On Monday, 15 April 2019 22:41:54 UTC+1, Steve Walker wrote:
On 15/04/2019 15:40, whisky-dave wrote:
On Monday, 15 April 2019 15:08:59 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Terry Casey wrote:
In article , steve@walker-
family.me.uk says...


Here the increase is East Europeans, not Asians, although a few miles
away it is indeed Asians. My point is that immigration as a whole is too
high and we need to cut it down. So far governments have failed to do
that and even if they did at the moment, there would be a gaping hole in
that we have no restrictions on the numbers coming from the EU.


Without looking it up, I think that half or slighly more of
the immigrants over the past few years have been from outside
the EU, so we could (and should have done already) slash the
figures by 50% without leaving the EU.

So why didn't we?

Quite. But this country has relied too long on a stream of immigrants to
do jobs the English don't want to do.

Perhaps with doctors and nurses it;s because the hours are too long and we in the UK do work longer hours than a lot of EU wrokers.

There are a couple of different problems.

With doctors, a lot are retiring early, because the government reduced
the lifetime cap on pensions, so it makes more sense for them to retire
early instead of continuing to contribute to their pension pot and being
taxed heavily for it.

Then why isn;t teh answer not to tax them so heavily ?


With both doctors and nurses, we simply don't offer enough training
places.

Then why not.

A few years ago, the papers were full of stories of the
government keeping nurse training places way below that required and of
junior doctors, having completed their first 3(?) years of training,
being unable to find anywhere in the UK to obtain placements to work and
continue their training and so leaving for other EU countries.

Because the govenment found it cheaper to employ them from the EU and commonwealth.


We got rid of the other practical skills and technical collges so everyone could go to university and sit behind desks, and if they could do that they were useless.

Yes. No-one wanted to train people for manual, practical work when they
could simply bring in someone ready trained from abroad.

Exactly and who voted for that then ?


And the idea that paying a little
more for those jobs will end the dole queue just plain daft.

A little more is of little use if you can employ car cleaners for less than £2.50 an hour.
Perhaps we could go back to employing kids on bob-a-job that would undercut all the low grade EU workers I doubt they'll work for 5p an hour.


Many people are caught in a poverty trap. They know that if they get a
minimum wage job, they will be little or no better off for a whole lot
of effort; housing benefit will cease, as will council tax benefit. Only
a little more per hour can make a difference though. However, what
employer is going to pay that bit more, when they can get someone from
abroad, at minimum wage?

Exactly so why support such an idea like the free movement of people which only encourages such things the last time this happened was during the slave trade because we didn't have enough workers we imported them, shoved them into overcrowded towns so the landowners and other wealthy people could make a greater profit. The EU seems to be encouraging such migration rather than trying to stop it.


SteveW

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Monday, 15 April 2019 22:41:54 UTC+1, Steve Walker wrote:
On 15/04/2019 15:40, whisky-dave wrote:
On Monday, 15 April 2019 15:08:59 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Terry Casey wrote:
In article , steve@walker-
family.me.uk says...


Here the increase is East Europeans, not Asians, although a few
miles
away it is indeed Asians. My point is that immigration as a whole is
too
high and we need to cut it down. So far governments have failed to
do
that and even if they did at the moment, there would be a gaping
hole in
that we have no restrictions on the numbers coming from the EU.


Without looking it up, I think that half or slighly more of
the immigrants over the past few years have been from outside
the EU, so we could (and should have done already) slash the
figures by 50% without leaving the EU.

So why didn't we?

Quite. But this country has relied too long on a stream of immigrants
to
do jobs the English don't want to do.

Perhaps with doctors and nurses it;s because the hours are too long and
we in the UK do work longer hours than a lot of EU wrokers.

There are a couple of different problems.

With doctors, a lot are retiring early, because the government reduced
the lifetime cap on pensions, so it makes more sense for them to retire
early instead of continuing to contribute to their pension pot and being
taxed heavily for it.

Then why isn;t teh answer not to tax them so heavily ?

Because that applys to all substantial income earners, not just doctors.

There'd be one hell of a stink if doctors had their own special tax deal.

With both doctors and nurses, we simply
don't offer enough training places.

Then why not.

It costs a lot to provide those.

A few years ago, the papers were full of stories of the government
keeping nurse training places way below that required and of
junior doctors, having completed their first 3(?) years of training,
being unable to find anywhere in the UK to obtain placements to
work and continue their training and so leaving for other EU countries.

Because the govenment found it cheaper to
employ them from the EU and commonwealth.

Duh.

We got rid of the other practical skills and technical
collges so everyone could go to university and sit behind
desks, and if they could do that they were useless.

Yes. No-one wanted to train people for manual, practical work when
they could simply bring in someone ready trained from abroad.

Exactly and who voted for that then ?

And the idea that paying a little more for those
jobs will end the dole queue just plain daft.

A little more is of little use if you can employ car cleaners for less
than £2.50 an hour.
Perhaps we could go back to employing kids on bob-a-job that would
undercut all the low grade EU workers I doubt they'll work for 5p an
hour.

Many people are caught in a poverty trap. They know that if they get
a minimum wage job, they will be little or no better off for a whole
lot of effort; housing benefit will cease, as will council tax benefit.
Only a little more per hour can make a difference though. However,
what employer is going to pay that bit more, when they can get
someone from abroad, at minimum wage?

Exactly so why support such an idea like the free movement
of people which only encourages such things the last time
this happened was during the slave trade

The last time that happened was actually just after war with the
windrushers.

because we didn't have enough workers we imported them,
shoved them into overcrowded towns so the landowners
and other wealthy people could make a greater profit.

So things could get done in fact.

The EU seems to be encouraging such
migration rather than trying to stop it.

The EU is doing what the UK did in the past,
encourage those who cant find work where
they are to move to where the work is. Thats
why the Plow**** ended up in London.

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Monday, 15 April 2019 19:18:59 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Monday, 15 April 2019 15:08:59 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Terry Casey wrote:
In article , steve@walker-
family.me.uk says...


Here the increase is East Europeans, not Asians, although a few
miles
away it is indeed Asians. My point is that immigration as a whole
is
too
high and we need to cut it down. So far governments have failed to
do
that and even if they did at the moment, there would be a gaping
hole
in
that we have no restrictions on the numbers coming from the EU.


Without looking it up, I think that half or slighly more of
the immigrants over the past few years have been from outside
the EU, so we could (and should have done already) slash the
figures by 50% without leaving the EU.

So why didn't we?

Quite. But this country has relied too long on a stream
of immigrants to do jobs the English don't want to do.

Perhaps with doctors and nurses it;s because the hours are too long
and we in the UK do work longer hours than a lot of EU wrokers.

More likely the cost of training as a doctor or nurse.

So why does it cost so much,

Because it costs a lot more to have trainee doctors
and nurses learning how to do their job than to have
a lecture theatre stuffed with kids with someone down
the front raving on about the Peloponnesian War.
That only costs his wage and a bit more for the
electricity for the lights in the lecture theatre etc.

if india and pakistan can afford it, and we get
quite a few from the philapines and they can afford
to train nurses up and export them to the UK.

They arent actually stupid enough to make them
do a full uni degree to get qualified to shove ****ty
bedpans in the machine that washes them.

How can a poor country afford to train such useful people.

By paying their trainers much less than the trainers in the UK, stupid.

Not sure that those who wash the bedpans etc work long hours
and presumably they have a machine that washes those.

Someone has to load the machines.

Yes, but they arent actually stupid enough to make them
get a full uni degree before they are allowed to do that.

We got rid of the other practical skills and technical collges

Thats bull****.

On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 04:57:05 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rot Speed,
the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH 115 lines of off topic bull**** unread

--
The Natural Philosopher about senile Rot:
"Rod speed is not a Brexiteer. He is an Australian troll and arsehole."
Message-ID:

"Terry Casey" wrote in message
...
In article , steve@walker-
family.me.uk says...


Here the increase is East Europeans, not Asians, although a few miles
away it is indeed Asians. My point is that immigration as a whole is too
high and we need to cut it down. So far governments have failed to do
that and even if they did at the moment, there would be a gaping hole in
that we have no restrictions on the numbers coming from the EU.


Without looking it up, I think that half or slighly more of
the immigrants over the past few years have been from outside
the EU, so we could (and should have done already) slash the
figures by 50% without leaving the EU.

So why didn't we?

Because it had been noticed that plenty of them were
useful to the economy, particularly the medically
qualified, but also with the engineers etc too.

Much cheaper to have someone else train them etc.

On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 05:03:52 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rot Speed,
the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH all the idiotic drivel unread

--
FredXX to Rot Speed:
"You are still an idiot and an embarrassment to your country. No wonder
we shipped the likes of you out of the British Isles. Perhaps stupidity
and criminality is inherited after all?"
Message-ID:

On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 05:34:28 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


Because it had been noticed that plenty of them were
useful to the economy, particularly the medically
qualified, but also with the engineers etc too.

Much cheaper to have someone else train them etc.

Nobody talked to you, senile Ozzietard! And now jump back into your roo's
pouch, you retarded rodent!

--
pamela about Rot Speed:
"His off the cuff expertise demonstrates how little he knows..."
MID:

On Tuesday, 16 April 2019 19:57:19 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Monday, 15 April 2019 22:41:54 UTC+1, Steve Walker wrote:
On 15/04/2019 15:40, whisky-dave wrote:
On Monday, 15 April 2019 15:08:59 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Terry Casey wrote:
In article , steve@walker-
family.me.uk says...


Here the increase is East Europeans, not Asians, although a few
miles
away it is indeed Asians. My point is that immigration as a whole is
too
high and we need to cut it down. So far governments have failed to
do
that and even if they did at the moment, there would be a gaping
hole in
that we have no restrictions on the numbers coming from the EU.


Without looking it up, I think that half or slighly more of
the immigrants over the past few years have been from outside
the EU, so we could (and should have done already) slash the
figures by 50% without leaving the EU.

So why didn't we?

Quite. But this country has relied too long on a stream of immigrants
to
do jobs the English don't want to do.

Perhaps with doctors and nurses it;s because the hours are too long and
we in the UK do work longer hours than a lot of EU wrokers.

There are a couple of different problems.

With doctors, a lot are retiring early, because the government reduced
the lifetime cap on pensions, so it makes more sense for them to retire
early instead of continuing to contribute to their pension pot and being
taxed heavily for it.

Then why isn;t teh answer not to tax them so heavily ?

Because that applys to all substantial income earners, not just doctors.

Maybe they need help fiddling their taxes returns then.


There'd be one hell of a stink if doctors had their own special tax deal.

Like a lot of high end componies but they manage it via shares and other options.


With both doctors and nurses, we simply
don't offer enough training places.

Then why not.

It costs a lot to provide those.

Why does it cost us mor eto provide them that other countries then ?


Exactly so why support such an idea like the free movement
of people which only encourages such things the last time
this happened was during the slave trade

The last time that happened was actually just after war with the
windrushers.

No it wasn't as we were importing particular people for particualar purposes the NHS and transport being the biggest two. They weren;t imported for a couple of months fruit pickin, they were here tpo replace those we lost in WWII

I don;t remmebr there being a war after WWII where a substantial number of UK men were killed and needed replacing after the mid 70s.
Pergaps the falklands war.
255 wasn't really enough to start a new windrush generation was it.



because we didn't have enough workers we imported them,
shoved them into overcrowded towns so the landowners
and other wealthy people could make a greater profit.

So things could get done in fact.

No to save money, save having to actually train people to do the jobs needed.


The EU seems to be encouraging such
migration rather than trying to stop it.

The EU is doing what the UK did in the past,

So it should have learnt from those mistakes, but instead decided to follow the mistakes.

encourage those who cant find work where
they are to move to where the work is. Thats
why the Plow**** ended up in London.

Yeah but only in sarf Lundon, it hardly counts ;-)

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 16 April 2019 19:57:19 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Monday, 15 April 2019 22:41:54 UTC+1, Steve Walker wrote:
On 15/04/2019 15:40, whisky-dave wrote:
On Monday, 15 April 2019 15:08:59 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Terry Casey wrote:
In article , steve@walker-
family.me.uk says...


Here the increase is East Europeans, not Asians, although a few
miles
away it is indeed Asians. My point is that immigration as a whole
is
too
high and we need to cut it down. So far governments have failed
to
do
that and even if they did at the moment, there would be a gaping
hole in
that we have no restrictions on the numbers coming from the EU.


Without looking it up, I think that half or slighly more of
the immigrants over the past few years have been from outside
the EU, so we could (and should have done already) slash the
figures by 50% without leaving the EU.

So why didn't we?

Quite. But this country has relied too long on a stream of
immigrants
to
do jobs the English don't want to do.

Perhaps with doctors and nurses it;s because the hours are too long
and
we in the UK do work longer hours than a lot of EU wrokers.

There are a couple of different problems.

With doctors, a lot are retiring early, because the government reduced
the lifetime cap on pensions, so it makes more sense for them to
retire
early instead of continuing to contribute to their pension pot and
being
taxed heavily for it.

Then why isn;t teh answer not to tax them so heavily ?

Because that applys to all substantial income earners, not just doctors.

Maybe they need help fiddling their taxes returns then.

That regulation has nothing to do with fiddling tax returns.

There'd be one hell of a stink if doctors had their own special tax deal.

Like a lot of high end componies but they manage it via shares and other
options.

Not possible for a doctor. They can't even operate as a corporation.

With both doctors and nurses, we simply
don't offer enough training places.

Then why not.

It costs a lot to provide those.

Why does it cost us mor eto provide them that other countries then ?

Because the labor and other costs are much higher in the
UK than in India and Pakistan and the Philippines, stupid.

Exactly so why support such an idea like the free movement
of people which only encourages such things the last time
this happened was during the slave trade

The last time that happened was actually just after war with the
windrushers.

No it wasn't as we were importing particular people for particualar
purposes the NHS and transport being the biggest two.

Thats a pig ignorant lie with the windrushes. And
slaves were imported for particular purposes too.

They weren;t imported for a couple of months fruit pickin,
they were here tpo replace those we lost in WWII

Wrong, as always.

because we didn't have enough workers we imported them,
shoved them into overcrowded towns so the landowners
and other wealthy people could make a greater profit.

So things could get done in fact.

No to save money, save having to actually
train people to do the jobs needed.

Wrong with the windrushes.

The EU seems to be encouraging such
migration rather than trying to stop it.

The EU is doing what the UK did in the past,

So it should have learnt from those mistakes,

It wasnt a mistake, it did make sense at the time.
And does now for the EU too given its one hell
of an incentive for the dregs of eastern europe
to join the EU which the EU sees as evidence
that the EU is successful. And in that sense it is.

but instead decided to follow the mistakes.

It wasnt a mistake then and isnt a mistake now for the EU.

encourage those who cant find work where
they are to move to where the work is. Thats
why the Plow**** ended up in London.

On Wednesday, 17 April 2019 15:58:25 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 16 April 2019 19:57:19 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Monday, 15 April 2019 22:41:54 UTC+1, Steve Walker wrote:
On 15/04/2019 15:40, whisky-dave wrote:
On Monday, 15 April 2019 15:08:59 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Terry Casey wrote:
In article , steve@walker-
family.me.uk says...


Here the increase is East Europeans, not Asians, although a few
miles
away it is indeed Asians. My point is that immigration as a whole
is
too
high and we need to cut it down. So far governments have failed
to
do
that and even if they did at the moment, there would be a gaping
hole in
that we have no restrictions on the numbers coming from the EU..


Without looking it up, I think that half or slighly more of
the immigrants over the past few years have been from outside
the EU, so we could (and should have done already) slash the
figures by 50% without leaving the EU.

So why didn't we?

Quite. But this country has relied too long on a stream of
immigrants
to
do jobs the English don't want to do.

Perhaps with doctors and nurses it;s because the hours are too long
and
we in the UK do work longer hours than a lot of EU wrokers.

There are a couple of different problems.

With doctors, a lot are retiring early, because the government reduced
the lifetime cap on pensions, so it makes more sense for them to
retire
early instead of continuing to contribute to their pension pot and
being
taxed heavily for it.

Then why isn;t teh answer not to tax them so heavily ?

Because that applys to all substantial income earners, not just doctors.

Maybe they need help fiddling their taxes returns then.

That regulation has nothing to do with fiddling tax returns.

If they had help sending their money to a tax haven island,
or could do an amazon then they wouldn't be paying a high rate of tax then so
effectively have more cash in their pocket.


There'd be one hell of a stink if doctors had their own special tax deal.

Like a lot of high end componies but they manage it via shares and other
options.

Not possible for a doctor. They can't even operate as a corporation.

Why can't they, what differnce does a corporation make ?

With both doctors and nurses, we simply
don't offer enough training places.

Then why not.

It costs a lot to provide those.

Why does it cost us mor eto provide them that other countries then ?

Because the labor and other costs are much higher in the
UK than in India and Pakistan and the Philippines, stupid.

What other costs do you mean things like housing, well in the past they had nurses accomedation that was cheaper than renting, now the majority have to pay higher costs becuase of teh private rental market which has been encouraged, via the selling off and removel of council housing.



Exactly so why support such an idea like the free movement
of people which only encourages such things the last time
this happened was during the slave trade

The last time that happened was actually just after war with the
windrushers.

No it wasn't as we were importing particular people for particualar
purposes the NHS and transport being the biggest two.

Thats a pig ignorant lie with the windrushes. And
slaves were imported for particular purposes too.

As I said similar situation to fill a gap, which could have been avioded.

They weren;t imported for a couple of months fruit pickin,
they were here tpo replace those we lost in WWII

Wrong, as always.

right as always.
What was the Windrush generation?
Between 1948 and 1970, nearly half a million people moved from the Caribbean to Britain, which in 1948 faced severe labour shortages in the wake of the Second World War. The immigrants were later referred to as "the Windrush generation".


because we didn't have enough workers we imported them,
shoved them into overcrowded towns so the landowners
and other wealthy people could make a greater profit.

So things could get done in fact.

No to save money, save having to actually
train people to do the jobs needed.

Wrong with the windrushes.

Try reading up on it.


The EU seems to be encouraging such
migration rather than trying to stop it.

The EU is doing what the UK did in the past,

So it should have learnt from those mistakes,

It wasnt a mistake, it did make sense at the time.

But doesn;t now, and there was a rise i9n racism
which they should have seen coming, because that is what happens
in such situations.


And does now for the EU too given its one hell
of an incentive for the dregs of eastern europe
to join the EU which the EU sees as evidence
that the EU is successful. And in that sense it is.

Exactly who in the EU sees it as succsessful, those in power with money,

few if any others do, the majority of Greece, spain and italy doesn't
Germany does OK, even though in Berlin the locals complain that those serving cofffee don't speak german, but English.


but instead decided to follow the mistakes.

It wasnt a mistake then and isnt a mistake now for the EU.

It is for a lot of people.

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 17 April 2019 15:58:25 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 16 April 2019 19:57:19 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Monday, 15 April 2019 22:41:54 UTC+1, Steve Walker wrote:
On 15/04/2019 15:40, whisky-dave wrote:
On Monday, 15 April 2019 15:08:59 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:
In article
,
Terry Casey wrote:
In article , steve@walker-
family.me.uk says...


Here the increase is East Europeans, not Asians, although a
few
miles
away it is indeed Asians. My point is that immigration as a
whole
is
too
high and we need to cut it down. So far governments have
failed
to
do
that and even if they did at the moment, there would be a
gaping
hole in
that we have no restrictions on the numbers coming from the
EU.


Without looking it up, I think that half or slighly more of
the immigrants over the past few years have been from outside
the EU, so we could (and should have done already) slash the
figures by 50% without leaving the EU.

So why didn't we?

Quite. But this country has relied too long on a stream of
immigrants
to
do jobs the English don't want to do.

Perhaps with doctors and nurses it;s because the hours are too
long
and
we in the UK do work longer hours than a lot of EU wrokers.

There are a couple of different problems.

With doctors, a lot are retiring early, because the government
reduced
the lifetime cap on pensions, so it makes more sense for them to
retire
early instead of continuing to contribute to their pension pot and
being
taxed heavily for it.

Then why isn;t teh answer not to tax them so heavily ?

Because that applys to all substantial income earners, not just
doctors.

Maybe they need help fiddling their taxes returns then.

That regulation has nothing to do with fiddling tax returns.

If they had help sending their money to a tax haven island,
or could do an amazon then they wouldn't be paying a high
rate of tax then so effectively have more cash in their pocket.

But that isnt possible for a doctor or nurse. That works
for operations like amazon and murdoch because they
claim that the operation is actually in the tax haven and
that the operation in the normal taxing country has to
pay high costs to the operation in the tax haven and
so its the operation in the tax haven appears to be
making the profit and the operation in the normal
taxing country is making a loss. Not possible for a
doctor to organise things like that.

There'd be one hell of a stink if doctors had their own special tax
deal.

Like a lot of high end componies but they manage it via shares and
other
options.

Not possible for a doctor. They can't even operate as a corporation.

Why can't they,

Because their employer is employing an individual. The
doctor can't claim to be a corporation providing services
to the NHS, the NHS doesnt employ doctors like that.

what differnce does a corporation make ?

That allows the subsidiary in the normal tax country
to claim expenses paid to the parent in the tax haven
and so export their income to the tax haven. Not
possible for an individual to operate like that.

With both doctors and nurses, we simply
don't offer enough training places.

Then why not.

It costs a lot to provide those.

Why does it cost us mor eto provide them that other countries then ?

Because the labor and other costs are much higher in the
UK than in India and Pakistan and the Philippines, stupid.

What other costs do you mean things like housing,

That isnt a cost to the operation providing the training although
obviously if they dont pay enough to cover the cost of the
housing, they wont be able to find anyone to work for them.

well in the past they had nurses accomedation that was cheaper than
renting,

And that is something that the low cost countrys
like India and Pakistan and the Philippines can
still do because again, they are low cost countrys.

now the majority have to pay higher costs becuase of
teh private rental market which has been encouraged,
via the selling off and removel of council housing.

And the low cost countrys have plenty of cheap accommodation
and plenty of people prepared to 'live' like that while training,
realising that its only for a limited time till they qualify and
can then **** off to the UK etc and get paid a hell of a lot more.

Exactly so why support such an idea like the free movement
of people which only encourages such things the last time
this happened was during the slave trade

The last time that happened was actually just after war with the
windrushers.

No it wasn't as we were importing particular people for particualar
purposes the NHS and transport being the biggest two.

Thats a pig ignorant lie with the windrushes. And
slaves were imported for particular purposes too.

As I said similar situation to fill a gap, which could have been avioded.

No it could not have been avoided. The windrushes were
replacing those who had been killed in the war and even
more who had been badly injured and who couldnt ever
do what they were doing before the war started, again.

It was always going to take 15-20 years before the boomers
would be able to do that work and so the windrushers were
in fact a very viable way to handle that situation.

They weren;t imported for a couple of months fruit pickin,
they were here tpo replace those we lost in WWII

Wrong, as always.

What was the Windrush generation?
Between 1948 and 1970, nearly half a million people moved
from the Caribbean to Britain, which in 1948 faced severe
labour shortages in the wake of the Second World War. The
immigrants were later referred to as "the Windrush generation".

Doesnt say that they were imported just for specific jobs.

because we didn't have enough workers we imported them,
shoved them into overcrowded towns so the landowners
and other wealthy people could make a greater profit.

So things could get done in fact.

No to save money, save having to actually
train people to do the jobs needed.

Wrong with the windrushes.

Try reading up on it.

Done that already. The labor shortage meant that
there werent the people to train to do the jobs needed.

The EU seems to be encouraging such
migration rather than trying to stop it.

The EU is doing what the UK did in the past,

So it should have learnt from those mistakes,

It wasnt a mistake, it did make sense at the time.

But doesn;t now,

Still does for the EU. The reason Merkel was so keen on inviting
1M illegals to germany is that they still have one hell of a
demographic problem with a severe lack of people to train
and they still have one of the best training systems in the
entire first world. Their problem is a lack of people to train.

and there was a rise in racism which they should have seen
coming, because that is what happens in such situations.

Of course they saw that coming, but had no choice on that.

And does now for the EU too given its one hell
of an incentive for the dregs of eastern europe
to join the EU which the EU sees as evidence
that the EU is successful. And in that sense it is.

Exactly who in the EU sees it as succsessful,
those in power with money,

And plenty more than just those, most obviously
with employers in germany who realise the massive
demographic problem they still have with a real
dearth of young kids to employ there.

few if any others do,

Thats bull****.

the majority of Greece, spain and italy doesn't

But they get no say on EU policy.

Germany does OK, even though in Berlin the locals complain
that those serving cofffee don't speak german, but English.

Yes, but those get no say on EU policy either. Its Merkel,
Macron, Junkers etc that determine EU policy.

but instead decided to follow the mistakes.

It wasnt a mistake then and isnt a mistake now for the EU.

It is for a lot of people.

Thats very arguable. Yes, the success of the EU is a massive
problem for Greece, Italy etc because thats the reason so
many of the illegal choose to move to the EU illegally,
but the success of the EU is also good for quite a bit
of the rest of the EU too, most obviously with CAP
for very inefficient agricultural producers in france etc.

On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 00:51:28 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rot Speed,
the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH 132 lines of troll****

Seriously? 00:51 am in Australia ...and you are up and trolling already, you
abnormal perverted senile sow? Jump back into the pouch of your roo you
escaped from, you disgusting rodent!

--
Bill Wright addressing senile Ozzie cretin Rot Speed:
"Well you make up a lot of stuff and it's total ******** most of it."
MID:

On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 02:38:06 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rot Speed,
the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH 260 !!! lines of the usual idiotic & off topic troll****

....and much better air in here again!

--
Norman Wells addressing senile Rot:
"Ah, the voice of scum speaks."
MID:

On Wednesday, 17 April 2019 17:45:25 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message

That regulation has nothing to do with fiddling tax returns.

If they had help sending their money to a tax haven island,
or could do an amazon then they wouldn't be paying a high
rate of tax then so effectively have more cash in their pocket.

But that isnt possible for a doctor or nurse. That works
for operations like amazon and murdoch because they
claim that the operation is actually in the tax haven

They claim.

and
that the operation in the normal taxing country has to
pay high costs to the operation in the tax haven and
so its the operation in the tax haven appears to be
making the profit .

But there is NO profit in health care. So anyone working to promote health isnlt making a profit.
Simple.


and the operation in the normal
taxing country is making a loss. Not possible for a
doctor to organise things like that.

No it's the laywers and solicotors jobs followed by law makers.


There'd be one hell of a stink if doctors had their own special tax
deal.

Like a lot of high end componies but they manage it via shares and
other
options.

Not possible for a doctor. They can't even operate as a corporation.

Why can't they,

Because their employer is employing an individual.

Who is their employer ?

The
doctor can't claim to be a corporation providing services
to the NHS, the NHS doesnt employ doctors like that.

So change it.
Make the health service a non profitable organisation or a charity.


what differnce does a corporation make ?

That allows the subsidiary in the normal tax country
to claim expenses paid to the parent in the tax haven
and so export their income to the tax haven. Not
possible for an individual to operate like that.

Then doctors should be paid as individuals.
It coukld be sorted, I see simialr things happen here
regarding who does what.


With both doctors and nurses, we simply
don't offer enough training places.

Then why not.

It costs a lot to provide those.

Why does it cost us mor eto provide them that other countries then ?

Because the labor and other costs are much higher in the
UK than in India and Pakistan and the Philippines, stupid.

What other costs do you mean things like housing,

That isnt a cost to the operation providing the training although
obviously if they dont pay enough to cover the cost of the
housing, they wont be able to find anyone to work for them.

It could be worked that way.


well in the past they had nurses accomedation that was cheaper than
renting,

And that is something that the low cost countrys
like India and Pakistan and the Philippines can
still do because again, they are low cost countrys.

They could do it here we used to.
Same with education how come an outside company can provide accommodation
while making a profit for itself and its shareholders but the govenment can't.




now the majority have to pay higher costs becuase of
teh private rental market which has been encouraged,
via the selling off and removel of council housing.

And the low cost countrys have plenty of cheap accommodation
and plenty of people prepared to 'live' like that while training,
realising that its only for a limited time till they qualify and
can then **** off to the UK etc and get paid a hell of a lot more.

Then there is the problem. The low paid can do exactly the same can;t they, they can come and clean cars without having to train for years.



Exactly so why support such an idea like the free movement
of people which only encourages such things the last time
this happened was during the slave trade

The last time that happened was actually just after war with the
windrushers.

No it wasn't as we were importing particular people for particualar
purposes the NHS and transport being the biggest two.

Thats a pig ignorant lie with the windrushes. And
slaves were imported for particular purposes too.

As I said similar situation to fill a gap, which could have been avioded.

No it could not have been avoided. The windrushes were
replacing those who had been killed in the war

that's whaty I told you.

And I said we haven;t lost many in wars since the 70s.

So if we educated and employed those already in the country like we did in the past.


and even
more who had been badly injured and who couldnt ever
do what they were doing before the war started, again.

but that isnlt the case now is it.
Are yuo still claiming we need to import workers because of the war ? which war exactly ?


It was always going to take 15-20 years before the boomers
would be able to do that work and so the windrushers were
in fact a very viable way to handle that situation.

I know but as I keep saying that is NOT the case now !
We haven;t go too few people therfpore need to import people,
we have enough people.



What was the Windrush generation?
Between 1948 and 1970, nearly half a million people moved
from the Caribbean to Britain, which in 1948 faced severe
labour shortages in the wake of the Second World War. The
immigrants were later referred to as "the Windrush generation".

Doesnt say that they were imported just for specific jobs.

But those with a brain know they were, London transport and the health service.
It was a short term idea to address the lack of workers it was never meant to happen every year from 1948 to the present day.



because we didn't have enough workers we imported them,
shoved them into overcrowded towns so the landowners
and other wealthy people could make a greater profit.

So things could get done in fact.

No to save money, save having to actually
train people to do the jobs needed.

Wrong with the windrushes.

Try reading up on it.

Done that already. The labor shortage meant that
there werent the people to train to do the jobs needed.

SO what happened to those peoplpe, why was there a shortage ?
Perhaps the year the windrush docked might give yuo a clue.



It wasnt a mistake, it did make sense at the time.

But doesn;t now,

Still does for the EU.

Maybe that's why some voted leave.

The reason Merkel was so keen on inviting
1M illegals to

How can they be illegals if invited ?

germany is that they still have one hell of a
demographic problem with a severe lack of people to train.

So they trained them in coffee shops ?
and teh german peole complianed because they were speaking English as a first language and not german.


and they still have one of the best training systems in the
entire first world. Their problem is a lack of people to train.

Then they should import more then shouldn't they.







the majority of Greece, spain and italy doesn't

But they get no say on EU policy.

I thought everyone had equal say.


Germany does OK, even though in Berlin the locals complain
that those serving cofffee don't speak german, but English.

Yes, but those get no say on EU policy either. Its Merkel,
Macron, Junkers etc that determine EU policy.

and people wonder why leave won.


but instead decided to follow the mistakes.

It wasnt a mistake then and isnt a mistake now for the EU.

It is for a lot of people.

Thats very arguable. Yes, the success of the EU is a massive
problem for Greece, Italy etc because thats the reason so
many of the illegal choose to move to the EU illegally,
but the success of the EU is also good for quite a bit
of the rest of the EU too, most obviously with CAP
for very inefficient agricultural producers in france etc.

If it was that good for people in the UK then they wouldn;t have voted to leave.

whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote

That regulation has nothing to do with fiddling tax returns.

If they had help sending their money to a tax haven island,
or could do an amazon then they wouldn't be paying a high
rate of tax then so effectively have more cash in their pocket.

But that isnt possible for a doctor or nurse. That works
for operations like amazon and murdoch because they
claim that the operation is actually in the tax haven

They claim.

and that the operation in the normal taxing
country has to pay high costs to the operation
in the tax haven and so its the operation in the
tax haven appears to be making the profit .

But there is NO profit in health care.

Of course there is. If there wasnt, there wouldnt
be any private hospitals anywhere in the world.

Or any medical insurance operations either.

So anyone working to promote
health isnlt making a profit.
Simple.

Even sillier than you usually manage and thats saying something

and the operation in the normal taxing
country is making a loss. Not possible
for a doctor to organise things like that.

No it's the laywers and solicotors jobs followed by law makers.

Whatever that **** is sposed to be about.

There'd be one hell of a stink if doctors had their own special tax
deal.

Like a lot of high end componies but they manage it via shares and
other
options.

Not possible for a doctor. They can't even operate as a corporation.

Why can't they,

Because their employer is employing an individual.

Who is their employer ?

In your case, mostly the NHS except with the stuff it doesnt
do like most of the cosmetic surgery and **** like that.

The doctor can't claim to be a corporation providing services
to the NHS, the NHS doesnt employ doctors like that.

So change it.

That has other downsides like the corp providing services
to the NHS being able to charge anything they like and
having to tender out those services. Much more viable
to be employing the doctors as individuals and having
a fixed salary scale like they do now. Same with nurses.

Make the health service a non
profitable organisation or a charity.

Doesnt fix the problem above.

what differnce does a corporation make ?

That allows the subsidiary in the normal tax country
to claim expenses paid to the parent in the tax haven
and so export their income to the tax haven. Not
possible for an individual to operate like that.

Then doctors should be paid as individuals.

They are. But when they are, they cant rort the tax system
as you originally suggested that they should do.

It coukld be sorted,

Nope. If it could with doctors and nurses, someone
would be doing it that way somewhere in the world
and no one actually does it like that anywhere.

I see simialr things happen here regarding who does what.

Not with how they are PAID you dont.

With both doctors and nurses, we simply
don't offer enough training places.

Then why not.

It costs a lot to provide those.

Why does it cost us mor eto provide them that other countries then ?

Because the labor and other costs are much higher in the
UK than in India and Pakistan and the Philippines, stupid.

What other costs do you mean things like housing,

That isnt a cost to the operation providing the training although
obviously if they dont pay enough to cover the cost of the
housing, they wont be able to find anyone to work for them.

It could be worked that way.

Nope, no one does it like that.

well in the past they had nurses accomedation
that was cheaper than renting,

And that is something that the low cost countrys
like India and Pakistan and the Philippines can
still do because again, they are low cost countrys.

They could do it here we used to.

And plenty of unis still do have some student accommodation
like that, but that is usually rather more expensive than the
private student accommodation with shared houses etc.

Same with education how come an outside company
can provide accommodationwhile making a profit for
itself and its shareholders but the govenment can't.

Because they dont provide the same level of services
with the rooms being cleaned by staff etc. Thats the
highest cost for operations like that.

Most govt operations dont have staff cleaners anymore,
the cleaning is contracted out to contract cleaners now.

now the majority have to pay higher costs becuase of
teh private rental market which has been encouraged,
via the selling off and removel of council housing.

And the low cost countrys have plenty of cheap accommodation
and plenty of people prepared to 'live' like that while training,
realising that its only for a limited time till they qualify and
can then **** off to the UK etc and get paid a hell of a lot more.

Then there is the problem. The low paid can do exactly the same can;t
they, they can come and clean cars without having to train for years.

You cant do medical staff that way.

Exactly so why support such an idea like the free movement
of people which only encourages such things the last time
this happened was during the slave trade

The last time that happened was actually just after war with the
windrushers.

No it wasn't as we were importing particular people for particualar
purposes the NHS and transport being the biggest two.

Thats a pig ignorant lie with the windrushes. And
slaves were imported for particular purposes too.

As I said similar situation to fill a gap, which could have been
avioded.

No it could not have been avoided. The windrushes were
replacing those who had been killed in the war

And I said we haven;t lost many in wars since the 70s.

Yes, but it was realised that it was cheaper to let those
who had been trained overseas to move to the UK
instead of training UKians where the training is
expensive like with doctors and nurses and engineers etc.

Wasnt a problem with most of the windrushers who did very
basic work on the railways etc which required little training.

So if we educated and employed those already
in the country like we did in the past.

Much more expensive than using foreigners who are
trained in their own country at that country's expense.

and even more who had been badly injured and who couldnt
ever do what they were doing before the war started, again.

but that isnlt the case now is it.
Are yuo still claiming we need to import workers because of the war ?

Nope, we import them now because its superficially
cheaper than training the UKians to do that work.

Superficially cheaper when you dont consider the cost
of the infrastructure to house all those immigrants etc.

It was always going to take 15-20 years before the boomers
would be able to do that work and so the windrushers were
in fact a very viable way to handle that situation.

I know but as I keep saying that is NOT the case now !
We haven;t go too few people therfpore need to import people,
we have enough people.

Thats very arguable given the very low unemployment rate now.

What was the Windrush generation?
Between 1948 and 1970, nearly half a million people moved
from the Caribbean to Britain, which in 1948 faced severe
labour shortages in the wake of the Second World War. The
immigrants were later referred to as "the Windrush generation".

Doesnt say that they were imported just for specific jobs.

But those with a brain know they were,
London transport and the health service.

They didnt just work in those two areas.

It was a short term idea to address the lack of workers it was
never meant to happen every year from 1948 to the present day.

What happens today is completely different, getting someone
else to pay for their much more expensive training.

because we didn't have enough workers we imported them,
shoved them into overcrowded towns so the landowners
and other wealthy people could make a greater profit.

So things could get done in fact.

No to save money, save having to actually
train people to do the jobs needed.

Wrong with the windrushes.

Try reading up on it.

Done that already. The labor shortage meant that
there werent the people to train to do the jobs needed.

SO what happened to those peoplpe, why was there a shortage ?

The war killed them or made them useless for that work.

It wasnt a mistake, it did make sense at the time.

But doesn;t now,

Still does for the EU.

Maybe that's why some voted leave.

Duh.

The reason Merkel was so keen on inviting 1M illegals to

How can they be illegals if invited ?

They entered the EU illegally. Once they were in the
EU they were invited by Merkel to move to Germany.

If you can't do any better than this silly ****, your
**** will be flushed where it belongs, again.

germany is that they still have one hell of a demographic
problem with a severe lack of people to train.

So they trained them in coffee shops ?

Nope, they trained them in their training system and
end up with no one left to work in coffee shops, so
they need to use foreigners in the coffee shops.

and teh german peole complianed because they were
speaking English as a first language and not german.

Unsurprising given how few foreigners speak german.

and they still have one of the best training systems in the
entire first world. Their problem is a lack of people to train.

Then they should import more then shouldn't they.

Thats what Merkel did with those 1M illegals.

the majority of Greece, spain and italy doesn't

But they get no say on EU policy.

I thought everyone had equal say.

Yes, you actually are that stupid.

Germany does OK, even though in Berlin the locals complain
that those serving cofffee don't speak german, but English.

Yes, but those get no say on EU policy either. Its Merkel,
Macron, Junkers etc that determine EU policy.

and people wonder why leave won.

No one with a clue does.

but instead decided to follow the mistakes.

It wasnt a mistake then and isnt a mistake now for the EU.

It is for a lot of people.

Thats very arguable. Yes, the success of the EU is a massive
problem for Greece, Italy etc because thats the reason so
many of the illegal choose to move to the EU illegally,
but the success of the EU is also good for quite a bit
of the rest of the EU too, most obviously with CAP
for very inefficient agricultural producers in france etc.

If it was that good for people in the UK
then they wouldn;t have voted to leave.

EU policy was never about what was good for the UK,
the policy was set at the time when de Gaul wouldnt
allow the UK to join.

On Fri, 19 Apr 2019 04:10:07 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rot Speed,
the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH 333 !!! lines of absolutely idiotic troll**** unread

--
Bill Wright addressing senile Ozzie cretin Rot Speed:
"Well you make up a lot of stuff and it's total ******** most of it."
MID: