On Tue, 24 Jun 2014 17:51:03 +0100, Tim Watts wrote:

No, just mass temporary migration.

Anyway, this has been a useful discussion because I have finally
clarified to myself what I don't like about the EU:

"Mass temporary migration".

What is a "temporary migrant", but a potential permanent migrant who
hasn't been there very long?

There's a reason other desirable countries (eg Australia, New Zealand,
Canada) encourage immigration, but do so in a tightly controlled manner.

As the UK does from non-EU countries.

Capitol wrote
Adrian wrote

I've spoken to plenty of highly competent call centres outside the UK.

I think you are in a minority of one!

Nope, I have too, in India, left any of the others I have used for dead.

Doesnt happen often, but it does happen at times.

"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 24/06/2014 16:36, Capitol wrote:
Adrian wrote:
I've spoken to plenty of highly competent
call centres outside the UK.


I think you are in a minority of one!

From what I've heard, I agree.

I dont, and it isnt what I have heard either, its what I have experienced.

Maybe Adrian is fluent in Urdu or Hindi ;-)

The one I got exceptional service from had better english than many of the
locals.

On Tue, 24 Jun 2014 17:22:36 +0100, Tim Watts wrote:

perhaps it should be limited to people with British nationality -
which brings us back to the whole EU debate quite squarely.

Well, quite. And should that limitation be to _locals_? Would a
Londoner get preference for a job in Belfast over somebody from Dublin?

Belfast is in the UK. Dublin is not.

So that's a "Yes"? Somebody from across a much wider sea than that
between France and the UK SHOULD get preference to somebody who lives a
mile away? Because that's where somebody drew a line on a map, nearly a
century ago?

That's all there is to it in my book...

Edinburgh is in the UK. It may not be soon. Should all Scots in London
have their working privileges revoked, if the referendum goes that way?
After all, they'll be no different to an Irishman or a Frenchman or a
Pole. They'll be _foreign_.

You live in the SE - you're nearer to France than you are to the
North-East. Which do you have greater "loyalty" to?

Not France - there's this bit of sea and a huge language barrier in
the way which negates any physical proximity.

So 20 miles of water is a big issue to you?

And the fact it is another country with their own rules and language.

Calais has been part of the UK more recently than Wales and England were
separate, yet you regard them as separate countries. Ydych chi'n siarad
Cymraeg yn rhugl?

FWIW, my local supermarket is in England, but all the signage is
bilingual (probably not unrelated to one end of their carpark being in
Wales)...

Including, I'm sure, the people doing it. So does it make a
difference if that person dossing on a mate's floor and working all
hours is from Warsaw or Walsall?

Walsall is OK as they are part of England

How about Cardiff? Edinburgh? Edinburgh now-versus-2015? Dublin?

Cardiff is part of the UK, ditto Edinburgh now. You're just being picky
and you know it.

Yes, I am, because I want to see how far you're going to hold this
artificial boundary up.

So you're just against population migration at all?

No, just mass temporary migration. We've always been open to migration

Many would disagree, or would regard that as bad.

but the EU "open borders" system with right to work everywhere is a new
and previously untested situation.

Well, apart from the forty years the UK's been partaking "testing" it.
Roughly a working lifetime.

Tim Watts wrote
Tim Watts wrote

No, just mass temporary migration.

Anyway, this has been a useful discussion because I have finally clarified
to myself what I don't like about the EU:

"Mass temporary migration".

And I have no shame in saying that - I believe it is a destructive force
on our local (UK) economy.

But its fine when british do it in places like the Middle East, eh ?

It's good for other people's economies and I begrudge noone for personally
making good on the opportunity - but I would rather our government put a
stop to it.

If they did, you'd see other countries doing that to the british who do
that.

There's a reason other desirable countries (eg Australia, New Zealand,
Canada) encourage immigration, but do so in a tightly controlled manner.

And the EU does the same thing, but not between countries that are part of
the EU.

If you think open borders are a good idea,

He didnt say that.

why not go the whole hog and let everyone from China and everywhere else
have a go here.

On 24/06/14 23:43, Adrian wrote:
Edinburgh is in the UK. It may not be soon. Should all Scots in London
have their working privileges revoked, if the referendum goes that way?
After all, they'll be no different to an Irishman or a Frenchman or a
Pole. They'll be_foreign_.

And not on the EU either.

Hey maybe we could send Brown away permanently..


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

"Adrian" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 24 Jun 2014 17:51:03 +0100, Tim Watts wrote:

No, just mass temporary migration.

Anyway, this has been a useful discussion because I have finally
clarified to myself what I don't like about the EU:

"Mass temporary migration".

What is a "temporary migrant",

One who doesnt plan to stay.

But that gets complicated because plenty do didnt
plan to stay end up staying forever and plenty who
did plan to stay forever change their minds later too.

but a potential permanent migrant
who hasn't been there very long?

The difference is the intention.

There's a reason other desirable countries (eg Australia, New Zealand,
Canada) encourage immigration, but do so in a tightly controlled manner.

As the UK does from non-EU countries.

On 24/06/14 23:32, Adrian wrote:
On Tue, 24 Jun 2014 17:51:03 +0100, Tim Watts wrote:

No, just mass temporary migration.

Anyway, this has been a useful discussion because I have finally
clarified to myself what I don't like about the EU:

"Mass temporary migration".

What is a "temporary migrant", but a potential permanent migrant who
hasn't been there very long?

By the usual definition of the term temporary...

Here for a couple of years without the intent to settle.


There's a reason other desirable countries (eg Australia, New Zealand,
Canada) encourage immigration, but do so in a tightly controlled manner.

As the UK does from non-EU countries.


And clearly should from the EU...

On 24/06/14 23:43, Adrian wrote:
On Tue, 24 Jun 2014 17:22:36 +0100, Tim Watts wrote:

perhaps it should be limited to people with British nationality -
which brings us back to the whole EU debate quite squarely.

Well, quite. And should that limitation be to _locals_? Would a
Londoner get preference for a job in Belfast over somebody from Dublin?

Belfast is in the UK. Dublin is not.

So that's a "Yes"? Somebody from across a much wider sea than that
between France and the UK SHOULD get preference to somebody who lives a
mile away? Because that's where somebody drew a line on a map, nearly a
century ago?

Yes. It's a national border. Simple. That is the entire point of a
national border.

That's all there is to it in my book...

Edinburgh is in the UK. It may not be soon. Should all Scots in London
have their working privileges revoked, if the referendum goes that way?
After all, they'll be no different to an Irishman or a Frenchman or a
Pole. They'll be _foreign_.

Dunno - that's one for the possible national government of Scotland and
the UK to sort out.

In reality I expect the Scots will be treated as defacto EU members even
though that process could take years to formalise.


Well, apart from the forty years the UK's been partaking "testing" it.
Roughly a working lifetime.


We have not had open borders (in any practical sense) for that long and
certainly not with countries that have highly disparate economies.

So the relevant date would be 2004 ish when the first EU enlargemnt took
effect.

You don't get a lot of temporary mobile german or french workers here
because those countries have economic parity with the UK.

"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
On 24/06/14 23:43, Adrian wrote:
On Tue, 24 Jun 2014 17:22:36 +0100, Tim Watts wrote:

perhaps it should be limited to people with British nationality -
which brings us back to the whole EU debate quite squarely.

Well, quite. And should that limitation be to _locals_? Would a
Londoner get preference for a job in Belfast over somebody from Dublin?

Belfast is in the UK. Dublin is not.

So that's a "Yes"? Somebody from across a much wider sea than that
between France and the UK SHOULD get preference to somebody who lives a
mile away? Because that's where somebody drew a line on a map, nearly a
century ago?

Yes. It's a national border. Simple. That is the entire point of a
national border.

That's all there is to it in my book...

Edinburgh is in the UK. It may not be soon. Should all Scots in London
have their working privileges revoked, if the referendum goes that way?
After all, they'll be no different to an Irishman or a Frenchman or a
Pole. They'll be _foreign_.

Dunno - that's one for the possible national government of Scotland and
the UK to sort out.

In reality I expect the Scots will be treated as defacto EU members even
though that process could take years to formalise.


Well, apart from the forty years the UK's been partaking "testing" it.
Roughly a working lifetime.


We have not had open borders (in any practical sense) for that long and
certainly not with countries that have highly disparate economies.

Bull**** with Spain, Portugal, Greece and Italy particularly.

So the relevant date would be 2004 ish when the first EU enlargemnt took
effect.

Pity about Spain, Portugal, Greece and Italy

You don't get a lot of temporary mobile german or french workers here
because those countries have economic parity with the UK.

But there have always been plenty from Spain, Portugal, Greece and Italy

And hordes of poms going the other way too.

On 24/06/2014 17:04, Adrian wrote:
On Tue, 24 Jun 2014 16:48:15 +0100, Bod wrote:

I've spoken to plenty of highly competent
call centres outside the UK.

I think you are in a minority of one!

From what I've heard, I agree.
Maybe Adrian is fluent in Urdu or Hindi ;-)

Nope, not at all.

The last outside-the-UK call centre I spoke to were very helpful and
friendly - going by his accent, he was Dutch, although the (car parts
supplier) company is French.

The very few call centre experiences that I've had, although they were
polite, I had great difficulty in understanding the broken English from
the Asian sounding voices. I also found one Scottish chap to be
impossible to understand.

On Wed, 25 Jun 2014 07:00:06 +0100, Tim Watts wrote:

Edinburgh is in the UK. It may not be soon. Should all Scots in London
have their working privileges revoked, if the referendum goes that way?
After all, they'll be no different to an Irishman or a Frenchman or a
Pole. They'll be _foreign_.

Dunno - that's one for the possible national government of Scotland and
the UK to sort out.

In reality I expect the Scots will be treated as defacto EU members even
though that process could take years to formalise.

Don't forget the Common Travel Area. The borders between the UK and the
Republic of Ireland are "open", as they are within Schengen. So, even
ignoring the EU, Irish people have no restriction on movement and
migration within the UK. And that would apply to Scots, too.

At least - it would until an independent Scotland joined the EU and,
inevitably, Schengen, which would mean the UK would need to join Schengen
(even if outside the EU, like Switzerland and Norway), or put passport
control between CTA and Schengen, as at Dover. And if the UK joined
Schengen, we'd not only not have control over Schengen migration, we'd
devolve all control over external migration, too, because Schengen visas
are common...

Well, apart from the forty years the UK's been partaking "testing" it.
Roughly a working lifetime.

We have not had open borders (in any practical sense) for that long and
certainly not with countries that have highly disparate economies.

Common Travel Area with (pre-"Celtic-Tiger") Ireland...? Introduced in
1923, with Irish independence.

You don't get a lot of temporary mobile german or french workers here
because those countries have economic parity with the UK.

London has, IIRC, the sixth largest French population of any city in the
world. Including those in France.

On Wed, 25 Jun 2014 08:19:27 +0100, Bod wrote:

The very few call centre experiences that I've had, although they were
polite, I had great difficulty in understanding the broken English from
the Asian sounding voices. I also found one Scottish chap to be
impossible to understand.

So you're just not very good at understanding people with accents.

And that, apparently, is their fault.

On 25/06/14 08:33, Adrian wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jun 2014 08:19:27 +0100, Bod wrote:

The very few call centre experiences that I've had, although they were
polite, I had great difficulty in understanding the broken English from
the Asian sounding voices. I also found one Scottish chap to be
impossible to understand.

So you're just not very good at understanding people with accents.

And that, apparently, is their fault.

Yes, it is.

The customer is always right.



--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

On 25/06/14 08:32, Adrian wrote:

London has, IIRC, the sixth largest French population of any city in the
world. Including those in France.


Sounds like they are settled rather than mobile and temporary.

On Wed, 25 Jun 2014 08:43:08 +0100, Tim Watts wrote:

London has, IIRC, the sixth largest French population of any city in
the world. Including those in France.

Sounds like they are settled rather than mobile and temporary.

All of them? You can tell from that one snippet of information? Wow. Even
the students? Even those in the city who'd be off tomorrow, to chase big
numbers, if their job changed or required it?

Maybe even the settled ones didn't all start off with the intention to
settle?

On Wed, 25 Jun 2014 08:36:11 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 25/06/14 08:33, Adrian wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jun 2014 08:19:27 +0100, Bod wrote:

The very few call centre experiences that I've had, although they were
polite, I had great difficulty in understanding the broken English
from the Asian sounding voices. I also found one Scottish chap to be
impossible to understand.

So you're just not very good at understanding people with accents.

And that, apparently, is their fault.

Yes, it is.

The customer is always right.

If you and Bod are the customers...

On 25/06/14 08:33, Adrian wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jun 2014 08:19:27 +0100, Bod wrote:

The very few call centre experiences that I've had, although they were
polite, I had great difficulty in understanding the broken English from
the Asian sounding voices. I also found one Scottish chap to be
impossible to understand.

So you're just not very good at understanding people with accents.

And that, apparently, is their fault.


Yes. specifically it is the fault of the company who decided to
outsource that function.

In China, very few people can understand cross province accents and
dialects, so everyone (who is educated) will be able to speak two forms
of chinese - the local dialect (which may be nothing more than a heavy
accent, or it could be significantly different) - and standard Beijing
mandarin (though Beijing does also have a local accent too IIRC).

On 25/06/14 08:45, Adrian wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jun 2014 08:43:08 +0100, Tim Watts wrote:

London has, IIRC, the sixth largest French population of any city in
the world. Including those in France.

Sounds like they are settled rather than mobile and temporary.

All of them? You can tell from that one snippet of information? Wow. Even
the students? Even those in the city who'd be off tomorrow, to chase big
numbers, if their job changed or required it?

Maybe even the settled ones didn't all start off with the intention to
settle?


I've never seen a french plumber in the UK undercutting the other plumbers.

I don't care about students - they are not damaging the local economy,
rather the opposite - they are contributing to it by paying student fees.
Let's clarify my standpoint further:

I think mobile workers who are able to vastly undercut the standard wage
for a given trade by:

a) Virtue of their own country's economic disparity;

b) The fact they do not intend to settle;

The two in combination are what causes the problem.

I see no obvious solution other than controlled immigration.

On 25/06/14 08:45, Adrian wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jun 2014 08:36:11 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 25/06/14 08:33, Adrian wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jun 2014 08:19:27 +0100, Bod wrote:

The very few call centre experiences that I've had, although they were
polite, I had great difficulty in understanding the broken English
from the Asian sounding voices. I also found one Scottish chap to be
impossible to understand.

So you're just not very good at understanding people with accents.

And that, apparently, is their fault.

Yes, it is.

The customer is always right.

If you and Bod are the customers...


If you think it is reasonable for someone to be able to cope with a
multitude of heavy accents, then no - sod that. Glaswegian or indian -
if the call centre staff cannot speak clear standard english, they
shouldn't be in that job.

Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Tim Watts
wrote:

For what reason do nations exist and have borders, if not so they can
run as they see fit. If everyone thought the same way, we'd have a
single world government and no borders.

But we don't because we are human beings, not ants. This is a
fundamental distinction that certain people appear unable to grasp.

In fact it's worse than that. Countries larger that 50 to 100 million
are too big to govern properly. It's not just the EU that should be
broken up, but the USA, China, and India too. Probably make the world a
safer place.


I think you are all missing the point that any immigrant working in a
UK job which could be filled by a UK resident costs the UK taxpayer an
average of £10,000 a year. No wonder we have a budget deficit.

On 25/06/14 08:55, Capitol wrote:
Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Tim Watts
wrote:

For what reason do nations exist and have borders, if not so they can
run as they see fit. If everyone thought the same way, we'd have a
single world government and no borders.

But we don't because we are human beings, not ants. This is a
fundamental distinction that certain people appear unable to grasp.

In fact it's worse than that. Countries larger that 50 to 100 million
are too big to govern properly. It's not just the EU that should be
broken up, but the USA, China, and India too. Probably make the world a
safer place.


I think you are all missing the point that any immigrant working in
a UK job which could be filled by a UK resident costs the UK taxpayer an
average of £10,000 a year. No wonder we have a budget deficit.

I agree. I like the europeans, as people and as countries, typically.

But anyone who thinks you can throw open the borders and have mass
highly fluid migration is deluded.

Rod Speed wrote:


"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 24/06/2014 12:21, Rod Speed wrote:


"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 24/06/2014 06:16, Rod Speed wrote:


"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 23/06/2014 20:02, Dennis@home wrote:
On 23/06/2014 15:23, The Natural Philosopher wrote:


Today the majority of people WITH an opinion want to LEAVE the EU.


Which bit of the EU do they want to leave?


Also you don't actually know how many want to leave as there hasn't
been
a vote. Your opinion is almost certainly biased as you probably
don't
talk to anyone that wants to stay and they don't talk to you.

Erm, like him or not, Farage has actually got people talking to each
other about the in/out EU issue.

No he hasnt. He is actually the RESULT of a significant
number who have never thought it made any sense.

Ukip has at the very least forced the hand of politicians to
listen to
a sizeable proportion of the electorate's dissension.

I dont buy that either.

Then you must have been living in a cave for the last few months,

Nope.

because Farage and the in/out issue debate has been in the news
virtually daily.

Irrelevant to what has driven those who want out of the EU.

Taint Farage.

Farage has forced the hands of the Tories and Labour

Pigs arse he has.

to confront the obvious dissent from many voters regarding the dubious
value of staying in the EU.

That has nothing to do with Farage. There have always
been plenty that never thought it made any sense.

But he has put it top of UKIP's agenda,

Because it was getting so much controversy.

which has obviously made a lot more people think about the merits (or
not) of exiting the EU.

I dont believe that. I dont believe that many
take much notice of any politician at all.

That's why the voter turnout in elections is so pathetic.

In other words, he has brought in a lot of the previously apathetic
voters and given them food for thought

I dont believe that either. All he has done is provide
someone the worst of the rabid bigots can vote for.
And when he hasnt managed even a single Westminster
seat, that is VERY graphic evidence of how few of them
there are.

Yes, there will always be some of the least employable
who find it impossible to get a job when lots of foreigners
show up and are prepared to work a lot harder than the
worst of the unemployable locals are, but thats about
the only group someone like that appeals to.

and he's done it in a refreshing way.

Bull****.

A lot of people relate to his style.

Plenty more realise that he is just another lying politician.

All of the rest of our politicians have a propensity to not being able
to answer a straight yes/no answer in less than a thousand words.

Bull****.

Very limited vocabulary?

On 25/06/2014 08:33, Adrian wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jun 2014 08:19:27 +0100, Bod wrote:

The very few call centre experiences that I've had, although they were
polite, I had great difficulty in understanding the broken English from
the Asian sounding voices. I also found one Scottish chap to be
impossible to understand.

So you're just not very good at understanding people with accents.

And that, apparently, is their fault.

A lot of people have trouble understanding Asian accents, especially
over the telling bone.

On Wed, 25 Jun 2014 08:53:53 +0100, Tim Watts wrote:

London has, IIRC, the sixth largest French population of any city in
the world. Including those in France.

Sounds like they are settled rather than mobile and temporary.

All of them? You can tell from that one snippet of information? Wow.
Even the students? Even those in the city who'd be off tomorrow, to
chase big numbers, if their job changed or required it?

Maybe even the settled ones didn't all start off with the intention to
settle?

I've never seen a french plumber in the UK undercutting the other
plumbers.

So perhaps the Gov't should just introduce an official fee structure for
plumbers?

What if it's a British plumber who wants to undercut others?

I see no obvious solution other than controlled immigration.

Price control?

On Wed, 25 Jun 2014 08:55:41 +0100, Capitol wrote:

I think you are all missing the point that any immigrant working in a
UK job which could be filled by a UK resident costs the UK taxpayer an
average of £10,000 a year.

Show your working.

In article , Tim Watts
wrote:
On 25/06/14 08:45, Adrian wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jun 2014 08:43:08 +0100, Tim Watts wrote:

London has, IIRC, the sixth largest French population of any city in
the world. Including those in France.

Sounds like they are settled rather than mobile and temporary.

All of them? You can tell from that one snippet of information? Wow.
Even the students? Even those in the city who'd be off tomorrow, to
chase big numbers, if their job changed or required it?

Maybe even the settled ones didn't all start off with the intention to
settle?


I've never seen a french plumber in the UK undercutting the other
plumbers.

I don't care about students - they are not damaging the local economy,
rather the opposite - they are contributing to it by paying student fees.
Let's clarify my standpoint further:


They are damaging it, by taking up accomodation which might otherwise be
used by locals. This means extra housing needs to be built with all the
attendant infrastructure and loss of green fields.

--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

On Wed, 25 Jun 2014 09:07:57 +0100, charles wrote:

They are damaging it, by taking up accomodation which might otherwise be
used by locals.

Is a Frenchman or a Pole or a Romanian in London "taking up
accommodation" any differently to a Mancunian or a Scot or an Irishman?

On 25/06/14 09:07, charles wrote:



They are damaging it, by taking up accomodation which might otherwise be
used by locals. This means extra housing needs to be built with all the
attendant infrastructure and loss of green fields.


Tricky one that.

My university would be severely stuffed if it weren't for the foreign
students, particularly the non EU ones.

It's a Russell group member so has a reputation, but there are a *lot*
of universities now and all have had to expand student places to offset
the drop in government funding over the last decades.

I remember when York uni had all of 3000 undergrads total in 1985.

It's now over 11000.

On 25/06/14 09:07, Adrian wrote:

What if it's a British plumber who wants to undercut others?

You seem to be bent on missing the point.

I'll say it one last time, as clearly as I can:

Mass mobile temporary migration from countries with significant economic
disparity with the UK leads to local economic damage to the UK by
driving down wages in certain trades to the point where the locals
cannot sensibly compete.


One UK plumber will have no effect.

You are unlikely to get a critical mass of of UK plumbers undercutting
prices as they all need to live here on economic parity with each other.

In article ,
Adrian wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jun 2014 08:55:41 +0100, Capitol wrote:

I think you are all missing the point that any immigrant working in a
UK job which could be filled by a UK resident costs the UK taxpayer an
average of £10,000 a year.

Show your working.

I assumed he meant that the UK resident, by not being in work, receives
State benefits.

--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

In article ,
Adrian wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jun 2014 09:07:57 +0100, charles wrote:

They are damaging it, by taking up accomodation which might otherwise be
used by locals.

Is a Frenchman or a Pole or a Romanian in London "taking up
accommodation" any differently to a Mancunian or a Scot or an Irishman?


you snipped. I was referring to students.

--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

On Wed, 25 Jun 2014 09:17:53 +0100, charles wrote:

They are damaging it, by taking up accomodation which might otherwise
be used by locals.

Is a Frenchman or a Pole or a Romanian in London "taking up
accommodation" any differently to a Mancunian or a Scot or an Irishman?

you snipped. I was referring to students.

Does it make a difference? Do students "take up accommodation"
differently to anybody else? Do Mancunian students "take up
accommodation" differently to Parisians or Dubliners or Bucharesti?

"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
On 25/06/14 08:45, Adrian wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jun 2014 08:43:08 +0100, Tim Watts wrote:

London has, IIRC, the sixth largest French population of any city in
the world. Including those in France.

Sounds like they are settled rather than mobile and temporary.

All of them? You can tell from that one snippet of information? Wow. Even
the students? Even those in the city who'd be off tomorrow, to chase big
numbers, if their job changed or required it?

Maybe even the settled ones didn't all start off with the intention to
settle?


I've never seen a french plumber in the UK undercutting the other
plumbers.

I don't care about students - they are not damaging the local economy,
rather the opposite - they are contributing to it by paying student fees.
Let's clarify my standpoint further:

I think mobile workers who are able to vastly undercut the standard wage
for a given trade by:

a) Virtue of their own country's economic disparity;

b) The fact they do not intend to settle;

The two in combination are what causes the problem.

I see no obvious solution other than controlled immigration.

That worked REAL well before Britain joined the EEC.

"Capitol" wrote in message
o.uk...
Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Tim Watts
wrote:

For what reason do nations exist and have borders, if not so they can
run as they see fit. If everyone thought the same way, we'd have a
single world government and no borders.

But we don't because we are human beings, not ants. This is a
fundamental distinction that certain people appear unable to grasp.

In fact it's worse than that. Countries larger that 50 to 100 million
are too big to govern properly. It's not just the EU that should be
broken up, but the USA, China, and India too. Probably make the world a
safer place.


I think you are all missing the point that any immigrant working in a UK
job which could be filled by a UK resident costs the UK taxpayer an
average of £10,000 a year.

Bull****. Most of those on the dole are completely unemployable.

No wonder we have a budget deficit.

You have a deficit because stupid pollys find it easier to
run a deficit than to pay for what they **** against the wall.

"Tim Watts" wrote in message
news
On 25/06/14 08:55, Capitol wrote:
Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Tim Watts
wrote:

For what reason do nations exist and have borders, if not so they can
run as they see fit. If everyone thought the same way, we'd have a
single world government and no borders.

But we don't because we are human beings, not ants. This is a
fundamental distinction that certain people appear unable to grasp.

In fact it's worse than that. Countries larger that 50 to 100 million
are too big to govern properly. It's not just the EU that should be
broken up, but the USA, China, and India too. Probably make the world a
safer place.


I think you are all missing the point that any immigrant working in
a UK job which could be filled by a UK resident costs the UK taxpayer an
average of £10,000 a year. No wonder we have a budget deficit.

I agree. I like the europeans, as people and as countries, typically.

But anyone who thinks you can throw open the borders and have mass highly
fluid migration is deluded.

How odd that it worked in Britain.

"Capitol" wrote in message
o.uk...
Rod Speed wrote:


"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 24/06/2014 12:21, Rod Speed wrote:


"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 24/06/2014 06:16, Rod Speed wrote:


"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 23/06/2014 20:02, Dennis@home wrote:
On 23/06/2014 15:23, The Natural Philosopher wrote:


Today the majority of people WITH an opinion want to LEAVE the EU.


Which bit of the EU do they want to leave?


Also you don't actually know how many want to leave as there hasn't
been
a vote. Your opinion is almost certainly biased as you probably
don't
talk to anyone that wants to stay and they don't talk to you.

Erm, like him or not, Farage has actually got people talking to each
other about the in/out EU issue.

No he hasnt. He is actually the RESULT of a significant
number who have never thought it made any sense.

Ukip has at the very least forced the hand of politicians to
listen to
a sizeable proportion of the electorate's dissension.

I dont buy that either.

Then you must have been living in a cave for the last few months,

Nope.

because Farage and the in/out issue debate has been in the news
virtually daily.

Irrelevant to what has driven those who want out of the EU.

Taint Farage.

Farage has forced the hands of the Tories and Labour

Pigs arse he has.

to confront the obvious dissent from many voters regarding the dubious
value of staying in the EU.

That has nothing to do with Farage. There have always
been plenty that never thought it made any sense.

But he has put it top of UKIP's agenda,

Because it was getting so much controversy.

which has obviously made a lot more people think about the merits (or
not) of exiting the EU.

I dont believe that. I dont believe that many
take much notice of any politician at all.

That's why the voter turnout in elections is so pathetic.

In other words, he has brought in a lot of the previously apathetic
voters and given them food for thought

I dont believe that either. All he has done is provide
someone the worst of the rabid bigots can vote for.
And when he hasnt managed even a single Westminster
seat, that is VERY graphic evidence of how few of them
there are.

Yes, there will always be some of the least employable
who find it impossible to get a job when lots of foreigners
show up and are prepared to work a lot harder than the
worst of the unemployable locals are, but thats about
the only group someone like that appeals to.

and he's done it in a refreshing way.

Bull****.

A lot of people relate to his style.

Plenty more realise that he is just another lying politician.

All of the rest of our politicians have a propensity to not being able
to answer a straight yes/no answer in less than a thousand words.

Bull****.

Very limited vocabulary?

Fools like you dont qualify for anything else.

"Adrian" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 25 Jun 2014 08:55:41 +0100, Capitol wrote:

I think you are all missing the point that any immigrant working in a
UK job which could be filled by a UK resident costs the UK taxpayer an
average of £10,000 a year.

Show your working.

He's clearly talking about the dole paid to the dole bludger.

"Adrian" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 25 Jun 2014 09:07:57 +0100, charles wrote:

They are damaging it, by taking up accomodation which might otherwise be
used by locals.

Is a Frenchman or a Pole or a Romanian in London "taking up
accommodation" any differently to a Mancunian or a Scot or an Irishman?

Yep, they're wogs.

Rod Speed wrote:


"Capitol" wrote in message
o.uk...
Rod Speed wrote:


"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 24/06/2014 12:21, Rod Speed wrote:


"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 24/06/2014 06:16, Rod Speed wrote:


"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 23/06/2014 20:02, Dennis@home wrote:
On 23/06/2014 15:23, The Natural Philosopher wrote:


Today the majority of people WITH an opinion want to LEAVE the
EU.


Which bit of the EU do they want to leave?


Also you don't actually know how many want to leave as there
hasn't
been
a vote. Your opinion is almost certainly biased as you probably
don't
talk to anyone that wants to stay and they don't talk to you.

Erm, like him or not, Farage has actually got people talking to
each
other about the in/out EU issue.

No he hasnt. He is actually the RESULT of a significant
number who have never thought it made any sense.

Ukip has at the very least forced the hand of politicians to
listen to
a sizeable proportion of the electorate's dissension.

I dont buy that either.

Then you must have been living in a cave for the last few months,

Nope.

because Farage and the in/out issue debate has been in the news
virtually daily.

Irrelevant to what has driven those who want out of the EU.

Taint Farage.

Farage has forced the hands of the Tories and Labour

Pigs arse he has.

to confront the obvious dissent from many voters regarding the
dubious
value of staying in the EU.

That has nothing to do with Farage. There have always
been plenty that never thought it made any sense.

But he has put it top of UKIP's agenda,

Because it was getting so much controversy.

which has obviously made a lot more people think about the merits (or
not) of exiting the EU.

I dont believe that. I dont believe that many
take much notice of any politician at all.

That's why the voter turnout in elections is so pathetic.

In other words, he has brought in a lot of the previously apathetic
voters and given them food for thought

I dont believe that either. All he has done is provide
someone the worst of the rabid bigots can vote for.
And when he hasnt managed even a single Westminster
seat, that is VERY graphic evidence of how few of them
there are.

Yes, there will always be some of the least employable
who find it impossible to get a job when lots of foreigners
show up and are prepared to work a lot harder than the
worst of the unemployable locals are, but thats about
the only group someone like that appeals to.

and he's done it in a refreshing way.

Bull****.

A lot of people relate to his style.

Plenty more realise that he is just another lying politician.

All of the rest of our politicians have a propensity to not being able
to answer a straight yes/no answer in less than a thousand words.

Bull****.

Very limited vocabulary?

Fools like you dont qualify for anything else.

Hmm. Impolite as well?