. I've said this any number of times. Or she goes to the IMF and accepts whatever austerity terms the IMF imposes, and then perhaps you guys can turn your displeasure on the IMF?
...

If Greece defaults how do you stop contagion though? The focus will surely shift on to other European countries.

Financial markets do not deal with panic situations well. We have seen this only too clearly.

kabayiri

mwpt wrote: »

...
Basically, just looking after our citizens in the form of health and social care is eating up a larger and larger chunk of our budget, while other services must suffer. Since the vast majority of EU immigrants are young, healthy and in jobs, I doubt they account for much of this, and this is true according to published stats.

I do take your point that the situation doesn't seem to be improving by having more immigration. I guess the question then is, would it be worse or better without EU immigration right now?

I guess we all know which way various posters will answer that question

It's not as though immigration spreads evenly. The ONS themselves have shown where the population growth centres are over the next decade.

Economic migrants will always head towards prosperous areas.

There is one school in East London catering for over 40 different languages, and another school in Fleetwood with a class containing just 3 pupils. That doesn't feel balanced to me.

Does FoM really mean that the vast majority of people end up in London/SE?

It doesn't seem sustainable to me.

CLAPTON

mwpt wrote: »

She defaults. This is what other countries do. I've said this any number of times. Or she goes to the IMF and accepts whatever austerity terms the IMF imposes, and then perhaps you guys can turn your displeasure on the IMF?

I've explained this above, in the following post:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/71764484#Comment_71764484

The IMF was part of the Troika that helped destroy Greece.
The IMF, under the control of the europhile Lagrange abandoned all its principles and previous good economic management.
Rather than find a solution for greece (devalution and debt restructing) it did the opposite and the result is what we see.
Anything to maintain the EU political dream.

mwpt

kabayiri wrote: »

If Greece defaults how do you stop contagion though? The focus will surely shift on to other European countries.

Financial markets do not deal with panic situations well. We have seen this only too clearly.

But that is a different question. You asked why you shouldn't blame the EU and I explained. You seem to keep adapting your arguments to maintain the position "EU is bad".

mwpt

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Life clearly isn't a meritocracy and hard work and ingenuity don't always get you to the top. As George Montbiot points out, if it did then every African woman would be a millionaire.

As a Left winger I find it a great shame that all those people who feel themselves to be struggling financially blame Europe, rather than the Tories, when the European versions of them aren't struggling at all.

It defies belief how many people local to me who are the epitome of the battling low wagers, vote Tory at every possible opportunity. Then they wail in disbelief at the inevitable cuts in services, housing, and in work benefits that come from Tory governments, then vote Tory again the next chance they get.

Every single time. Its this weird victim mentality the Right seems to be able to stoke in people who will blame their problems on everything other than how they keep voting.

I think it is because most of those voters don't want more hand-outs and they buy the message that a stronger economy will mean better jobs.

Unfortunately for us, the Lib-Dems weren't a force in the last election and Labour didn't focus on this message, that they would create conditions where more handouts weren't needed. All Labour did was attack the Tories as the nasty party who will cut benefits, but for millions of voters who don't want to be on benefits, that doesn't work.

CLAPTON

mwpt wrote: »

I think it is because most of those voters don't want more hand-outs and they buy the message that a stronger economy will mean better jobs.

Unfortunately for us, the Lib-Dems weren't a force in the last election and Labour didn't focus on this message, that they would create conditions where more handouts weren't needed. All Labour did was attack the Tories as the nasty party who will cut benefits, but for millions of voters who don't want to be on benefits, that doesn't work.

one might speculate that conditions where 'handouts weren't needed' would include higher wages and cheaper housing.
I assume the Lib Dem solution is to import a few more million immigrants to compete for jobs and to squeeze into the existing housing stock.
My view is that this would depress wages and raise the price of housing.

Herzlos

CLAPTON wrote: »

one might speculate that conditions where 'handouts weren't needed' would include higher wages and cheaper housing.

I'd start further back - better education and infrastructure. Neither are going to happen under this austerity drive. Cutting services invariably means cutting staff, which means more people needing handouts and spending less money back into the economy.

I'm not convinced higher wages will necessarily help - all it'll do is drive the cost of stuff up.

Reducing immigration will have zero impact on the "Just About Coping"'s whilst the Tories are trying to shaft them in every way possible.