| The Comments |
Tadd
That had been going on fir years, that's globalisation NOT Brexit, why do you think
all the steel works have closed in the US.
Heavy industry moved to lower cost bases long ago.
ThecUK has to rely on the expertise of its thousands of small and medium sized businesses who can export.
You may be surprised to learn we are in a digital age not building ships in the UK anymore, everyone must adapt.
France, Italy Spain and many others are suffering similar fates.
Only Germany with compliant unions and long term investment can currently compete as its currency is kept artificially low by the weaker Euro nations.
3
Like
|
EU migrants make up 11% of manufacturing workforce - ONS
Excellent article on BBC right now
0
Like
|
"All they can do is insult, name call and attack anyone who says anything that they don't like - no respect just rude but it can be amusing at times"
And the pot is still calling the kettle black.
1
Like
|
"Mrs May and her band of chums whose nauseating glee at what they achieved may come back to haunt them."
Mrs May was a remainer! But she accepted the democratic will of the people, is working in the interests of all and trying to secure the best deal possible.
2
Like
|
Don't see your point pp
We have already agreed UKs manufacturing industry is not massive anymore.
The biggest employers in the UK are now
Retail, Leisure, Services and very probably white van drivers, most of whom are probably on zero hour contracts.
Tteedd, we've been told by some that the UKs democratic system is not fair enough as apparently it does not represent 100% of the people, can you believe that?
2
Like
|
Er. Who makes up 89% of our mfg workforce then? Maybe we have enough migrant workforce at this time?
also. From a long time posting ago, I was once told a Lithuanian qualified doctor could come over to the uk and earn more picking fruit, than practicing in their own country, so the EU experiment must continue for these people, they need to better themselves.
After thinkung this through I said, for a very intelligent member of society, we gain a fruit picker and Lithuania lose a doctor hmmmm. That's not an experiment I want to be part of.
But thanks for the really meaningful contribution PP.
_______________________
Best wishes, Brian
3
Like
|
Approximately 390,000 EU migrants that live in the UK do not have jobs and are claiming DSS benefits .
3
Like
|
Brian
I will pass on your thought
Hugh_man
Yes it has been going on for years and lokk how it has left the uk - very little and even less soon
Windtalker
It is not the eu fault and after brexit these 390, 000 will probably still be in uk getting benefits
_______________________
“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge”
0
Like
|
Tadd1966 the DSS system was set up for the people of the UK ....As you well know David Cameron tried to stop EU migrants claiming benefits pre Brexit and was stop by the EU . Hence one of the reasons the UK voted out of the EU ...Now please don't go harping on that the UK DSS is to generous it was set up to look after the people of the UK not for the population of the EU if you stop the scroungers claiming the DSS then the Brexit would never happened simple as that.
4
Like
|
Taking back control but in a way that assists the UK economy is the key phrase, Tadd.
This message was last edited by ads on 13/04/2017.
3
Like
|
HSBC, Europe’s largest bank, in a sign of thigs to come has spotted some Brexit decisions already being made by its clients.
Noel Quinn, the bank’s head of global commercial banking, told Bloomberg’s Stephen Morris that some of its largest corporate clients are asking for their business to be routed through the bank’s offices in mainland Europe.
A number of our larger clients are now asking us to book more of their trade and foreign-exchange activity in their French operation through our Paris office,” said Quinn. Executives at multinational companies are looking past Brexit talks, “making plans to ensure they can continue to trade irrespective of the outcome. They can’t afford to wait for a decision that may not emerge until two years’ time.”
Quinn said some clients have also boosted their holdings of cash since last June’s referendum either because of sterling’s decline, a deferment of investment or concern about the economic outlook. He also noted some companies are evaluating whether to “flip” their regional head offices to European cities from Britain, meaning they would need to reclassify the U.K. branch as a country office.
Bloomberg.
The cost of a few migrants claiming benefits will pale into insignificance when coporate Britain loses billions of service trade to Europe post Brexit.
This message was last edited by Mickyfinn on 13/04/2017.
_______________________
Time is the school in which we learn
Time is the fire in which we burn.
Delmore Schwartz.
0
Like
|
windtalker
The spanish system was set up for the spanish
the problem is as we have discussed before is the way the uk have it set up for UK residents and yes it is far too generous creating far too many scroungers
camerons proposal was discriminatory that is why it was rejected.
Stop the scroungers yes but that means everyone no matter nationality
ads
by taking back control as you say will not stop immigranst getting benefits or coming to the uk and how is it going to assit the uk economy. Are the UK govt planning to stop benefits to all existing and future immigrants?
_______________________
“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge”
0
Like
|
Micky. making plans to ensure they can continue to trade irrespective of the outcome
very, very sensible. Lloyds are opening a European trading office as a just in case too.
Long term, for banking and commerce companies to have more than one office is a really good thing, it will suit the UK to be able to cross money borders easier and the financial institutions are giving clues they are not to be messed about by political bullies ( they have history eh ha)
The phrase uk and branch office gives a clue about the writer of the report being somewhat 'slanted' in their views though. (Is it just me that can spot theses things?).
HSBC had a massive review in February 2016 which arrived at the decision to remain in the UK When another review comes along, I'm sure Bloomberg will let us know
This message was last edited by briando55 on 13/04/2017.
_______________________
Best wishes, Brian
2
Like
|
Tadd,
You asked the question "by taking back control as you say will not stop immigrants getting benefits or coming to the uk and how is it going to assit the uk economy. Are the UK govt planning to stop benefits to all existing and future immigrants?"
The answer in short appears to be no. The key point about control being the UK Govt presumably will regain control to decide the criteria who and under what circumstances will benefits become applicable, to suit the needs of the various sectors of the UK at any given time. As you have observed in the past they have been very generous when you compare the differentials between member states, and during a recent Select Committee cross questioning on the 15th March, David Davies suggested that he was fully aware of the Eastern Member states concerns ( he referred to them as our friends), since in the main they are the ones who have been coming here with families, but that this will form part of the ongoing negotiations and forward strategy with the EU. Obviously early days on that score but his diplomatic manner appeared well intentioned to seek mutually beneficial outcomes.
1
Like
|
Ads
yes the UK govt may come up with some criteria that limits or even controls migration
However, limiting these to certain benefits or cherry picking etc wil be discrimantory under the current system of entiltlement.
Are they going to use the same criteria for benefits to UK citzens?
What about the jobs the UK scroungers who are capable but won't take?Aare the govt going to clampdown on this which is a far bigger drain on the economy or are the UK govt going to simply fill these jobs with labour from other countries with no benefits therefore supporting and subsidising the UK benefit scroungers and allow them to continue living on benefits
_______________________
“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge”
0
Like
|
Tadd.
Bloomberg ought to suggest the Job Centres relocate to the side of each weathrspoons, and ban the illegal practice of eastern European job advertising in their own country and favouring their own people (which contravenes european law I Hope!)
_______________________
Best wishes, Brian
3
Like
|
Tadd,
The current arrangements appear to continue until Brexit is completed in 2019 so the suggestion of control mechanisms appears a Post Brexit scenario.
As for discriminatory practices post Brexit, much depends upon the deal accomplished but "discriminatory " is a rhetorical term that can be applied to many more scenarios, for instance has it been discriminatory in practice that the EU has been unwilling to recognise through ongoing negotiations with the UK the unequal differentials and other criteria that in reality exists across member states and which has resulted in irregular and compromising patterns of migration? Is it in practice discriminatory that the EU have not taken action under existing arrangements (infringement mechanisms in place to protect), against non adherence to the rule of law in areas of resourcing Justice systems to afford timely justice and enforcement that has led to major and continuing compromising problems for innocent citizens? Is it discriminatory that a member state can avoid their requirement to adhere to stability mechanisms again in place to protect to the benefit of some and the detriment of others? etc etc....
It's not so black and white as you suggest, Tadd.
Are you suggesting that the UK will stop benefits for its own citizens when such things as in-work benefits including housing benefits and tax credits were designed to assist those citizens back into work, in a caring timely approach to incentivise until such time as a job is acquired?
This message was last edited by ads on 13/04/2017.
This message was last edited by ads on 13/04/2017.
0
Like
|
ads
The unequal diffenreces are caised by the UK's system - it so not rocket science to adopt a similar system and ruse that other natiosn have. It si not about how much but who is entitled etc.
The agreement to give EU citizens the same rights as the citiznes in the member state they choose to reside in was sigend by the UK as well as others - they shoudl have taken note then.
You cant keep blaming the EU for the faults of the UK system. Once out of EU it is very likely the system in the UK will remain and therefore any immigrants will be entiled to the same as they have always been during membership of the EU and pre membership of the EU.
I keep saying look at the system here in Spain for migrant benefits and remember it is not just EU migrants many more non EU migrants get benefits and jobs etc.
Many immigrants arrived post the 1945 and on through the 50's, 60's and 70's all who qualified for the same benefits of the UK citizens of that time
_______________________
“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge”
0
Like
|
Scrounges in the system are a valid point.
The problem how do you realistically prevent it, successive governments have tried.
The current givernment is attempting to reform welfare payments and benefits as it has now reached proportions whereby Housing and Child benefit plus others can amount to more than the average working wage.
The problem is by attempting to reduce the burden on taxpayers, they get vilified by the liberal press and others for casting many into poverty.
Once you start giving benefits, it becomes very difficult to reduce or take them away from those who don't need them.
One of the reasons the Americans generally think welfare is a bad word.
For every benefit receiver with an excuse not to work there is a really needy person being denied benefits but means testing in costly, time consuming and not perfect.
If there was a guaranteed system, would successive minds not have come up with it.
It seems the more rules and regulations brought into p,say, the more abusers are clever enough to thwart the system.
Imfo think though there is some justifiable envy in EU CITIZENS working here on low pay but receiving housing and child benefits, some of which are sent home.
And yes Brian, gaining a fruit picker when his country loses a doctor is not what the EU was designed for.
1
Like
|
Some might suggest we are a caring nation that is ALREADY in the process of reform, and it is debatable the pace at which this should be done in terms of austerity measures, etc....A fine and sensitive balance in terms of retaining cohesion in our society, for which most UK citizens are rightly proud and wish to prioritise, but we cannot afford to ignore the realities post the financial crash ( which again affected some member states more than others in terms of their debt ratios) especially when the UK's system is under threat and at risk from factors outside of Govt control.
p.s. I dont see it as a fault to be caring and timely with reforms intended to incentivise those nationals who have become benefit dependent for whatever reason over the years, and to establish a better system that realistically makes timely preparation in the interim periods prior to people achieving a decent living wage, whilst at the same time retaining and encouraging a psyche of understanding for those caught up in this viscious cycle of events. We should make no apology for being caring and sufficiently concerned to retain a cohesive society during these years when migration became out of kilter with all the subsequent negative impacts, so to speak.
But to repeat, all of these factors have been significantly compromised by the EU policy of free movement in recent years, and their failure to realistically allow member states to adequately preplan (in the case of the UK DC was asking for 13 years not 4 or 7, but denied).....Building houses, significantly increasing the various sector budgets (education, health, prison etc) to accommodate for swift irregular migration (unintended consequences???) etc all take time, especially when the Govt were attempting to address an increasing debt ratio (ironically advocated by the EU as a stability mechanism). It's the unrealistic forward planning mechanisms and willingness to review differentials and their impacts that appear to have failed in this regard in terms of adequate flexibility on the EU's part.
All of us, both sides of the debate, need to look to the unrealistic nature of the stresses that have occurred following such irregular patterns and learn from the mistakes, but to continually deny that the EU played little part in this scenario appears as denial.
This message was last edited by ads on 13/04/2017.
This message was last edited by ads on 13/04/2017.
5
Like
|