Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
howard
you correct leaderless david
and all other major parties wont touch it
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Keith #36
They are trying to get to grips with it but it is like a supertanker, slow to turn around. That said the LD part of the coalition is a hindrance to this. I have said before the government must try harder on immigration.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
I know I've said this many times, but my understanding is that while we are members of the EU, we cannot restrict the numbers of people from other EU countries coming here - or can we ?
Roger
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
No, Roger but there are far too many from other countries. There were some more accurate figures produced after the election that threw more light on the subject that was done during the election. As for the EU, you know what I think of that!
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
barryw;
in general terms the two points you make neither is being dealt with leaderless dave.
and although i applaud the work done by frank fields, and in later years I.D.S. on the benefits system, they fell well short of what was required.
i think enough people have highlighted the problems
lets hope and think positive that there will be a massive sea change on this issue but i suspect it wont happen as its not a vote winner
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
Thank you Barry - I thought as much.
So if we can't stop all and sundry coming here, what, if anything can we do about how much we pay out in benefits etc. or is that a taboo subject ?
Does anyone actually know what legal EU immigrants are offered ? What are our conditions of entry ? Do we have any ? Can we have any ?
Can we set rules: -
speaking English
having a job when they come here
somewhere to live
not being a financial burden
Roger
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
ROGER;
Your party(and im not digging here just making a point) in the general election gave the impression they would stop all this immigration, and now in power they have gone back on there word and said, as you do that not much they can do as the uk is part of the E.U they were aware of that before the election.
also not nuch being done aboutothers coming in outside the eu either.
it was another political football,m that sadly we were the losers on.
and -there is little being done to change itr, whether that be withdrawing from the E.U. or sorting out the eu from within.
so it will go on.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
Maybe it wasn't so much going back on their word, but realising once in power, that we simply can't stop them - what we should be able to do, is determine what kind of financial support they will get and set our own criteria for entry here.
Roger
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
ROGER;
They would have been fully aware of the situation, these are experienced politicians from your party.
sadly it was never going to happen and people led into it, to find they had been fibbed to.
the result of this is that even more people wont go to the ballot box.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Keith - you are again misinterpreting what was said in the election.
They did not say or suggest "they would stop all this immigration" they said they would reduce non-EU immigration from hundreds of thousands as it was under Labour to tens of thousands. Nothing was said over EU immigration though in the fog of a election claims and counter claims there was a great deal of misinformation put around. This was cleared up with figures after the election fever was out of the way. Cable and the LDs are trying to water down the attempt to bring non-EU immigration under control.
EU immigration is another matter but it is a two way affair, plenty of Brits go to France, Spain and other places both to work and to retire. That said the influx from Eastern Europe got out of hand because Labour did not take advantage of a one-off opportunity when the Eastern Europe countries joined to limit their immigration here for a transitional period, other EU countries did and benefited at our expense.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
BARRYW;
I fully understand what was the impression your party attempted to create
and by the way the numbers have increased and not reduced
so not sorted that out either.
but on the issue itself, we have a number of our own uk residents we need to look at also
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
Daily Mail advertised ten fictitious job vacancies in towns and cities across Britain. Advertisements were placed online, in newspapers and in shop windows. All of the jobs we offered purported to pay above the national minimum wage.
The responses provide a fascinating snapshot of Britain's 21st-century labour market.
A 25-hour-a-week cleaning job paying £10 an hour that was advertised in London attracted in excess of 225 applications. Of these, just 17 were from British workers.
The remainder were drawn from individuals living in this country but who originated in one of 41 countries across the globe. Romanians and Poles were heavily represented. But so, too, were workers from further afield — from Nepal, Brazil and China.
The kitchen job in Manchester, meanwhile, attracted 46 applications of which almost two-thirds were from foreign-born workers. The number of Spanish applicants for this and other jobs was eye-catching: a reflection, perhaps, of the economic problems in their home country.
All of the jobs advertised attracted applications from foreign-born workers.
Among the native applicants there was little evidence of the long-term unemployed looking to take their first step back into paid employment.
Many of the British hopefuls were students looking to pay their way through courses or school-leavers embarking on their first jobs.
The foreign applicants appeared eloquent and intelligent; most stated a determination to work hard and to get on.
So Alexander there are jobs but not ones the Brits seem interested in doing. Thats why there are so many foreigners and ''East Europeans'' as you call them working in the UK.
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
Interesting Marek.
I'm sure it's not just cleaning or similar jobs the long-term unemployed Brits won't even attempt to go after, many just don't want to work as it has now (sadly) become a way of life for them.
I would have thought though that if the minimum wage was actually £10.00 per hour, there would be more people working (maybe the above posting proves otherwise); the cost to businesses would just be impossible to afford though and actually not worth that cost to many businesses.
Roger
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
MAREK;
Some interesting points within the post, and now we see the truer story
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
Marek,
Garbage in garbage out.
Temporary, low paid, part time. Are these kinds of jobs not exactly what the itinerant worker prefers?
Was the kitchen in a Tapas bar?
If you are long-term unemployed and want desperately to find work are the ones the Mail advertised attractive? What happens to the rent/rates what are the forms and the time-scale of tax credits?
How well does the benefit system deal with those who might be out of work, in work, out of work, in work. Apart from this there is also the growth in zero hour contracts and the tag-line on many job descriptions "all and any other duties demanded".
What were the Mail's results for the skilled long term decent wage jobs they advertised?
This is yet another case of ensuring the results fit with the desired editorial stance. The Mail knows where best to tickle it's readership.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Marek, I have to totally disagree with the point you are making here about the job offers in the Daily Mail post 52.
This one particular newspaper is not read by all unemployed British people, and neither is any particular other newspaper for that matter.
So how many British unemployed people did not have a chance to read the offers in question?
Not all unemployed live in the areas where the jobs were advertised.
And in particular,if 17 British people applied for the cleaning job, and if over one third of people who applied for the kitchen job are British, this surely PROVES that, for each job offered, a number of applications came from British people (not 1, but many, ie 17....over one third...etc.)
So you have actually proved to us all that unemployed British people do apply for vacant jobs.
Sorry Marek, you scored a home-goal. Thanks
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Further more, Marek, people from 27 EU countries are eligible to work in Britain, and many look out for vacant jobs in Britain, and spread the word to their little brother and sister, to their neighbours and all over the town bazar in the East, whenever they find a job going in Britain.
(Daily Mail can be read online)
And work-agencies in Poland have an eye for these offers and immediately telephone their clients - in Poland AND in "the UK"when a job is going. (I doubt many know what "UK stands for).
The outcome is, that if you count the number of unemployed people in the eastern EU, and add to these the number of employed people in the eastern EU who are earning 1,5 euros an hour and would immediately drop their job and run to Britain for a tenner an hour, you have 20-30 times as many potential applicants for each job in Britain than there are unemployed British people!
Now that's something to think over!
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
When you lose your job (redundancy or otherwise) and are desperate to find work, first you look at a similar skilled full time employment that you are trained for, avoiding part time low wage take up.
With no success and because of need, you turn to benefits to survive.
Then, when you look at alternative lower paid work, to get your self off benefits, you realize you cannot come off benefits because you would not survive.
Trapped?
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,895
Gary, that just about sums it up.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
Financially backing up business and creating employment is the only way out of this mess.
Of course, business needs to make a profit to survive and continue, that is right and how it should be.
But we are now into a period where profit and gain, at all costs, has taken over and these bosses do not care about the average Joe Blogs who not only help, as an employee but also as a member of the public that puts money into said business, by being a buyer or payer, via purchase or use.
Every day, we see companies making massive profits, every day we see same big companies avoiding paying their taxes.
Greed is the core of our problem.
Raise the minimum wage to £10.00 ph, scrap working tax credits, and pay the money saved, to the employers, to compensate them.
This will encourage employment, be an incentive for all and put money into the economy?
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
