Brexit the economy and house prices part 6

Herzlos

kabayiri wrote: »

The young Polish child I personally know about needs translator help due to his special education needs.

The cost of this tuition was £44/hour. It's probably slightly higher now. His parents don't even earn that figure combined!

That sounds like a pretty niche case. My British child will likely need additional help due to his special educational needs, and I'm pretty sure it'll cost more hourly than my wife and I earn. Why is that any different?

IMO translation costs should be borne by the customer. In fact, I did exactly this when I worked more in EU mainland.

I don't think there is an EU requirement to provide translation free, so we once again seem out of kilter with our EU neighbours.

So again it's us failing to use the rules already there, to solve a problem that isn't that big?


I've very much against means tested stuff when it comes to needs - if you make it means tested or pass the money onto them it only really leaves them 3 options:
1. Have the kid go without education.
2. Run up enormous (and likely untenable debt)
3. Move back to Poland.


None of those options helps any of us in any real way beyond getting to feel good about ourselves for stopping a foreigner "screwing us over". Do you then apply the same criteria to people with a UK passport?

Herzlos

kabayiri wrote: »

I don't believe your 'we will manage' guarantees, because of the evidence of a lack of 'management' ever since the FOM numbers jumped in the early noughties.

the managing guarantees are fairly reliant on electing a competent government that's not self serving or short termist. But like I keep saying, that's a UK political problem and not an EU or a logistical problem. The only thing stopping the UK from handling the meagre demands on population is politicians who are doing a bad job and pandering to NIMBYism. Leaving the EU and/or banning foreigners won't solve any of the problems.

I'm not against Scotland going it alone, and choosing a mass migration approach though. You should be able to decide for yourself.

How sporting of you

Cakeguts

What I think about this is that the immigrants are welcome to come to the UK but they must not live in the South East. They need to be intergrated into places of very low population so somewhere like Scotland where there is space to expand all the towns and villages with large new estates. Then they can help the local economies grow. We don't need people to help grow economies in the large city areas we need people to help grow small rural economies. So think of some where like Ballater and Braemore and Aviemore in the Highlands of Scotland could accommodate some huge new housing estates and blocks of flats for new arrivals. With new motorways linking them to Inverness and Perth you could really increase the economies of these areas with an influx of an extra 30 million people into the area and it would take the pressure of the South East.

andrewf75

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

And in the spirit of honesty, as this country desperately needs many million more migrants to rebalance the ageing population and ensure the continued competitiveness and prosperity of the nation, then your concerns about these minor inconveniences around infrastructure are of little relevance.

If your side was even remotely honest about it, you'd admit the scale of the UK's demographic crisis and explain to voters that your vision of the future involves decaying public services, higher taxes and lower benefits for the masses, and a reduced standard of living for everyone.

But your side is not honest about it.... They continue to try and mislead the public, and spread anti-immigrant disinformation, fear and propaganda.

So I will continue to oppose people like you every chance I get.

Brexiteers may have won the battle, but thankfully, they're losing the war.

I don’t think anyone is honest about the issues we face with the demographic crisis. High immigration is just kicking the can down the road allowing us to keep going as we are for a bit longer. Personally I’d prefer to actually deal with the unsustainable way we live and try and restructure the economy so that we can deal with the issues, while keeping immigration at relatively low levels. Of course that would involve sacrificing the all-important economic growth. Anyone daring to propose real solutions is dismissed as an extremist unfortunately, while this ridiculous government keeps talking about delivering the will of the people to reduce immigration, while still pursuing the ever more growth which is going to require more people! The irony is that it’s those on the left whose policies are best suited to reduced immigration, yet they are ideologically in favour of it. Crazy times we live in.

kabayiri

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

...
But your side is not honest about it.... They continue to try and mislead the public, and spread anti-immigrant disinformation, fear and propaganda.
...

We only use it because it works Hamish

You should be used to this disinformation tactic, after the Scottish referendum anyway.

Poorly managed migration is the main trigger for the rise in right of centre politics all across Europe.

It's like the Liberals deliberately decided to arm their opponents with the best ammunition, when they failed to control migration at a time of rising terror attacks. Nuts.

kabayiri

Herzlos wrote: »

the managing guarantees are fairly reliant on electing a competent government that's not self serving or short termist. But like I keep saying, that's a UK political problem and not an EU or a logistical problem. The only thing stopping the UK from handling the meagre demands on population is politicians who are doing a bad job and pandering to NIMBYism. Leaving the EU and/or banning foreigners won't solve any of the problems.
...

Oh, that sounds lovely, and all that .... but again, where is the evidence that billions will be spent before mass migration occurs in an area?

You must have noticed the 30-40% local government cuts in the last half dozen or so years.

(Maybe you have not.... Scotland do get a pretty good subsidy deal)

cogito

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

There is no mention of numbers polled in that article, and it actually appears to be an advertising vehicle.

It was five.

Thrugelmir

mayonnaise wrote: »

From the sky? We do live in a country with quite a bit of precipitation if you hadn't noticed yet,

Didn't realise that we now need to put buckets out to catch the water we require. :rotfl:

Herzlos

Cakeguts wrote: »

What I think about this is that the immigrants are welcome to come to the UK but they must not live in the South East. They need to be intergrated into places of very low population so somewhere like Scotland where there is space to expand all the towns and villages with large new estates. Then they can help the local economies grow. We don't need people to help grow economies in the large city areas we need people to help grow small rural economies. So think of some where like Ballater and Braemore and Aviemore in the Highlands of Scotland could accommodate some huge new housing estates and blocks of flats for new arrivals. With new motorways linking them to Inverness and Perth you could really increase the economies of these areas with an influx of an extra 30 million people into the area and it would take the pressure of the South East.

I agree entirely; we need migrants across the country. Some Scottish Ilses have even run advertising campaigns.

kabayiri wrote: »

Oh, that sounds lovely, and all that .... but again, where is the evidence that billions will be spent before mass migration occurs in an area?

There is none, because our government are incompetent. I've never said otherwise.
But why not address the problem (government incompetence) instead of the symptom (migrants driving up population faster than infrastructure can handle)?

You must have noticed the 30-40% local government cuts in the last half dozen or so years.

(Maybe you have not.... Scotland do get a pretty good subsidy deal)

The SNP have been trying pretty hard to mitigate the worst of the Tory cuts, but we've seen a degradation in almost everything up here too.

Thrugelmir

mayonnaise wrote: »

He ignored them and lo and behold, we became the fastest growing, most prosperous economy in Europe.

Nothing to do with low interest rates, loose fiscal policies (HTB , QE etc etc) and PPI payouts.

All of which have one thing in common. They are drawing to a close.