It's all bluff they want our money at the end of the day.
Dave will roll over and have his tummy tickled in order to be a "good European" like he and every Prime Minister before him has done since we signed up in 1972
It's a mess, a very big mess. We are an integral part of this mess. We will not be able to extricate ourselves from that mess. We are all in this mess together. Get used to this mess. The mess will only get more stinky and the pile of mess get higher and higher. Apart from that happy days...
We don't need to close our borders. What Cameron and his mob need to do is address the reason why they all want to come here in the first place. Stop giving them free handouts and council houses and all of a sudden they'll stop coming, apart from those who genuinely come to work hard and pay their way.
Also, whether or not we're part of the EU, it won't solve the problem of all the non EU immigrants jumping onto lorries in Calais.
Stop the benefits, stop the problem. Simple really............
It's all bluff they want our money at the end of the day.
So some would have you believe.
But the UK's net contribution - around £8bn - is tiny. In context: around 15% of the NHS budget; £3bn less than the rest of the UK's contribution to Northern Ireland; and only around half of Germany's EU contribution. Meanwhile Germany would see paying its share of our £8bn as a very, very cheap price to pay for converting Frankfurt into the financial services sector's EU powerhouse rather than London. London turns over nearly $2 trillion A DAY with more Euros traded than in all other EU countries combined. London earns 16 times the net EU contribution a year. With much of that income from the rest of the EU. Germany would just love some of those wealth creating one million financial services sector jobs to come its way. And that's what would happen.
Uncontrolled immigration simply floods the unskilled labour market, thus hurting the poorer sectors of society. I don't know how Labour can claim to be the party for the working man if they are promoting this.
Can somebody please tell me what the disadvantages are of having a points system in place for immigration? We currently discriminate against non-EU immigrants on this basis so why not leave the EU and place all immigrants on a level playing field?
anyone who says immigration is bad for the economy is lying, it's good for the economy. It does, however, create a social problem.
Personally i think we're better off in the eu in the same way scotland were better off in the uk. Big american businesses/banks will go to dublin to stay in the EU club and still have english speaking workers. I still think it's important to have a referendum on it though.
Immigration is a complete red herring used to generate votes. A bigger labour market can only be better for the economy and it is a fact that immigrants tend to be net contributors in the tax/benefits games i.e. benefit tourism is completely nullified by the huge economic contributions hardworking migrants make.
What is the issue is the lack of space and the pressure on public services that unnatural surges in populations create. England is already one of the most densely populated areas within the EU and only by including the largely geographically inhospitable Wales and Scotland does the UK as a whole resemble the population densities of other large EU countries. The green spaces and clean skies we take for granted will soon be replaced by tower blocks and poor quality terraced housing as well as the refuse and pollution generated to create and sustain the habitats as a race to fill up the UK to the seams picks up speed. Public services are also largely failing to keep up with capacity as well as being able to cater for different languages and cultural issues.
The problem isn't immigration, it's that the only people benefitting from it are businesses who enjoy a large supply of cheap, high-quality labour. Judging by all the indications that immigrant labour is providing huge boons to our economy, the Treasury is in no way making enough money from it. Our tax system faced its last major reformation at the end of World War 2 with the expansion of the welfare state and does not take into account the fact that the UK is a completely different country than it was 70 years ago. It's time politicians stopped treating migrants when the real issue is the Government is not making enough money off migrants because of our out-dated tax system.
It does, however, pre-empt the current and future issue of the UK running out of space. At what point will the ecological & sociological concerns of a member nation outweigh the principle of freedom of movement? At the moment, it won't, and Germany, France er al will be happy to see the UK become a polluted, urbanised nation of unhappy people with poor health from overcrowding. Maybe it's time we took a look at the members of the club we find ourselves in and have a think why we are negotiating with people who actively want to destroy the UK?
It's all bluff they want our money at the end of the day.
So some would have you believe.
But the UK's net contribution - around £8bn - is tiny. In context: around 15% of the NHS budget; £3bn less than the rest of the UK's contribution to Northern Ireland; and only around half of Germany's EU contribution. Meanwhile Germany would see paying its share of our £8bn as a very, very cheap price to pay for converting Frankfurt into the financial services sector's EU powerhouse rather than London. London turns over nearly $2 trillion A DAY with more Euros traded than in all other EU countries combined. London earns 16 times the net EU contribution a year. With much of that income from the rest of the EU. Germany would just love some of those wealth creating one million financial services sector jobs to come its way. And that's what would happen.
What about the countries that have halfway-house, such as Switzerland,Norway,Sweden? - they dont seem to do so badly - ok, Norway has Oil to thank, but the others dont seem to have to have any economy problems - and isnt it tough to be able to get a visa work in Switzerland as an example?
What about the countries that have halfway-house, such as Switzerland,Norway,Sweden? - they dont seem to do so badly - ok, Norway has Oil to thank, but the others dont seem to have to have any economy problems - and isnt it tough to be able to get a visa work in Switzerland as an example?
Sweden is part of the EU. And you've already alluded as to why the other European countries outside of the EU do well on their own. They each have a niche, Norway - oil, Switzerland and Luxembourg - tax havens.
It's all bluff they want our money at the end of the day.
So some would have you believe.
But the UK's net contribution - around £8bn - is tiny. In context: around 15% of the NHS budget; £3bn less than the rest of the UK's contribution to Northern Ireland; and only around half of Germany's EU contribution. Meanwhile Germany would see paying its share of our £8bn as a very, very cheap price to pay for converting Frankfurt into the financial services sector's EU powerhouse rather than London. London turns over nearly $2 trillion A DAY with more Euros traded than in all other EU countries combined. London earns 16 times the net EU contribution a year. With much of that income from the rest of the EU. Germany would just love some of those wealth creating one million financial services sector jobs to come its way. And that's what would happen.
Why?
a big attraction to the uk for big businesses and banks (particularly american) is that it has english speaking workers in the EU marketplace. Dublin or Berlin or Amsterdam would be the next port of call for (mostly) english speaking workforce in the EU. Why keep your company in a country which has isolated itself from a massive market on their doorstep and then have to set up a new european headquarters a few hundred miles away? We don't have the lucrative banking laws that the swiss use to attract their financial business. Basically leaving the EU would mean we'd have more to lose than gain.
What about the countries that have halfway-house, such as Switzerland,Norway,Sweden? - they dont seem to do so badly - ok, Norway has Oil to thank, but the others dont seem to have to have any economy problems - and isnt it tough to be able to get a visa work in Switzerland as an example?
Sweden is part of the EU. And you've already alluded as to why the other European countries outside of the EU do well on their own. They each have a niche, Norway - oil, Switzerland and Luxembourg - tax havens.
What about the countries that have halfway-house, such as Switzerland,Norway,Sweden? - they dont seem to do so badly - ok, Norway has Oil to thank, but the others dont seem to have to have any economy problems - and isnt it tough to be able to get a visa work in Switzerland as an example?
Sweden is part of the EU. And you've already alluded as to why the other European countries outside of the EU do well on their own. They each have a niche, Norway - oil, Switzerland and Luxembourg - tax havens.
Luxembourg is part of the EU.
suspect he meant Liechtenstein. Which is another tax haven.
What about the countries that have halfway-house, such as Switzerland,Norway,Sweden? - they dont seem to do so badly - ok, Norway has Oil to thank, but the others dont seem to have to have any economy problems - and isnt it tough to be able to get a visa work in Switzerland as an example?
Sweden is part of the EU. And you've already alluded as to why the other European countries outside of the EU do well on their own. They each have a niche, Norway - oil, Switzerland and Luxembourg - tax havens.
There's also the matter that the EU's 'accountants' (i.e. Germany) has magicked a bill for £1.6bn out of thin air that they want the UK to pay, clearly timed to punish the UK for her continuing insubordinance. The justification for staying in this nasty little club of squalid republics is shrinking every day.
Immigration is a complete red herring used to generate votes. A bigger labour market can only be better for the economy and it is a fact that immigrants tend to be net contributors in the tax/benefits games i.e. benefit tourism is completely nullified by the huge economic contributions hardworking migrants make.
I do not think so as a good percentage of immigrants earn at or below the £10k mark which is the point where people start paying tax. So they're not paying any tax and benefitting from benefits such as housing in lieu of their low earnings, their kids go to school and health services are free and all these adds up to a deficit.
There's also the matter that the EU's 'accountants' (i.e. Germany) has magicked a bill for £1.6bn out of thin air that they want the UK to pay, clearly timed to punish the UK for her continuing insubordinance. The justification for staying in this nasty little club of squalid republics is shrinking every day.
This is utter and complete rubbish. Where do you get this stuff?
What actually happens, as announced by the EU on 27th October: EU budget Commissioner Jacek Dominik will make a statement on the annual mechanical adjustment of member states’ gross national income (GNI) contribution to the EU budget, based on data provided by member states. So, we have our own data being used to fine-tune the EU budget. As it is each and every year. The "pot" is then divided up according to how each nation's GNI has been calculated. It so happens that the UK has been doing rather well, so its contribution has increased marginally. Why politicians should get in a tizzy about that is beyond me.
For the sake of clarity: The four largest net contributors in per capita terms are Denmark, Finland, Germany, Italy. The four largest net contributors as a proportion of GDP are Denmark, Italy, Germany, Finland.
You'll notice that the UK does not feature - it probably should, as should France.
Immigration is a complete red herring used to generate votes. A bigger labour market can only be better for the economy and it is a fact that immigrants tend to be net contributors in the tax/benefits games i.e. benefit tourism is completely nullified by the huge economic contributions hardworking migrants make.
I do not think so as a good percentage of immigrants earn at or below the £10k mark which is the point where people start paying tax. So they're not paying any tax and benefitting from benefits such as housing in lieu of their low earnings, their kids go to school and health services are free and all these adds up to a deficit.
EU residents do indeed provide a net contribution to the economy but it is easily argued they put a strain on public services. Overall my opinion is that immigration is a smoke screen; why do the media and the popular parties focus more on immigration then on the 'tax avoidance' by individuals, Gary Barlow, or companies, Amazon. Whilst complaining about immigration people are forgetting all about the issue of tax avoidance by British citizens and Big corporations; if these entities paid thier fair share imagine how much money could be pumped into public services. Why did the government push the hospitals into PFI has crippled some NHS hospitals? all the time people focus on immigration the real issues are left.
There's also the matter that the EU's 'accountants' (i.e. Germany) has magicked a bill for £1.6bn out of thin air that they want the UK to pay, clearly timed to punish the UK for her continuing insubordinance. The justification for staying in this nasty little club of squalid republics is shrinking every day.
This is utter and complete rubbish. Where do you get this stuff?
For the sake of clarity: The four largest net contributors in per capita terms are Denmark, Finland, Germany, Italy. The four largest net contributors as a proportion of GDP are Denmark, Italy, Germany, Finland.
You'll notice that the UK does not feature - it probably should, as should France.
This is utter and complete rubbish. Where do you get this stuff?
For the sake of clarity:
The four largest net contributors as a proportion of GDP are Czech Republic @ 1.01%; Portugal @ 0.97%; Malta @ 0.97% & Spain @ 0.94%
Comments
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/02/angela-merkel-warns-david-cameron-german-chancellor-uk-prime-minister-unskilled-migrants
Dave will roll over and have his tummy tickled in order to be a "good European" like he and every Prime Minister before him has done since we signed up in 1972
;0)
It's a mess, a very big mess. We are an integral part of this mess. We will not be able to extricate ourselves from that mess. We are all in this mess together. Get used to this mess. The mess will only get more stinky and the pile of mess get higher and higher. Apart from that happy days...
Also, whether or not we're part of the EU, it won't solve the problem of all the non EU immigrants jumping onto lorries in Calais.
Stop the benefits, stop the problem. Simple really............
So some would have you believe.
But the UK's net contribution - around £8bn - is tiny. In context: around 15% of the NHS budget; £3bn less than the rest of the UK's contribution to Northern Ireland; and only around half of Germany's EU contribution. Meanwhile Germany would see paying its share of our £8bn as a very, very cheap price to pay for converting Frankfurt into the financial services sector's EU powerhouse rather than London. London turns over nearly $2 trillion A DAY with more Euros traded than in all other EU countries combined. London earns 16 times the net EU contribution a year. With much of that income from the rest of the EU. Germany would just love some of those wealth creating one million financial services sector jobs to come its way. And that's what would happen.
Can somebody please tell me what the disadvantages are of having a points system in place for immigration? We currently discriminate against non-EU immigrants on this basis so why not leave the EU and place all immigrants on a level playing field?
Personally i think we're better off in the eu in the same way scotland were better off in the uk. Big american businesses/banks will go to dublin to stay in the EU club and still have english speaking workers. I still think it's important to have a referendum on it though.
What is the issue is the lack of space and the pressure on public services that unnatural surges in populations create. England is already one of the most densely populated areas within the EU and only by including the largely geographically inhospitable Wales and Scotland does the UK as a whole resemble the population densities of other large EU countries. The green spaces and clean skies we take for granted will soon be replaced by tower blocks and poor quality terraced housing as well as the refuse and pollution generated to create and sustain the habitats as a race to fill up the UK to the seams picks up speed. Public services are also largely failing to keep up with capacity as well as being able to cater for different languages and cultural issues.
The problem isn't immigration, it's that the only people benefitting from it are businesses who enjoy a large supply of cheap, high-quality labour. Judging by all the indications that immigrant labour is providing huge boons to our economy, the Treasury is in no way making enough money from it. Our tax system faced its last major reformation at the end of World War 2 with the expansion of the welfare state and does not take into account the fact that the UK is a completely different country than it was 70 years ago. It's time politicians stopped treating migrants when the real issue is the Government is not making enough money off migrants because of our out-dated tax system.
It does, however, pre-empt the current and future issue of the UK running out of space. At what point will the ecological & sociological concerns of a member nation outweigh the principle of freedom of movement? At the moment, it won't, and Germany, France er al will be happy to see the UK become a polluted, urbanised nation of unhappy people with poor health from overcrowding. Maybe it's time we took a look at the members of the club we find ourselves in and have a think why we are negotiating with people who actively want to destroy the UK?
Move on as would be said in another context on here!
What actually happens, as announced by the EU on 27th October:
EU budget Commissioner Jacek Dominik will make a statement on the annual mechanical adjustment of member states’ gross national income (GNI) contribution to the EU budget, based on data provided by member states.
So, we have our own data being used to fine-tune the EU budget. As it is each and every year. The "pot" is then divided up according to how each nation's GNI has been calculated. It so happens that the UK has been doing rather well, so its contribution has increased marginally. Why politicians should get in a tizzy about that is beyond me.
For the sake of clarity:
The four largest net contributors in per capita terms are Denmark, Finland, Germany, Italy.
The four largest net contributors as a proportion of GDP are Denmark, Italy, Germany, Finland.
You'll notice that the UK does not feature - it probably should, as should France.
Can't argue with the stats.
Even if what you said were true, surely living for a lower wage will make their employers more money, and so more taxable profit?
For the sake of clarity:
The four largest net contributors as a proportion of GDP are Czech Republic @ 1.01%; Portugal @ 0.97%; Malta @ 0.97% & Spain @ 0.94%