jump to last post 1-4 of 4 discussions (41 posts)

Its all happening over here (Europe).

  1. Silverspeeder profile image61
    Silverspeederposted 2 years ago

    It seems the rise of the political right in the European elections has started the lefty leaners to question their ability to continue to fool most of the people most of the time.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27593556
    What Milliband and his crew don't seem to understand is that the shortages and hardships felt by the British electorate are a direct result of the immigration policies of his party in the previous government.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27592488
    Even Cameron is starting to sing the song of discontent felt by the British electorate, maybe he should have just brought his referendum on Europe about in this parliament rather than wait till he loses the vote in the next?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27580942
    Poor old Cleggy, the less said about him the better.

    I think the response from these political elite show just how out of touch they really are with the electorate, its true that the EU are not the root of all the ills that ail the people of Europe but as they are supposed to be in charge, are supposed to be making life better for all its citizen then some if not a large portion can be laid squarely at there door.
    The problems of unemployment, healthcare, housing and finance have just moved around Europe with the implementation of the Schengen Agreement.

    The pseudo socialist left wing experiment of the European union has not worked out exactly as the political elite would have liked, it seems the peasants are revolting.

    1. John Holden profile image61
      John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      A direct result of immigration!!  I really don't think the immigrants that UKIP are down on are bankers. I really can't see how the bedroom tax can be laid at the door of immigrants either. In fact the whole idea that immigrants can push the western world into a deep recession is, frankly, ludicrous.

      By the way, no party in the UK is actually far enough to the left for the majority  have a look at this

      http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/left-wing-pric … oll-519684

      This whole idea that UKIP is somehow for the working man is bonkers. They will continue with all the right wing policies in place in this country but they will step up the pace of decline. They will push us back into the nineteenth century faster than you can blink.
      Don't forget Farage is an upper-class-born with a silver spoon in his mouth toff, just like Cameron. Like all the others his is fooling the working class, it just appears that at the moment he is doing it a bit better than the others
      The only way out of this mess is a party willing to throw out any remnant of Thatcherism, stand up to the bankers, and replace with people friendly policies.

      1. Silverspeeder profile image61
        Silverspeederposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        The shortages of housing and the stress on services are a direct result of over 3 million people (a very conservative estimate by the ONS) arriving here in the past 15 years. A shortage of housing has led to the unpopular bedroom tax (which I also believe is wrong) and shows the desperation of a government who has no idea on how to control its borders.
        Of course immigrants cant push the world into deep recession but they can exasperate the problems cause by bad fiscal policy.

        I know that no party in the UK is far left thank god (if there is one) as the country would be in more of a mess than it is now.

        I think the working man appreciates that UKIP is indeed fighting the lefty ideas and overburdened bureaucracy of the EU.
        How can you possibly say what UKIP will do? You have no idea, just like you have no idea how a total socialist party would work, manly because we have never had one. The fact of the matter is that the electorate would be more inclined not to vote foe a totally left party as they would be for a totally right party.
        Although many people like the idea of nationalised industry they would probably not like the idea that their lives would be controlled even more than it is now. We already know a nationalised transport system doesn't work, we already know that the NHS is failing, we already know that anything the government touches under the auspice of making things fairer for all always throws up winners and losers.
        As you have stated that there is no true left wing party in the UK maybe that's the reason why people have decided to look to UKIP to make a difference. They have started by showing us that the EU is incapable of making a difference so maybe they can challenge the established political elite which  ever side of the fence they sit on.

        By the way there is a little hospital in Cambridge that has excelled since they have been taken over by a private company.
        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/artic … -firm.html
        I know you hate the Daily Mail John but that's where the story is
        However the politically motivated union Unison seem to have other ideas
        http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/News/Hi … 012013.htm
        However that may be a bit of sour grapes on their part as they would love to return to the closed shop system of strike strike strike and less for more.


        I think a people friendly policy (for UK residents) would be to limit immigration to a need basis. If we need them they can come.

        1. John Holden profile image61
          John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          I hardly think that the Germans who trashed our already heavily depleted housing stock in WWII had any desire to immigrate here. After WWII the (socialist) Labour party embarked on a huge house building program, it wasn't enough but it was needed. Of course immigrants helped in this rebuilding program, as they help in the NHS, 
          The bedroom tax is nothing to do with the housing shortage which was caused by the end of the social housing program and the ending of restrictions on financing for houses.

          1. Silverspeeder profile image61
            Silverspeederposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            The Germans also depleted the stock of young fit workers that could have returned to the workforce and rebuilt Briton, but as we had lost a generation the government (quite rightly) invited our foreign cousins to come and partake in the new Briton, a Briton they would help rebuild and then take the benefits from their labour.
            I still have a lot of respect for those who came here to do so, I have respect for those who left their families and friends and travelled across the world not knowing what to expect. My own friend who came here in 1963 and worked hard for 40 years, he brought his wife here in 1968 and she worked in the NHS for 30yrs, they have never claimed any benefits and have raised 3 children, he still believes this is the best country in the world but he does consider the current immigration program as a problem. Apparently he voted UKIP (this is what he told me) even though he had been a life long Labour supporter.

            The bedroom tax is directly linked to reducing the spare capacity in the system, in the governments eyes it helps to train the mind of those having to claim benefits to move to less expensive properties with the appropriate accommodation thus freeing up larger properties for lager families.

            1. John Holden profile image61
              John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Er, no. It encourages those on a low income to move into the private sector where rents are always higher. Very few social housing providers provide dwellings suitable for single people or even childless couples, how then are they not forced into the private sector?

  2. psycheskinner profile image79
    psycheskinnerposted 2 years ago

    In several countries the resurgence was on the far left, not the far right. Both wings of political though can benefit from reactionary shifts based on not liking how things are going.

  3. John Holden profile image61
    John Holdenposted 2 years ago

    Milliband left wing! Don't make me laugh.

    1. Silverspeeder profile image61
      Silverspeederposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Of course he isn't John he just likes to try and fool the working class and his union masters into thinking he is.

      1. HollieT profile image86
        HollieTposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        The working classes know that he isn't left wing which is why many do not vote at all. He's left of centre (marginally) The working classes are being fooled by a Libertarian party, the establishment's rebranding of the Conservatives: Enter UKIP.

        They're also daft enough to look at their neighbours and believe that all our woes are created by immigrants. Whom, I might add, are far less likely to apply for social housing, claim benefits or even attempt to see a Dr. when they need to (irrespective of the fact that they're more than entitled to do so) then the indigenous population.

        There are plenty of studies out there (and have been for some time) supporting my claims. I can't be bothered to find them for you. But, if you prefer the speculation, lies and utter nonsense spouted by the Daily Mail to evidence- you deserve to remain in the dark.

        Roll on an enlightened UK, sickening to see that my fellow country men look to the Daily Mail for education.

        Shocking!

        1. GA Anderson profile image85
          GA Andersonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          I have nothing to offer here, except my admiration for you Brits. although there are a lot of other reasons for that admiration, "daft"  is a good example. Along with "Spot on" and "Buggers!" I really love Buggers.

          GA

          1. HollieT profile image86
            HollieTposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Daft, buggers, plonker and dip stick are my favourite phrases. Well, there are a few others but they include swear words. wink

        2. Silverspeeder profile image61
          Silverspeederposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          The working class is apathetic towards the ruling political elite, they have come to understand that voting for non of the above is exactly the same as voting for any of the above.

          Of course immigrants are not the problem, politicians and their policies are.
          You must have been brainwashed if you think minimum wage migrants do not claim benefits, do not go to see the doctor or use the NHS or send their children to our schools. They also wouldn't pay very much tax at all.
          Do you really think that all the 25000 Romanians who have arrived since January all have obtain middle income employment and private rented properties without claiming a penny in working tax credits or housing benefits?

          There are plenty of studies, all commissioned by the ruling political elite to back up their ludicrous claims the non of the 3 million or so immigrant who have entered the UK in the last 16 years have claimed or put any strain on the system at all. There are think tanks and studies that totally refute the claims of the ruling political elite but they are usually shouted down by the left wing with chants of ignorant daily mail reader!

          There is always a element of truth any media report, you just have to peal away the political bias to see it.

          1. John Holden profile image61
            John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            " Whom, I might add, are far less likely to apply for social housing, claim benefits or even attempt to see a Dr. when they need to (irrespective of the fact that they're more than entitled to do so) then the indigenous population."

            Note the "far less likely" which is a world away from the "never" which you claim Hollie said.

            1. Silverspeeder profile image61
              Silverspeederposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              The studies you talk about leave out or put in facts to suit the pro immigration stance of all the main political parties that are all for immigration.
              From you stance on the studies conducted I take it we are not to question the results on any grounds?

              Lets take for instance the OBR, surely their long term forecast on population will include the facts.
              Here are some of the obvious assumptions to make the figures stack up in their favour
              All migrants are young
              All migrants  will work
              All migrants will have no children
              All migrants will go home
              All migrants will never grow old
              All migrants will never get sick
              All migrants will never be out of work
              The Office for Budget Responsibility has proposed that immigration on a huge scale (about 6m - 15m extra people) over the next half century will have a demographic effect on the national debt.  However, what the OBR doesn't tell us is that the huge extra demand for pensions and welfare in the mid to late 21st century will be due to the high birth rates amongst the migrants who arrived in the past 15 years - 25% of children are children of migrants.


              The definitive House of Lords inquiry into the benefits of immigration concluded that ".... the economic benefits of positive net immigration are small or insignificant".   
              In reality this small effect is not surprising because, in the longer term an immigrant becomes just another member of the economy.  Immigration just adds people to a country, it does not make each person richer.  Now that almost 20% of the population of England is either a recent immigrant or the child of a recent immigrant any new immigrants do not increase the diversity of the economy - it is already diversified in that way, new immigration just brings another person.

              The real test is of course are we all wealthier because of immigration? Maybe that's the question that should be answered by the working class, have they seen a marked improvement in their standard of living because according to the figures and facts (based on GDP stats) tabled by these studies the immigrants should have raised the standard of living for everyone.
              Surely all the extra tax collected from the extra 3,5 million immigrants would have negated any recessionary effects?

              I will continue to question the need for an open door immigration policy, I shall continue to question why so many of the reports are commissioned, if there is nothing wrong why would I need a report to tell me there is nothing wrong. I will continue to question why MP's favour immigration as a way of filling the employment gaps when there are millions unemployed anyway. I will continue to question why people are called racist when they are in opposition to open door immigration policies and I will continue to question why the concerns of the British electorate are met with the political elite branding us as bigots.

              1. HollieT profile image86
                HollieTposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Can I have link to these so called assumptions made by the OBR please, because we're clearly talking about different studies?

                Firstly, how can you include the 'facts' when it comes to a long term study, as in future forecasts? You can only make forecasts based on the data you have available, you can't discuss the 'facts' when it comes to migration in 2025, we don't have the data yet.

                "All migrants are young
                All migrants  will work
                All migrants will have no children
                All migrants will go home
                All migrants will never grow old
                All migrants will never get sick
                All migrants will never be out of work

                Secondly, the OBR make no such assumptions- read it again. I have absolutely no idea where you've got this from or what you're talking about.

                "The real test is of course are we all wealthier because of immigration? Maybe that's the question that should be answered by the working class, have they seen a marked improvement in their standard of living because according to the figures and facts (based on GDP stats) tabled by these studies the immigrants should have raised the standard of living for everyone.
                Surely all the extra tax collected from the extra 3,5 million immigrants would have negated any recessionary effects?"

                Eh? When looking at the impact of immigration on the economy we're examining lots of different factors, one of which is the whether their tax contributions outweigh or fall short of the public resources they use (services, benefits etc.) When we're discussing migrants from the EU the overall fiscal impact is positive, this is the EVIDENCE, not an assumption however much you'd like to be.

                None of us are better off, whether we're from a working or middle class background. Food, fuel and housing costs are crippling many of us as are stagnating wages.  Globally food prices are higher, same when it comes to fuel. Rents are not controlled which leads to exploitative practices by landlords, particularly when we are in the midst of a housing crisis. And then there's energy costs. I think you know what's going on there. To ask whether we're all better off because of immigration is an overly simplistic response to falling living standards, there are too many other issues to consider. It's really not a good idea to blame immigrants for excessive rents and rising energy and fuel bills. 

                I will continue to question the need for an open door immigration policy, I shall continue to question why so many of the reports are commissioned, if there is nothing wrong why would I need a report to tell me there is nothing wrong

                I can't believe that you're actually questioning why research is conducted!! Research is the pursuit of knowledge, it expands our understanding of issues and enables us to seek solutions.

                I don't think it's the 'political elite' who are branding ignorant people racist,  just the more enlightened members of society.

                1. Silverspeeder profile image61
                  Silverspeederposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Firstly you couldn't be bothered to supply any links to surveys which you say clearly state the advantages of mass immigration, it is also plainly obvious you have not read either the forecast report from the OBR or the House of Lords report from 2008.

                  "Eh? When looking at the impact of immigration on the economy we're examining lots of different factors, one of which is the whether their tax contributions outweigh or fall short of the public resources they use (services, benefits etc.) When we're discussing migrants from the EU the overall fiscal impact is positive, this is the EVIDENCE, not an assumption however much you'd like to be."

                  Please point me to the evidence as the latest I heard is that there was no discernible benefit from the recent influx of immigrants (last 15 yrs) income tax receipts, mostly because they are from low income employment and if you know anything about minimum wage earners you know they pay very little income tax. Unless of course assumptions are made.


                  I think you have forgotten your basic economics, the more people fighting over resources the higher the price will be. The Labour party instigated the quickest highest rise in immigration than at any other time in our history, it also failed to plan for the influx and when questions were asked about there policy we got the infamous racist chant of " we need immigrants to do the jobs lazy British workers wont do", something I believe they have apologised for, also apologising for their immigration policy.

                  And finally if there is no problem why would we need to do research (into immigration) to seek solutions.
                  Research: the systematic investigation into and study of materials and sources in order to establish facts and reach new conclusions.

                  No I am sure that Gordon Brown called a few people bigots and racists. And I am sure there were a few more of the political elite that have done so.
                  If these people were truly enlightened they would know that immigration is a question of numbers and nothing to do with race.

                  1. HollieT profile image86
                    HollieTposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Firstly you couldn't be bothered to supply any links to surveys which you say clearly state the advantages of mass immigration, it is also plainly obvious you have not read either the forecast report from the OBR or the House of Lords report from 2008.

                    I posted a link to the channel 4 blog which contained the link to CReAMs briefing. So you hadn't read it, you haven't even noticed that the link was already supplied!! Which explains why I couldn't understand what you were talking about.   Anyway, here's the link which will take you to CReAM'S briefing.  http://www.cream-migration.org/files/Mi … tSheet.pdf

                    CReAMS briefing broadly supports the findings in the ONS report.

                    "The Office for Budget Responsibility agrees that “most recent evidence for the UK is supportive of the view that net inward migration has had a positive fiscal impact”, largely because migrants tend to be younger."

                    And here's research undertaken by  the OECD. http://www.oecd.org/els/mig/imo2013.htm

                    Please point me to the evidence as the latest I heard is that there was no discernible benefit from the recent influx of immigrants (last 15 yrs) income tax receipts, mostly because they are from low income employment and if you know anything about minimum wage earners you know they pay very little income tax. Unless of course assumptions are made.

                    No, that is not what the studies indicate at all. I have absolutely no idea where you're getting this information from. I can provide the links for you but unfortunately I can't read them on your behalf. You'll have to do that for yourself and the findings are pretty conclusive, immigration has been broadly positive for the economy. (it's all there in black and white)

                    I think you have forgotten your basic economics, the more people fighting over resources the higher the price will be.

                    If you decide to read the studies and analyse the findings, you'll discover that in some regions immigration has depressed wages, but not in others. And we're not discussing basic economics, we're discussing the impact of immigration on GDP, public services, wages and our skill base.

                    And finally if there is no problem why would we need to do research (into immigration) to seek solutions.

                    The problem is the economy, jobs and  strain on public services, the research is to determine whether immigration has had a positive or negative impact. Obvious really.

                    I'm not supporting decisions made by Gordon Brown or the Labour party. I'm not a Labour voter and I have no idea whether Gordon Brown referred to those who oppose immigration as racists, bigots or otherwise. Can't help you there.

                    Oh, and can you provide that link please?

                  2. John Holden profile image61
                    John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Then why did Farage ask us ho we would feel if ten single Romanian men moved in next door?

                    I personally would feel perturbed if ten single men of any nationality (especially English) moved in next door.

          2. HollieT profile image86
            HollieTposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Let me just recap because evidently you not only missed the gist of my post, but failed to read it properly. I stated that:

            They're also daft enough to look at their neighbours and believe that all our woes are created by immigrants. Whom, I might add, are far less likely to apply for social housing, claim benefits or even attempt to see a Dr. when they need to (irrespective of the fact that they're more than entitled to do so) than the indigenous population.

            At no point did I state that they didn't claim benefits, see a Dr. or ever apply for social housing.

            As an aside, I'd love to see the studies which you cite  'refuting' the claims. Here's your opportunity, I wont shout you down. I am aware that these so called 'think tanks'? have attempted to use studies that indicate that net migration has broadly had a positive impact on the economy, and migrants are far less likely use benefits, claim social housing etc. than their British born contemporaries, to spout the complete opposite. Which, I hasten to add, is why they were shouted down and called ignorant DM readers, because they ARE NOT the Findings of the study.

            http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/fac … -pay/16332

            Furthermore, the ruling political elite, aka the govt. of the day, have not attempted to claim that immigrants have put no strain on the system. They claim the complete opposite. Where are you gleaning your information from??

            And no, there is not always an element of truth to any media report. Although I do agree political bias is a problem with the media in this country (and others) And again, not all studies are commissioned by the ruling elite! Who told you this?

  4. HollieT profile image86
    HollieTposted 2 years ago

    Me neither. I doubt him or his policies (when they have some) will stand up to scrutiny in the next 12 months.

    1. John Holden profile image61
      John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      The few ideas that I have so far seen fill me with horror.

      1. HollieT profile image86
        HollieTposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Like "ban the burkha" No 1 priority in their last manifesto?

        Ahem, who funds them, and why?

        1. John Holden profile image61
          John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          A quick search suggests that their major funders are, gulp, the EU who they so much want to scrap!
          You couldn't make it up.

          1. HollieT profile image86
            HollieTposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            You see, that's all that can be gleaned from the internet. Other than Paul somebody or other. They are really SECRETIVE when it comes to where their cash comes from.

            Try another search with a different mindset smile

 
working