|
Post by JohnV on Mar 20, 2017 9:31:59 GMT
I don't see where the hell you are coming from ...... there has never been a move or a suggestion to stop foreign seasonal agricultural workers ...... they just will no longer have the right to stay afterwards. and as for your comment regarding nursing homes etc .... before the "free movement of labour EU" immigration was allowed for skills needed ...... anyway a proportion of such staff are coming from non EU areas. All you need is something like the American green card system. The whole thing is just pure scaremongering by a devious news organisation where am I coming from, obvious really, a simple question. Who is going to wipe your arse in the home if there is no migration, as the op objects to it. Countryfile farmer was asking for clarification of the system you are proposing, migrants coming in to work in areas of need, some of which isn't seasonal. Who is going to pay the taxes to pay for our state pensions if we don't allow migration, when the majority of the population is elderly, the baby boomer generation. As for devious reporting, Laura Keunsberg was nowhere to be seen! So your answer is to just keep bringing in more young workers ....more homes...... who have children ..... more schools/teachers ....... who then get sick ....more hospitals/doctors/nurses ....... they then get old ....... more care facilities....... more need of immigration to provide the workers/pay the taxes etc..... so on and so on ad infinitum ......... It's attempting to control something by positive feedback ....... that is false logic. The bullet should have been bitten years ago but repeated governments either from cowardice or well meaning but dangerous "do gooderism" have fudged the issue. To continue down the same road to increasing overload and eventual disaster is downright stupid. There are simply too many people in the world for it to continue to support.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2017 10:18:29 GMT
I think the problem is seeing everything in black or white (so to speak). I'm not against immigration, I just think it should be kept to sensible levels. John is right, it is out of control and has been for a long time.
Most families are suffering as a result of trying to pay off extortionate mortgages and rents due to the increased demand for homes in certain areas. In the meantime, the privileged few make a LOT of money out of immigration. Brexit was partly a protest about it but the BBC still allow themselves to be spun by the wealthy few.
Hardly the British Broadcasting Co, more the Brainwashing Bullshit Co. Give it a few more years after we leave Europe and I reckon there will be an inquest into it.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Mar 20, 2017 10:22:37 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2017 10:41:00 GMT
I don't see where the hell you are coming from ...... there has never been a move or a suggestion to stop foreign seasonal agricultural workers ...... they just will no longer have the right to stay afterwards. and as for your comment regarding nursing homes etc .... before the "free movement of labour EU" immigration was allowed for skills needed ...... anyway a proportion of such staff are coming from non EU areas. All you need is something like the American green card system. The whole thing is just pure scaremongering by a devious news organisation where am I coming from, obvious really, a simple question. Who is going to wipe your arse in the home if there is no migration, as the op objects to it. Countryfile farmer was asking for clarification of the system you are proposing, migrants coming in to work in areas of need, some of which isn't seasonal. Who is going to pay the taxes to pay for our state pensions if we don't allow migration, when the majority of the population is elderly, the baby boomer generation. As for devious reporting, Laura Keunsberg was nowhere to be seen! Actually your question is justified but I was trying to explain the bigger picture which is causing the problem. If we were more family orientated, we wouldn't be farming our elderly parents off into 'care' homes. My mother who is now 96 wiped the arses of her parents before they died and an elderly cousin. Unfortunately due to the modern ethos, we would chuck them in a care home because mum is too busy at work. To be honest, I have a dilemma as in theory we could give up travelling around on the boat and move into my mums hone to care for her. However she is insistent that she doesn't want that and still manages with very little visit care. We may have the same dilemma with my wifes mum in the future. To make matters worse, the current system has probably made it 'uncool' to expect your kids to look after you. Obviously if you have no family to care for you then what? So yes, we do need care workers, I'm just saying that much of the problem is caused by a few people making a lot of money out of care and skewing the system to make even more. Families are also to blame for not taking responsibility for their parents but it's the system which has broken down those traditional family ethics. This is the bit most of the modern generations can't see...because we were born into it and think it is 'normal'.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2017 10:50:25 GMT
If we stayed in Europe and pushed power even further away fron us, we'd have no power to pull the pendulum back and the rich would carry on getting richer. The idea that pro Brexiters are thick is no more than sour grapes.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Mar 20, 2017 10:57:35 GMT
Who is making money out of caring for the elderly? Care homes are closing in hordes because it isn't economically viable, councils are having to assume responsibility again. As for paying higher wages to recruit english fruit pickers, fine, are you happy to pay the extra for your strawberries? Or I suppose we just import from europe, the plasticos in spain, and pay the tariff.
How many here would like to move back in with their kids btw? My wife and I wouldn't.
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Mar 20, 2017 11:05:10 GMT
I don't see where the hell you are coming from ...... there has never been a move or a suggestion to stop foreign seasonal agricultural workers ...... they just will no longer have the right to stay afterwards. and as for your comment regarding nursing homes etc .... before the "free movement of labour EU" immigration was allowed for skills needed ...... anyway a proportion of such staff are coming from non EU areas. All you need is something like the American green card system. The whole thing is just pure scaremongering by a devious news organisation where am I coming from, obvious really, a simple question. Who is going to wipe your arse in the home if there is no migration, as the op objects to it. Countryfile farmer was asking for clarification of the system you are proposing, migrants coming in to work in areas of need, some of which isn't seasonal. Who is going to pay the taxes to pay for our state pensions if we don't allow migration, when the majority of the population is elderly, the baby boomer generation. As for devious reporting, Laura Keunsberg was nowhere to be seen! Most unfortunately the baby boomers (I'm one of them) are going to have to take it up the arse, to some extent. The alternative; to continually grow the number of younger people in order that they can pay for the older generation is flawed. It's one huge Ponzi scheme and as we know, these all fail, eventually. Governments should take heed of this. Before encouraging growth of the population; be it by increasing benefits for parents or encouraging mass immigration the powers that be should consider the longer view, rather than just the here and now. The chickens are starting to come home to roost from the government's post war baby drive. Schools will be next to suffer, as the government realises it can't afford to educate all the eager young minds created during Blair's baby boom. It can't afford to, because the working population isn't prepared to pay higher taxes. So, wise people will realise that quite soon, the notion that the government will pay for the care of all its old people will be just that, a notion.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Mar 20, 2017 11:07:13 GMT
If we stayed in Europe and pushed power even further away fron us, we'd have no power to pull the pendulum back and the rich would carry on getting richer. The idea that pro Brexiters are thick is no more than sour grapes. There were lies told however, The £350 million on the side of the battlebus for a start, that would be "going towards the NHS" edited to add this re the petition on the £350m The Government has responded to the petition – “Pay £350m per week to NHS or re-run EU Referendum”. Government responded: The country voted to leave the European Union in a referendum approved by an Act of Parliament. We will not seek to retain partial or associate membership of the European Union by remaining members of the Single Market. Instead, we will pursue a new strategic partnership with the EU, including an ambitious and comprehensive Free Trade Agreement and a new customs agreement. We will get the best deal for the UK, and will continue to support our NHS. The Government has committed to spend an additional £10bn a year by 2020 to ensure the NHS continues to deliver care to those who need it and to deliver a truly 7 day service. The Government is focused on securing the best possible deal for the United Kingdom as we leave the European Union. Once we have left it will be for us to decide how taxpayers' money is spent. We have been clear that, once we leave the EU, we will not be required to pay vast contributions to the EU budget. The country voted to leave the European Union, and it is the duty of the Government to make sure we do just that. We will not be seeking to retain membership of the Single Market. Instead, we see a bold and ambitious Free Trade Agreement with the European Union, covering tariff and barrier-free trade in goods and services, as offering the fullest possible access to the European market for UK companies. Department for Exiting the European Union Note the lies at the end "the country voted". Bless , they can't help it, being tories! It would be accurate to say, "28% of the population, a tiny majority over the remainers, many of whom didn't mean it and have changed their minds since...." We need a referendum to confirm the deal, when we know what brexit means. (anyone who repeats Mays' twaddle "Brexit means Brexit" needs a slap)
|
|
|
Post by lollygagger on Mar 20, 2017 11:16:30 GMT
NHS/social care - We don't really train enough here. Why bother when some other country will do it for free, before we poach them and pay minimum wage. Simple short sighted solution that's out of control and has spread out to every sector where it works.
If you are a public limited company director it is your DUTY to make money for your shareholders. If it's more profitable to move production to china, you MUST do it or you are failing in your duty.
Similar pressures apply for NHS managers. And on and on.
This country, if you cut us off from the world would not work and governments have been papering over that crack for ever.
Mrs T set the scene for dragging things out a few more decades by dividing society and destroying social connections - every man for himself.
The internet has connected groups of people that now can openly discuss anything they want, they don't even have ever know one another in the traditional sense. As a whole these overlapping groups of course live in the real world and people who don't use the internet are nevertheless drawn into the whole raising of political consciousness.
We got Brexit because any party that sought to tackle reality would be unelectable in our dog eat dog society. More than half the voters were/are concerned enough that this, being the only possibility of shaking things up, was grasped. Much as I despise that weasel Camoron, who knows eh? Maybe history will look back favourably.
Greed makes our country tick but also destroys it. Money needs spending, not piling up. To die rich should be to die in shame. A bit of leveling up would go a long way.
|
|
|
Post by lollygagger on Mar 20, 2017 11:22:52 GMT
If we stayed in Europe and pushed power even further away fron us, we'd have no power to pull the pendulum back and the rich would carry on getting richer. The idea that pro Brexiters are thick is no more than sour grapes. There were lies told however, The £350 million on the side of the battlebus for a start, that would be "going towards the NHS" edited to add this re the petition on the £350m The Government has responded to the petition – “Pay £350m per week to NHS or re-run EU Referendum”. Government responded: The country voted to leave the European Union in a referendum approved by an Act of Parliament. We will not seek to retain partial or associate membership of the European Union by remaining members of the Single Market. Instead, we will pursue a new strategic partnership with the EU, including an ambitious and comprehensive Free Trade Agreement and a new customs agreement. We will get the best deal for the UK, and will continue to support our NHS. The Government has committed to spend an additional £10bn a year by 2020 to ensure the NHS continues to deliver care to those who need it and to deliver a truly 7 day service. The Government is focused on securing the best possible deal for the United Kingdom as we leave the European Union. Once we have left it will be for us to decide how taxpayers' money is spent. We have been clear that, once we leave the EU, we will not be required to pay vast contributions to the EU budget. The country voted to leave the European Union, and it is the duty of the Government to make sure we do just that. We will not be seeking to retain membership of the Single Market. Instead, we see a bold and ambitious Free Trade Agreement with the European Union, covering tariff and barrier-free trade in goods and services, as offering the fullest possible access to the European market for UK companies. Department for Exiting the European Union Note the lies at the end "the country voted". Bless , they can't help it, being tories! It would be accurate to say, "28% of the population, a tiny majority over the remainers, many of whom didn't mean it and have changed their minds since...." We need a referendum to confirm the deal, when we know what brexit means. (anyone who repeats Mays' twaddle "Brexit means Brexit" needs a slap) Blinkered dude. Nobody believed that. It works both ways: The pro EU campaign was based on fear in turn based on lies... Smell the coffee - every politician lies for their cause.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2017 11:26:30 GMT
If we stayed in Europe and pushed power even further away fron us, we'd have no power to pull the pendulum back and the rich would carry on getting richer. The idea that pro Brexiters are thick is no more than sour grapes. There were lies told however, The £350 million on the side of the battlebus for a start, that would be "going towards the NHS" edited to add this re the petition on the £350m The Government has responded to the petition – “Pay £350m per week to NHS or re-run EU Referendum”. Government responded: The country voted to leave the European Union in a referendum approved by an Act of Parliament. We will not seek to retain partial or associate membership of the European Union by remaining members of the Single Market. Instead, we will pursue a new strategic partnership with the EU, including an ambitious and comprehensive Free Trade Agreement and a new customs agreement. We will get the best deal for the UK, and will continue to support our NHS. The Government has committed to spend an additional £10bn a year by 2020 to ensure the NHS continues to deliver care to those who need it and to deliver a truly 7 day service. The Government is focused on securing the best possible deal for the United Kingdom as we leave the European Union. Once we have left it will be for us to decide how taxpayers' money is spent. We have been clear that, once we leave the EU, we will not be required to pay vast contributions to the EU budget. The country voted to leave the European Union, and it is the duty of the Government to make sure we do just that. We will not be seeking to retain membership of the Single Market. Instead, we see a bold and ambitious Free Trade Agreement with the European Union, covering tariff and barrier-free trade in goods and services, as offering the fullest possible access to the European market for UK companies. Department for Exiting the European Union Note the lies at the end "the country voted". Bless , they can't help it, being tories! It would be accurate to say, "28% of the population, a tiny majority over the remainers, many of whom didn't mean it and have changed their minds since...." We need a referendum to confirm the deal, when we know what brexit means. (anyone who repeats Mays' twaddle "Brexit means Brexit" needs a slap) I'd rather the liers were closer to home and more accountable to us. Come on, politicians thrive on lies and always will.
|
|
|
Post by lollygagger on Mar 20, 2017 11:35:36 GMT
The nub of the matter is that if the supposedly intelligent remainers, who seem to me represented by the better off end of society, took their heads out of their bottoms and had genuine concern for society as a whole, there wouldn't have been a big enough mass of electorate to kick back. You reap what you sow.
|
|
|
Post by lollygagger on Mar 20, 2017 11:48:56 GMT
The nub of the matter is that if the supposedly intelligent remainers, who seem to me represented by the better off end of society, took their heads out of their bottoms and had genuine concern for society as a whole, there wouldn't have been a big enough mass of electorate to kick back. You reap what you sow. Society as a whole or just the bit within our borders? The bit within our borders. There is a percieve need to get our house in order. Stage 1 draw a less blurred line around our house. It's simplistic I know, but that's where we're at.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2017 11:51:57 GMT
The nub of the matter is that if the supposedly intelligent remainers, who seem to me represented by the better off end of society, took their heads out of their bottoms and had genuine concern for society as a whole, there wouldn't have been a big enough mass of electorate to kick back. You reap what you sow. Exactly this. Unfortunately some people seem to equate intelligence with being nice and doing the right thing. From my experience of life so far, the trend is opposite. The kindest and wisest people I have met had very little in material terms. Where someone used to receive a bloody nose for being a #%;@ they now use intelligence and finacial power to duck and therfore continue to be a #%;@. I learnt more about respect from punch up's in the school playground than from political philosophy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2017 11:55:46 GMT
The nub of the matter is that if the supposedly intelligent remainers, who seem to me represented by the better off end of society, took their heads out of their bottoms and had genuine concern for society as a whole, there wouldn't have been a big enough mass of electorate to kick back. You reap what you sow. A big part of why I voted to leave was wanting to hold the politicians that I might be able to influence to account. Immigration played a much smaller part to my decision, and I know many others that thought the same way.
|
|