What is the best Brexit deal we can realistically achieve?

[Doggit]

The immigrants (of whatever nationality) are prepared to work hard, and they don't expect as much to live on. The unemployed Brits expect a lot more from the system; they want say a 2 bed house, but the immigrants will happily use the living room to sleep in, so would live in a 1 bed house, and pay less rent, so need less money.

Residential care isn't well funded (because the owners want to make a profit), and because they know they can get foreigners that will work for lower wages.

We are at a similar point to the middle ages. Before the black death, serfs worked the land on behalf of the landowners, but the black plague decimated the population, and the landowners had to make concessions in order to get them to do the work. The bosses can offer poor wages, because they know the immigrants will happily take it, but until the working population gets thinned out, wages won't improve.

 

[JohnD]

If only it was possible for workers to organise in such a way that they could negotiate en masse with employers who currently take advantage of taxpayers, who have to subsidise bad employers who offer such poor wages that workers qualify for benefits to enable them to live.

Some kind of free-market collective bargaining to level the playing field.

They could join into some kind of co-operative workers union, by industry, perhaps, or by trade.

Do you think such a thing is possible?

Or maybe we could have some kind of legally-enforceable basic standard of pay that would enable workers to live decent lives. We could call it a "Basic Survivable Pay" or something like that.

 

[SirGalahad]

The immigrants (of whatever nationality)
Residential care isn't well funded (because the owners want to make a profit), and because they know they can get foreigners that will work for lower wages.

Residential care market is made up mainly of small operations. About 15 % of the care homes are operated by 4 large providers. One of which is owned by a private equity company and is now being squeezed due to the high debt repayments it has to make and is now selling off care homes.

Also you mentioned that profit was a part of this equation - well what are you arguing? Care home operators are greedy - but isnt that capitalism?

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/nov/06/guy-hands-government-change-funds-care-homes

 

[SirGalahad]

If only it was possible for workers to organise in such a way that they could negotiate en masse with employers who currently take advantage of taxpayers, who have to subsidise bad employers who offer such poor wages that workers qualify for benefits to enable them to live.

Some kind of free-market collective bargaining to level the playing field.

They could join into some kind of co-operative workers union, by industry, perhaps, or by trade.

Do you think such a thing is possible?

Or maybe we could have some kind of legally-enforceable basic standard of pay that would enable workers to live decent lives. We could call it a "Basic Survivable Pay" or something like that.

Unionisation was in effect a way for labour to organise against the concentrated power of employers. Now we all know that people tend to concentrate power and then abuse their position which is why labour unionised.

 

[EFLImpudence]

People on here aren't very good at it, are they?

 

[wobs]

Immigration is a double edged sword. Politicians work on the simplistic basis that you need people in work to support an ever increasing aging population, and as the UKs population isn't growing fast enough, then the growth needs to fuelled by immigration. Except that immigrants tend to have larger families, so that requires not only more housing, but more infrastructure, more schools, more hospitals, that then need more doctors and nurses. But because we haven't trained the doctors and nurses, we then need to import them from abroad, and so the cycle continues endlessly. Often, immigrants that come here for work, then bring their families with them, and then they are entitled to in work benefits that outstrip what they are putting into the economy.

We also have a lot of immigrants that are selling the Big Issue, and they are then entitled to the supposed in work benefits. Hence the reason that controlled immigration is needed.

And of course, then we get to the fact that Immigrants are needed to do the jobs that the home grown benefit scroungers won't do, because it's too much like hard work. So, sometime immigration is a good thing. sometimes it's a bad thing, and sometimes, it's a necessity.

You do know that EU immigrants are a economic benefit to the UK right? They contribute to the UK, and are on average young and healthy. Their absence will be the UK's loss.

EU migrants come here primarily to work, not claim benefits. In fact they are less likely to claim anything than their UK equivalents.

Here is an interesting link:

There is still no evidence of an overall negative impact of immigration on jobs, wages,
housing or the crowding out of public services. Any negative impacts on wages of less skilled groups are small. One of the largest impacts of immigration seems to be on public perceptions.

http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/EA019.pdf
Or here:
https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/ian-sinclair/7-myths-about-immigration

Of course, Brexit will probably sort the issue out, as our economy suffers - less people will want to come, as there will be less opportunities for anyone.

 

[IWalkLikeHimaMartian]

Of course, Brexit will probably sort the issue out, as our economy suffers - less people will want to come, as there will be less opportunities for anyone.

Precisely, damage the economy and there will be no need for immigration control.
Self-perpetuating downward spiral.

 

[SirGalahad]

But But But We take back control so we can hand it over to our bourgeoisie overlord leaders who can't wait to cut regulations to free us from the chains of emancipation.

 

[IWalkLikeHimaMartian]

To Prime Minister Theresa May and all ministers:
"The government called an election to get a massive mandate for hard Brexit, but instead, it lost its majority. Now, as the French and German governments have confirmed that the UK can reverse Article 50, and it becomes clear that a ‘no deal’ Brexit would have devastating consequences for Britain, we call on you to commit to rescinding Article 50 if we fail to reach a deal with Europe."

Sign the petition to demand that no deal means no Brexit,

https://secure.avaaz.org/campaign/e...2beaed1a430e7d142f41a7a365a14bcbca4b75e67111c

 

[JohnD]

that should have been put on the official Parliamentary Petitions website.

 

[Doggit]

You do know that EU immigrants are a economic benefit to the UK right? They contribute to the UK, and are on average young and healthy.

Oh dear, another left wing myth I'm afraid, as both the LSE and open democracy are both left wing organisations.

Most immigrant are young (healthy is immaterial) and so many of them have families that they will bring over here. Most single immigrants working on the minimum wage, contribute virtually nothing to the economy, because they don't pay tax if they earn the minimum wage. If they have a wife and a child, then they draw benefits, and still don't pay tax. But as always, there are migrants, and migrants, and without a shadow of a doubt, there are many that not only do a beneficial job, but also pay tax and NI, and are a positive contribution to the economy.

We will always need migrants, and once the dust settles, at least we can decide the ones we want, and those we don't.

 

[JohnD]

Oh dear, another left wing myth I'm afraid, as both the LSE and open democracy are both left wing organisations.

There are lots of educated and sensible economists about. Surely you can find one, somewhere, that supports your opinion with rational argument?

 

[Doggit]

I don't need to John, I learnt your trick of just challenging others without proving anything relevant. And what would be the point of getting into a discussion with you; you don't believe in them.

But on a more realistic note. I've learnt that you can find anything on the web to support your point of view, as you keep proving time and time again. You just choose the ones that show what you're trying to prove, and I don't sink to that level.

 

[JohnD]

Here is an interesting link:

http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/EA019.pdf
Or here:
https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/ian-sinclair/7-myths-about-immigration

So Doggitt, when you are shown evidence you don't like, you dismiss it with no opposing arguments.

I say that water is wet, and demonstrate it experimentally.

You say the experiments are carried out by people with a wettist bias who believe water to be wet and its not fair, because all the people who study water say its wet.

OK then, show me evidence that water is dry.

 

[EFLImpudence]

I am dismayed by reading the EU rules on freedom of movement - linked recently.

It would seem that the level of immigration is not the fault of the EU but of Britain, itself.
It is a pity this was not pointed out in the run up to the referendum. I wonder why it was not.
It seems to negate most people's reason for voting leave and does not mean it will be altered if Britain leaves.


I did wonder why, to get residency here, I was asked to verify whether I had a job to go to or had sufficient means to support myself.