Scum Hamas Terrorists Slaughter Jews In Israel

[stlucifer]

59 minutes ago, W6er said:

The economic benefit of immigration is pretty much spurious and usually reported in terms of GDP growth, which obfuscates the reality:

 

However, even if we were to accept that lots of our NHS doctors and nurses are immigrants, do you think depriving the third world of their medical staff is a good thing? I would suggest it's only likely to make living conditions far worse for people who are already impoverished. But the lack of health care provisions in the third world is not something that appears to concern you, does it? No need to answer.

Sorry but, what a load of sh!te! In general, the countries these graduates come from have a deliberate  surplus of trainees and the governments of these countries know they will see a lot depart from their lands. In contrast. The UK did not train enough doctors, nurses, et al to compensate for the drain we suffer from our doctors and nurses departing to the likes of Australia. That's why we rely so heavily on those valuable immigrants. SO. There was a need to answer.

The biggest factor, certainly for me, with mass-immigration is the exorbitant cost of housing. I don't know how old you are, but in the mid-1990s house prices were far more affordable. Perhaps you were able to buy a nice house, which is now unencumbered. However, many people are really struggling due to the cost of housing  and those are able to get on the housing ladder will have to sacrifice a huge portion of their income to pay their mortgage, others, not so fortunate, will have to rent and may never own their own home. But that's something that doesn't concern you, does it? No need to answer.

The very fact there is a lack of housing is the reason for such a disparity between then and now. I already addressed the issue of affordable rented accommodation AND the cost of a decent family home. Perhaps a need to read is in order for you.

 

As an aside. Is it possible we might lose young Nahmani to conscription? I hope not but it must be absolutely horrific for him right now.

Edited October 21, 2023 by stlucifer

[Albanian Buddy]

@W6er 

Only a while ago I’m sure you were highly critical of immigrants arriving in this country many of whom are escaping persecution, war and famine - yet it seems that some of your ancestors came to Scotland via the same “route” from Ireland.

Is that not little hypocritical? Apologies if I have confused you with someone else?

[Albanian Buddy]

1 hour ago, W6er said:

I don't know how old you are, but in the mid-1990s house prices were far more affordable. Perhaps you were able to buy a nice house, which is now unencumbered. However, many people are really struggling due to the cost of housing  and those are able to get on the housing ladder will have to sacrifice a huge portion of their income to pay their mortgage, others, not so fortunate, will have to rent and may never own their own home. But that's something that doesn't concern you, does it? No need to answer.

 

Really?
Perhaps you have no idea how hard it was to get on the property ladder in the 80s and 90s especially with the very strict loan to value calculations. Unemployment rates were horrific. 
That is without taking into consideration the really high interest rates if you were accepted for a mortgage. 
Consumers today have never had it so good in terms of “borrowing”. 

The problem arises is that many people today are up to the neck in consumer credit card debt, monthly payments for PCP cars, mobile, gyms, TV, uber eats, etc. 

It has always been a struggle for young working people to get on the property ladder. 

[antrin]

2 hours ago, W6er said:

1.  The economic benefit of immigration is pretty much spurious and usually reported in terms of GDP growth, which obfuscates the reality:

 

2.  However, even if we were to accept that lots of our NHS doctors and nurses are immigrants, do you think depriving the third world of their medical staff is a good thing? I would suggest it's only likely to make living conditions far worse for people who are already impoverished. But the lack of health care provisions in the third world is not something that appears to concern you, does it? No need to answer.

3.  The biggest factor, certainly for me, with mass-immigration is the exorbitant cost of housing. I don't know how old you are, but in the mid-1990s house prices were far more affordable. Perhaps you were able to buy a nice house, which is now unencumbered. However, many people are really struggling due to the cost of housing  and those are able to get on the housing ladder will have to sacrifice a huge portion of their income to pay their mortgage, others, not so fortunate, will have to rent and may never own their own home. But that's something that doesn't concern you, does it? No need to answer.

 

Regard 1.  Economists would disagree. Mah wummin (an economist) was as sceptical as you, till she read up on it and grudgingly conceded she was being superficial.

 

2.  It seems to be a god thing for not only the people coming here, as they can experience a better quality of living and personal development whilst doing what the majority of them - send monies back to the families that they’ve left behind.  And many( better trained, experienced and skilful) take their talents home.

 

3.  Immigrants are the last people to blame for the housing crisis.  And they’re especially blameless when it comes to the bottom of the market.  
Last week the BBC had the first of a two-parter (I watched both) on the the UK housing crisis and pulled no punches.  It was focussed and angry.  I may have misunderstood but it has been (and is STILL BEING) made more and more worse by successive Tory governments kow-towing to house-building, Tory financing companies AND their property owning  selfish voters.  
Watch the programmes if you really wish to understand why UK has this problem, which is STILL worsening.

[Albanian Buddy]

8 minutes ago, antrin said:

2.  It seems to be a god thing for not only the people coming here, as they can experience a better quality of living and personal development whilst doing what the majority of them - send monies back to the families that they’ve left behind.  And many( better trained, experienced and skilful) take their talents home.

Why does this being always have to be involved?

If god created the universe who or what created god? 

[W6er]

1 hour ago, Albanian Buddy said:

@W6er 

Only a while ago I’m sure you were highly critical of immigrants arriving in this country many of whom are escaping persecution, war and famine - yet it seems that some of your ancestors came to Scotland via the same “route” from Ireland.

Is that not little hypocritical? Apologies if I have confused you with someone else?

I don't accept the much touted economic benefits of immigration, no. I'm not critical of immigrants, but of the policy of mass-immigration.

I would rather, in the first instance, that my tax money was not spent on intervening in, otherwise known as "bringing democracy to", the Middle East, which resulted in the killing and displacing of millions. Iraq was invaded Iraq on a false pretext. Before that, I would rather we had not armed Saddam Hussein to fight the Iranians.  

I'm convinced David Kelly was murdered for speaking out. I also have questions I'd like answered about 9/11...but let's not go there.

I would rather we had not intervened in Libya, too!

So, what has this got to do with what you asked me, I imagine you're wondering? Well our foreign policy has destabilised the Middle East and north Africa - for example, the emergence of ISIS - which has resulted in the problems we're now experiencing. The regime changes in Iraq and Libya were likely motivated by their leaders' threats to sell oil in a currency other than the dollar. (1)(2) Maintaining the petrodollar is necessary to control US hegemony.

Given the UK's instrumental role in all of this, I agree that we have a duty to accept refugees displaced by the various conflicts we have helped cause. But I do not accept that it's this wonderful gift that we're always being told. Migration Watch's website has a repository of studies which indicate that it's not economically beneficial: https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/key-topics/economics

One salient paragraph:

Quote

5. Oxford Economics estimated, in a 2018 paper commissioned by the government, that immigrants overall cost the Exchequer £4.3 billion in the year 2016/17, (with a net contribution of over £4bn from migrants from the EU 'Original Member States' considerably outweighed by a cost of £9bn for non-EEA migrants - par. 4.11 of September 2018 MAC report). On this evidence, immigration does not generate the tax receipts needed for migrants to ‘pay their way’, let alone to finance the new infrastructure or anything else required by rapid population growth – more than 80% of which was the result of immigration between 2001 and 2016 (see our paper: MW452 - Impact of immigration on UK population growth).

 [I'll leave the above for @antrin to consider. I would suggest there are various externalities to consider, regardless.]

As for whether I am a hypocrite, I would say I am not. My last Irish ancestor came over in ~1906, at least 15 years prior to Irish independence. Ireland was not a colony at the time, as Irish Republican mythology always claims. It was a fully fledged part of the United Kingdom.

1) The Union Jack (I know it's technically known as the Union Flag, unless flown on a ship, btw) 🇬🇧 - is comprised of three flags: the crosses of St. George (England), St. Andrew and St. Patrick. (3)

2) The Irish elected MPs directly to Westminster - indeed the Irish Parliamentary Party were kingmakers in parliament, which led to the Home Rule Bill in 1912 (?). No colonies did this. (4)

3) Two British prime ministers were born in Ireland. (5)

4) The currency in Ireland was sterling until 1928! (6)

 

My ancestors coming here were simply travelling from one part of the United Kingdom to another, just as a Welshman or an Englishman coming here is not an immigrant.

Anyway, I bid you gentleman a pleasant weekend.  

 

(1) https://www.theguardian.com/business/2003/feb/16/iraq.theeuro

(2) https://theecologist.org/2016/mar/14/why-qaddafi-had-go-african-gold-oil-and-challenge-monetary-imperialism

(3) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_the_United_Kingdom

(4) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Parliamentary_Party

(5) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prime_ministers_of_the_United_Kingdom_by_birthplace

(6) https://remitr.com/blog/history-of-currency-in-ireland/

[Albanian Buddy]

But we are all gods children? @W6er

Many of these people (I don’t like the term immigrants) are from former (brutalised) parts of the British empire. 

They surely deserve to be welcomed into their homes by christian minded people like yourself.

They might even help you get onto the property market!

[beyond our ken]

5 hours ago, Albanian Buddy said:

Why does this being always have to be involved?

If god created the universe who or what created god? 

Typo

[Albanian Buddy]

13 minutes ago, beyond our ken said:

Typo

No? Really. 🤦‍♂️ I’d never have known. Jeezo! 😜 

[antrin]

God.

Subliminal typos….  I don’t ever do spelling misteaks.

W6 didn’t react to my  3 responses, apart from leaving…

”something from Oxford Economics for (me) to consider” about 1 bit. From Oxford Economics.

I googled…

“Is Oxford better than LSE?

 

The LSE is widely rated as on a par with Oxford and Cambridge for the subjects it teaches and more generally.”

 

Mah wummin went to LSE and, as she acknowledges she may have been wrong, I’d imagine the Oxford Economics thing is also “wrong” given that it was commissioned specifically by the Tories in 2018 to confirm their bias.  Kinda archaic evidence… 

 

And that small example it offers is…chalk with cheese bollox.
 Why?

Eu migrants who are permitted to work are more economically worthwhile than non EU migrants, whom we deny the right to work.  Duh…

Now why would one group be less financially beneficial than the other?!  Could the latter’s  opportunity chances be less?

 

And, of course, immigrants won’t finance “new infrastructure” especially if the govt has not planned, scheduled or considered doing ANYTHING about new infrastructure, especially housing.

 

Watch the BBC PROGRAMMES on this.  Immigrants are not the baddies, here.

Edited October 21, 2023 by antrin

[stlucifer]

18 hours ago, Albanian Buddy said:

@W6er 

Only a while ago I’m sure you were highly critical of immigrants arriving in this country many of whom are escaping persecution, war and famine - yet it seems that some of your ancestors came to Scotland via the same “route” from Ireland.

Is that not little hypocritical? Apologies if I have confused you with someone else?

You're definitely confused.

[Albanian Buddy]

11 hours ago, antrin said:

God.

Subliminal typos….  I don’t ever do spelling misteaks.

Organic grass fed is sublime. Not subliminal. Maybe that’s where you’re going wrong. 

[Albanian Buddy]

16 minutes ago, stlucifer said:

You're definitely confused.

I’m certainly confused by the god fearing “one truth faith” agenda being pushed. 

[W6er]

18 hours ago, Albanian Buddy said:

But we are all gods children? @W6er

Many of these people (I don’t like the term immigrants) are from former (brutalised) parts of the British empire. 

They surely deserve to be welcomed into their homes by christian minded people like yourself.

They might even help you get onto the property market!

 

We are all God's children. We should always try to be compassionate and love towards our fellow human beings, regardless of their creed, colour or social status.

However, the former colonies sought, and eventually achieved, independence. Mass-immigration, certainly on the scale it's happening now is post-colonial. 

Nobody should ever blame immigrants for economic conditions. I would be a hypocrite if I were to do so, as I can understand why someone would want to migrate for a better life and prospects for their children; I would certainly consider doing the same in their position. The blame can only ever lie at the foot of the government. 

I own my own place, fortunately. Many are not so lucky. 

 

13 hours ago, antrin said:

God.

Subliminal typos….  I don’t ever do spelling misteaks.

W6 didn’t react to my  3 responses, apart from leaving…

”something from Oxford Economics for (me) to consider” about 1 bit. From Oxford Economics.

I googled…

“Is Oxford better than LSE?

 

The LSE is widely rated as on a par with Oxford and Cambridge for the subjects it teaches and more generally.”

 

Mah wummin went to LSE and, as she acknowledges she may have been wrong, I’d imagine the Oxford Economics thing is also “wrong” given that it was commissioned specifically by the Tories in 2018 to confirm their bias.  Kinda archaic evidence… 

 

And that small example it offers is…chalk with cheese bollox.
 Why?

Eu migrants who are permitted to work are more economically worthwhile than non EU migrants, whom we deny the right to work.  Duh…

Now why would one group be less financially beneficial than the other?!  Could the latter’s  opportunity chances be less?

 

And, of course, immigrants won’t finance “new infrastructure” especially if the govt has not planned, scheduled or considered doing ANYTHING about new infrastructure, especially housing.

 

Watch the BBC PROGRAMMES on this.  Immigrants are not the baddies, here.

 

Your assertion that the Oxford study is biased is purely conjecture, without evidence.

My understanding is that many eastern Europeans came to the UK as young, healthy adults with the sole purpose of working. I imagine they're also far more likely to return to their home countries before reaching pension age. It is when people get old that they become particularly costly - they're basically totally reliant on the state for pensions and health care, whilst contributing very little to the Exchequer. I read some time ago, but cannot find the source, that someone needs to earn, on average, ~£35,000 per year in order that they're not a drain on public funds over their life time. 

You can find the raw info here: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/personalandhouseholdfinances/incomeandwealth/datasets/theeffectsoftaxesandbenefitsonhouseholdincomefinancialyearending2014

I haven't got the time to explore it, unfortunately.

The rapid, exponential growth in AI means we're approaching a time when many jobs will be made redundant. Take the legal profession: https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/law-society-predicts-savage-reduction-in-legal-jobs-as-ai-takes-over/5108772.article 

The demand for immigrant labour, indeed the demand for any labour is going to be reduced over the next ten to twenty years. Whilst jobs will be created, far more will be unnecessary. 

As for infrastructure - housing, sewage processing, water, roads, schools, hospitals, public transport, power stations are not free. A growing population requires all of these things. It's far more expensive than maintaining existing infrastructure.

The notion that an additional 6,000,000 people per decade does not have any impact on the demand for housing is simply bizarre. Laying the blame purely on the supply side and claiming not enough houses are being built is literally one-sided. It could equally be said that the government is allowing too many people in, which is increasing demand.

Of course, the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) loves mass-immigration. Businesses benefit from having a steady supply of cheap labour, plus additional consumers, without any of the aforementioned costs.

Quote

The average house in the UK currently costs around nine-times average earnings, based on data as at 30 November 2022. The last time house prices were this expensive relative to average earnings was in the year 1876, nearly 150 years ago.

Source: https://www.schroders.com/en-gb/uk/individual/insights/what-174-years-of-data-tell-us-about-house-price-affordability-in-the-uk/

 

[antrin]

2 hours ago, W6er said:

 As for infrastructure - housing, sewage processing, water, roads, schools, hospitals, public transport, power stations are not free. A growing population requires all of these things. It's far more expensive than maintaining existing infrastructure.

The notion that an additional 6,000,000 people per decade does not have any impact on the demand for housing is simply bizarre. Laying the blame purely on the supply side and claiming not enough houses are being built is literally one-sided. It could equally be said that the government is allowing too many people in, which is increasing demand.

Of course, the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) loves mass-immigration. Businesses benefit from having a steady supply of cheap labour, plus additional consumers, without any of the aforementioned costs.

So, you don’t intend to be see the recent BBC documentaries with data and proof about the governmental neglect and abuse of the self-inflicted housing disaster?

…not to mention your blaming of immigrants  for (and glib dismissal of current government’s) failures in sewage, transport and power etc?  
Of course, these are not free!  No one but you might have suggested they were!  Their costs are ongoing (if a government truly wants to protect and care for its citizens) and a decent, caring government will plan for and fund all the above.  Even when fresh people arrive on these islands.  It's not only the native Scottish population that’s falling.  We need immigrants.

Our government has been and is a disaster.

[shull]

 

[shull]

 

[shull]

 

[shull]

 

[Jockmd]

 

[Jockmd]

 

[shull]

 

[shull]

 

[shull]

 

[shull]