Strawman.
UKIP - a 'one trick pony'?
- Thread starter JBR
- Start date
- Status
Strawman.
Sponsored Links
Is this supposed to be the question?
Can you re-type it in English and so it makes sense.
I'm not quite sure what a list with a tiny fraction of immigrants featuring on it has to do with uncontrolled immigration. Particularly the problem of economic migrants without papers who sneak into this country to be reclassified as Asylum seekers by gullible authorities. I have no problem with a handful of successful immigrants, as long as they arrived here LEGALLY.
It's the potential millions who are intent on getting here who will always be a drain on everything that our society needs to look after it's own.
Perhaps someone could tell me the percentage of immigrants, legal or otherwise, who will end up on the rich list and therefore completely self supporting?
Sponsored Links
This post from that link says it all.....
"I have been in the construction industry for 43yrs. The effect on the industry is that migrant labour have pushed the labour rates down by 60% with a gross rate of 30%. I have cut my gross rate by 10% and don’t have a further 20% to trim off the top unless I employ migrant labour. Something I am not prepared to get involved in. My only alternative is to change what I do. Which Is what I am doing. And why I will vote Ukip having been a dedicated conservative all my working life. I am British I try to buy British."
Nice one nausey.
As always propaganda on websites is a lot different to reality.
"I have been in the construction industry for 43yrs. The effect on the industry is that migrant labour have pushed the labour rates down by 60% with a gross rate of 30%. I have cut my gross rate by 10% and don’t have a further 20% to trim off the top unless I employ migrant labour. Something I am not prepared to get involved in. My only alternative is to change what I do. Which Is what I am doing. And why I will vote Ukip having been a dedicated conservative all my working life. I am British I try to buy British."
Nice one nausey.
As always propaganda on websites is a lot different to reality.
Would Turkey be eligible, bearing in mind that all but a tiny corner of the country is in Asia?
- Joined
- 10 Sep 2014
- Messages
- 673
- Reaction score
- 31
- Country
- Joined
- 10 Sep 2014
- Messages
- 673
- Reaction score
- 31
- Country
I always reckoned that's why Labour introduced the minimum wage. It was nothing to do with real concern for the low paid. It was because they had embarked on a policy of mass immigration, and they needed to protect their policy somehow.
The inevitable scramble for cheap immigrant labour and a race to the bottom for pay rates in many employment sectors would have been political suicide. Min wage was one way of hoodwinking people and partially masking the problems caused by their flawed policy.
If you want something, nobody is forcing you to buy goods and services which have included cheap imported labour. 
If you want something, nobody is forcing you to buy goods and services which have included cheap imported labour.
I like goods produced with cheap labour, it's the cheap imported labour bit I don't like. Keep cheap goods production and cheap labour overseas.
Unfair trade products all the way for me.
It's relevant as we were discussing the varied motivations of immigrants. Ie it is proof that not all are freeloading benefit seekers.
Once we have proof that some are highly motivated entrepreneurs, then it disproves the theory that all are scroungers i.e. the truth is not at the extremes. ANY percentage of successful immigrants blows the bigot's prejudice out of the water, because it shows that pre judgement of individuals is erroneous and to be frank, stupid.
I will have a look for figures for immigrants who become self supporting. I suspect it compares well with 'indigenous' benefit recipients. if you have them you can post them to save time, as I presume your views are based on something of substance.
I think you'll find that's the general rule for Norcon's contributions -but this is a safe place for him to let off steam and ,hopefully,eventually learn how making an argument works . So don't be too hard on him.
WS66,
From 'More or Less'
'When we do that, we see that between 1995-2011, on average each EEA immigrant put about £6,000 more into the public purse than they took out'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-25880373
I'll dig deeper for you to find source material.
For the comparison between UK , EU and Non EU benefit recipients, I thought the Telegraph for balance might be good. It's hardly a left wing rag.
"In 2014, 4.9 million (92.6 per cent) working age benefit claimants were British while only 131,000 (2.5 per cent) were EU nationals."
"What does this all mean? It suggests that whatever the arguments for and against reducing the number of EU migrants receiving British benefits, delivering such a reduction wouldn’t make a significant difference to the overall welfare bill which is estimated to be £208 billion for the year 2013-14. And seeing as the take-up of benefits among migrants is so small, it’s also worth asking how big of a draw Britain’s welfare system really is."
The tables are interesting.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...h-do-immigrants-really-claim-in-benefits.html
And from another one
"The notion that foreign-born people are less than half as likely to be claiming benefits as UK nationals is well founded in the available figures from the DWP and the ONS. They indicate that around 15 per cent of UK nationals are currently claiming working age benefits, compared to six per cent of foreign nationals."
https://fullfact.org/factchecks/migrants_foreign_nationals_benefits_claim_likely_UK-27395
From 'More or Less'
'When we do that, we see that between 1995-2011, on average each EEA immigrant put about £6,000 more into the public purse than they took out'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-25880373
I'll dig deeper for you to find source material.
For the comparison between UK , EU and Non EU benefit recipients, I thought the Telegraph for balance might be good. It's hardly a left wing rag.
"In 2014, 4.9 million (92.6 per cent) working age benefit claimants were British while only 131,000 (2.5 per cent) were EU nationals."
"What does this all mean? It suggests that whatever the arguments for and against reducing the number of EU migrants receiving British benefits, delivering such a reduction wouldn’t make a significant difference to the overall welfare bill which is estimated to be £208 billion for the year 2013-14. And seeing as the take-up of benefits among migrants is so small, it’s also worth asking how big of a draw Britain’s welfare system really is."
The tables are interesting.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...h-do-immigrants-really-claim-in-benefits.html
And from another one
"The notion that foreign-born people are less than half as likely to be claiming benefits as UK nationals is well founded in the available figures from the DWP and the ONS. They indicate that around 15 per cent of UK nationals are currently claiming working age benefits, compared to six per cent of foreign nationals."
https://fullfact.org/factchecks/migrants_foreign_nationals_benefits_claim_likely_UK-27395
- Status
Sponsored Links
Similar threads
