Straw poll: Do you want to retain FOM?

mwpt

kabayiri wrote: »

So why the inconsistency when it comes to matters European?

Why the inconsistency when it comes to the UK? Why can someone from Scotland, Wales or NI move freely to anywhere they want in England?

I support this principle but I can't quite work out why you would if you don't believe in the concept of FOM.

CLAPTON

mwpt wrote: »

Why do you lie?

I have told you many times that I don't think I don't think unlimited immigration from across the world is feasible or desirable in the short or even medium term. Maybe not even in the long term. I posted this just a few days ago:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5390860

But you argue there is no difference between some-one moving from Redcar to London and some-one moving from elsewhere in the world to London : whatever do you ACTUALLY mean and ACTUALLY believe (as opposed to making argumentive and reductio ad absurdum points.)

kabayiri

mwpt wrote: »

Why the inconsistency when it comes to the UK? Why can someone from Scotland, Wales or NI move freely to anywhere they want in England?

I support this principle but I can't quite work out why you would if you don't believe in the concept of FOM.

Because it doesn't work.

All we are seeing in the decades which we have had this globalization is an increased centralization of wealth.

It's not hard to see. Look at London; Manchester; Leeds; Vancouver; and see the new development ongoing.

Move out to the regional towns and there is a different picture.

By your logic 10 million people (eg) from the poorer parts of Wales; NE; NW etc could easily transform their income by moving to London.

So what timeframe should we set for this mass move? Have you a suggestion to match your poll?

mwpt

kabayiri wrote: »

Because it doesn't work.

All we are seeing in the decades which we have had this globalization is an increased centralization of wealth.

It's not hard to see. Look at London; Manchester; Leeds; Vancouver; and see the new development ongoing.

Move out to the regional towns and there is a different picture.

By your logic 10 million people (eg) from the poorer parts of Wales; NE; NW etc could easily transform their income by moving to London.

So what timeframe should we set for this mass move? Have you a suggestion to match your poll?

I am sorry, I'm not trying to be purposely obtuse but I really can't decipher your answer to my post.

Quite simple question: Do you or do you not support freedom of movement inside the union of countries that is the United Kingdom?

kabayiri

mwpt wrote: »

...
Quite simple question: Do you or do you not support freedom of movement inside the union of countries that is the United Kingdom?

As FOM is currently defined, no I don't.

FOM has no link to having a viable job to go to, as it stands.

I don't support people moving freely without having an economic plan.

Is that clear enough for you?

mwpt

kabayiri wrote: »

As FOM is currently defined, no I don't.

FOM has no link to having a viable job to go to, as it stands.

I don't support people moving freely without having an economic plan.

Is that clear enough for you?

It's clear, thank you.

I find it astonishing, but it is clear.

coffeehound

antrobus wrote: »

We have skill shortages as well. Which is why a quarter of NHS doctors are non-British. Apparently our skills shortage is "chronic".

We don't even have the excuse of being a former Communist country.:)

https://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/2016/feb/18/uk-skills-shortage-universities-employers-industry

That article is commenting on the woeful quality of the UK's education provision (something unlikely to be improved by a tidal wave of children who don't speak English as a first language, incidentally) rather than a lack of people.

Of course the main reason for NHS staff shortages is the unprecedented demand for health services arising from the population boom. Many economic migrants in the UK have started a family thus putting excessive strain on maternity departments, and other services. From the ONS:

Over a quarter (27.5%) of live births in England and Wales in 2015 were to women born outside the UK, the highest level on record.

The small increase in live births between 2014 and 2015 resulted from a 2.5% rise in births to women born outside the UK; births to UK born women decreased by 0.4%.

Poland was the most common country of birth for mothers born outside the UK, followed by Pakistan and India.

From a Royal College of Midwives report:

RCM wrote:

"The number of babies born in 2014 was almost 100,000 higher than it was in 2001. Maternity services are still having to cope with a substantially greater level of activity than at the turn of the century"

More people coming to the UK create a new requirement for more services, a typical example being translation provision in all areas of public services. The people taking up these roles will themselves be economic migrants who will themselves increase the demand on services, and so on.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

mwpt wrote: »

It's clear, thank you.

I find it astonishing, but it is clear.

I think what others, myself included, find "astonishing" is your refusal to accept that FOM is unworkable.
Beyond country borders certainly.

You have NOT answered a question which has been asked of you many times, preferring instead to dodge the issue whilst accusing others of doing so.
So I will make this simple.

FOM = unlimited movement of people.
Yes or no.
From your continued responses we see that answer already as "yes".

Given that so many obviously already see the UK as a place to migrate to, we have seen large numbers of immigrants.
Yes or no?
Difficult to see how you can argue other than "yes" to that one.

FOM would see more migrants entering the UK than we currently have.
Yes or no?
Again, difficult to see how you can argue other than "yes" to that one.

How many would have to arrive before you see even deeper problems for the UK than we already have?
(No this is NOT the place to discuss "what problems" - just try answering the question.)
A further million?
A further five million?
More?

What would YOU do when the UK cannot cope with more migration?
Or do you seriously NEVER see mass migration to one country as being a problem?
Serious question.

mwpt

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

I think what others, myself included, find "astonishing" is your refusal to accept that FOM is unworkable.
Beyond country borders certainly.

You have NOT answered a question which has been asked of you many times, preferring instead to dodge the issue whilst accusing others of doing so.

You are lying.

But I'll dance for your demands and I reserve the right to explain my answers.

FOM = unlimited movement of people.
Yes or no.
From your continued responses we see that answer already as "yes".

Yes, just like in the UK we have unlimited movement of people between the countries of Wales, Scotland, NI and England. And even within regions inside the countries. Unlimited]/b]

But unlimited is always practically constrained by logistics, as your fellow leave voters acknowledge.

Given that so many obviously already see the UK as a place to migrate to, we have seen large numbers of immigrants.
Yes or no?
Difficult to see how you can argue other than "yes" to that one.

No. Migration to the UK has been lower as a percentage of our population than many other countries.

FOM would see more migrants entering the UK than we currently have.
Yes or no?
Again, difficult to see how you can argue other than "yes" to that one.

For the moment, yes. But there will come a time when other countries are as prosperous as the UK and immigration will decline or possibly reverse.

How many would have to arrive before you see even deeper problems for the UK than we already have?
(No this is NOT the place to discuss "what problems" - just try answering the question.)
A further million?
A further five million?
More?

False question. I believe the figures (available publicly) that EU immigrants are net contributors to our tax system and therefore they more than pay for the services they use. I acknowledge that if five million people arrive in a year, this would cause severe strain, but there is zero chance of this happening in practice, and like your leader CLAPTON says, we need to think practically.

What would YOU do when the UK cannot cope with more migration?
Or do you seriously NEVER see mass migration to one country as being a problem?
Serious question.

I don't think the UK has seen mass migration to levels that are destabilising.

If it did, I would expect the government to kick in an emergency break and the EU to allow it, just as Cameron requested.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

What would YOU do when the UK cannot cope with more migration?

The UK can cope with, and needs, much higher levels of immigration than we've had.