British jobs for British people

[Nik_Endeavour]

Maybe I am biased but the immigrants will always get the brunt because is easy to blame them. To illustrate this, here is my case:

1. Moved here in 2001 to study Software Engineering at University. Total net profits for the UK. 3 Years x £7800 =£23400 in fees alone. Add to this a minimum of £5000 per year living costs = £15000. Left university with a BEng with First Class Honours

2. Dad got lung cancer. We PAID for chemotherapy privately at both NHS and BMI hostpitals about £4000 to £5000 per session for a course of 18 months Chemotherapy. Total Cost £48000

3. Dad passes away in the UK. Cost of repatriation £3000

4. I return. No one would employ me because I have no work permit and to get a work permit I need a job. Through friends recommendation I get 3 job offers for very reputable software development companies. Home Office doesn't issue work permits because the salary apparently undercuts british workers (Starting Pay was £24000 per year). Each application costs £495. 6 Applications in total. £2960

5. I retrain as a teacher. Fee to study this at University £9000. Plus £3000 living costs. I work for an IT company in the evenings as now I am allowed to work as a student

6. Been working as a teacher for 4 years and have created a graphic design / web development company with a friend whom is a British Citizen. IN meanwhile my sister is studying (just finished) Civil Engineering at University. Fees now are £8950 per year. Cost £26750 plus £12000 living costs. I pay the bill

7. This year I should be eligible for unlimited leave to remain in the UK (fee £995) but they want to curb immigration so they might not issue that to me and let me here only until 2013 when my work permit runs out (It was issued in 2008 as teaching was a shortage occupation)


Lets total this: £23400 + £15000 + £48000 + £3000 + £2960 + £9000 + £3000 + £26700 + £12000 + £995 = £144 055

Not eligible for benefits. Visit the GP 3 times and A & E 1 time. A cold, a shoulder problem (from gym) and 1 problem with headaches. A & E burned hand with hot oil (university shenanigans ). Total Cost being very generous at £200 per visit £800


So I a Non EU immigrant put a strain in the UK resources????

 

[jepho]

Maybe I am biased but the immigrants will always get the brunt because is easy to blame them. To illustrate this, here is my case:

1. Moved here in 2001 to study Software Engineering at University. Total net profits for the UK. 3 Years x £7800 =£23400 in fees alone. Add to this a minimum of £5000 per year living costs = £15000. Left university with a BEng with First Class Honours

2. Dad got lung cancer. We PAID for chemotherapy privately at both NHS and BMI hostpitals about £4000 to £5000 per session for a course of 18 months Chemotherapy. Total Cost £48000

3. Dad passes away in the UK. Cost of repatriation £3000

4. I return. No one would employ me because I have no work permit and to get a work permit I need a job. Through friends recommendation I get 3 job offers for very reputable software development companies. Home Office doesn't issue work permits because the salary apparently undercuts british workers (Starting Pay was £24000 per year). Each application costs £495. 6 Applications in total. £2960

5. I retrain as a teacher. Fee to study this at University £9000. Plus £3000 living costs. I work for an IT company in the evenings as now I am allowed to work as a student

6. Been working as a teacher for 4 years and have created a graphic design / web development company with a friend whom is a British Citizen. IN meanwhile my sister is studying (just finished) Civil Engineering at University. Fees now are £8950 per year. Cost £26750 plus £12000 living costs. I pay the bill

7. This year I should be eligible for unlimited leave to remain in the UK (fee £995) but they want to curb immigration so they might not issue that to me and let me here only until 2013 when my work permit runs out (It was issued in 2008 as teaching was a shortage occupation)


Lets total this: £23400 + £15000 + £48000 + £3000 + £2960 + £9000 + £3000 + £26700 + £12000 + £995 = £144 055

Not eligible for benefits. Visit the GP 3 times and A & E 1 time. A cold, a shoulder problem (from gym) and 1 problem with headaches. A & E burned hand with hot oil (university shenanigans ). Total Cost being very generous at £200 per visit £800


So I a Non EU immigrant put a strain in the UK resources????

You might consider the notion that you are an edge case. The maths you have used is rather simplistic. Your £23400 university fees were not paid to the exchequer for UK plc. They were the direct costs of providing the course at the university which accepted you as a student. (a place that a UK national could not occupy once you had filled it) The transaction was purely that of you (the buyer) making a purchase (from the vendor) and you were free to either accept or reject the deal.

The chemotherapy cost was (yet again) a matter of personal choice. I don't know too many people who could pay such a cost. The cost of pharmaceuticals and medical care may be perceived as something that is wrong but the system was hardly going to change just because you came to the UK. It may well be iniquitous (I believe it can be very unfair) but it has always been thus. People who cannot afford the services are left to languish and die. The repatriation costs are not an issue for the British Government. Airlines charge what they do and when you see repatriation costs to the UK from elsewhere, then you can see the same extortionate costs being levied.

Rules about work and costs of applications are what they are. Anyone emigrating to any new country would be well-advised to find out what rules apply to them and under which circumstances can the regulations change. Life is not necessarily going to be fair. I have many friends who have gone to live in other countries and they too, report mad rules and officialdom which makes no sense. I would say that you don't have to agree with the rules, regulations and laws of another country, to which you want to emigrate, but you do have to accept them and the social mores that you find when you get there.

The rest of your post is more of the same. Try visiting the USA and get emergency health care at a reasonable cost. I know something about healthcare and $20,000 for a process in the USA that has actual cost implications of say... $500 in the UK, does seem unfair. You have had both medical and emergency treatment in the UK by your own account. How is that unreasonable?

I find it interesting that you don't appear to appreciate what you have managed to obtain by way of training and healthcare from the UK, being a non UK or EU national. If you think my viewpoint is a little harsh, just ask yourself what a UK national would be entitled to when settling in your own country and make the comparison. Would I even be entitled to take a university place that could go to one of your countrymen?

 

[oldcro]

Immigrants come here and take our jobs. If the jobs existed why didn't we take them before any immigrant arrived?

We did not want the jobs and blame the immigrant for taking what we did not want in the first place.

Paying ourselves too much for not working is to blame, not the industrious immigrant who is prepared to work.

Governments and banks created the financial mess the western world is in and nobody else.

 

[Deleted member 37751]

Immigrants come here and take our jobs. If the jobs existed why didn't we take them before any immigrant arrived?

We did not want the jobs and blame the immigrant for taking what we did not want in the first place.

Paying ourselves too much for not working is to blame, not the industrious immigrant who is prepared to work.

Governments and banks created the financial mess the western world is in and nobody else.

It's too easy to blame the indigenous people nowadays.

Having been in the building trade for 14 year before I changed tack, I saw first hand the lengths to which the mostly Polish populace would go to to get work.
Example; they would actively try to undercut my hourly rate of £15 per hour, offering their own labour for £6-7 an hour. Whenever this did happen, which was quite often, I would usually get a phonecall about 6 week after to put their work right.
And no, this isn't blind xenophobia, this is my own personal experience of the stampede that happened as soon as Poland joined the EU.

 

[markjay]

It's too easy to blame the indigenous people nowadays.

Having been in the building trade for 14 year before I changed tack, I saw first hand the lengths to which the mostly Polish populace would go to to get work.
Example; they would actively try to undercut my hourly rate of £15 per hour, offering their own labour for £6-7 an hour. Whenever this did happen, which was quite often, I would usually get a phonecall about 6 week after to put their work right.
And no, this isn't blind xenophobia, this is my own personal experience of the stampede that happened as soon as Poland joined the EU.

sweetpea, I don't disagree, but this is simply an expected outcome of East European countries (and soon also Turkey) joining the EU. And, I have recently met quite a few Greek nationals seeking employment in the UK. I don't see how this can be avoided other than through the UK leaving the EU, and this is clearly a far bigger issue than the comments made by IDS.

My point remains - what does IDS want us to do exactly? It is a mystery to me why he made those comments. Our staying within or parting from the EU is not an issue for employers, and until something is changed with regards to the UK relationship with the EU we will always have people coming from other EU countries to seek employment here. So what does IDS want from us?

 

[Nik_Endeavour]

@jepho,

But you didn't answer my question though. Am I a net drain or source in UK resources and liquidity? I never questioned the rules and regulations and did my homework before moving here and making an investment. (Canada, the US, Germany and Australia were very attractive options). I am grateful and consider my self lucky to live here but I do not understand the animosity that some people have against legal immigrants especially the ones that bring wealth here (not just generate it here).


It seems that you counterargument was the I paid his amount of money not to UK Plc but to the university/hospitals etc. Ahem... so my £7800 per year as opposed to £1024 per home/EU student did not help.

I certainly did not occupy the space of an indigenous student because only 20% of my course was home students (and half of them dropped out or switched to easier course because it was too hard). I contributed to the funding of the course as it was not subsidised.

I did not complain that I paid that much for either education, health treatment or airline tickets but to claim that I could have gone elsewhere is a very dim view from a business point of view. All that money was spent in the UK, taxes were paid in the UK and they all helped pay for services in the UK which benefited the indigenous population. To alienate a source of net income somehow does not make sense.

 

[LTD]

Nik

I think it is fair to say that you are in the minority. You came here, paid when required and have bettered yourself in the process.

Congratulations on grabbing the opportunity.

I think the mainstay of the problem are those migrants who come here to better themselves at the expense of the benefits system. Professional refugees.

 

[Dryce]

But you didn't answer my question though. Am I a net drain or source in UK resources and liquidity? I never questioned the rules and regulations and did my homework before moving here and making an investment. (

How representative an example do you consider yourself?

Your circumstances are rather unusual.

The impression that HMG and the advocates for migration make is this alleged inward migration of wealth with people. It's not the norm but a big political lie.

 

[jepho]

@jepho,

But you didn't answer my question though. Am I a net drain or source in UK resources and liquidity? I never questioned the rules and regulations and did my homework before moving here and making an investment. (Canada, the US, Germany and Australia were very attractive options). I am grateful and consider my self lucky to live here but I do not understand the animosity that some people have against legal immigrants especially the ones that bring wealth here (not just generate it here).


It seems that you counterargument was the I paid his amount of money not to UK Plc but to the university/hospitals etc. Ahem... so my £7800 per year as opposed to £1024 per home/EU student did not help.

I certainly did not occupy the space of an indigenous student because only 20% of my course was home students (and half of them dropped out or switched to easier course because it was too hard). I contributed to the funding of the course as it was not subsidised.

I did not complain that I paid that much for either education, health treatment or airline tickets but to claim that I could have gone elsewhere is a very dim view from a business point of view. All that money was spent in the UK, taxes were paid in the UK and they all helped pay for services in the UK which benefited the indigenous population. To alienate a source of net income somehow does not make sense.

Your post came across as you being somewhat less than happy to have accepted whatever UK plc has assisted you with. There appeared to be a negative and carping intent behind your enumerated list of the items which had apparently displeased you; to the point of writing a complaint and posting it on a public forum. You must see that the price for foreign students is bound to be different from those of nationals who are intimately tied into the taxation system via their parents and themselves where they have been employed. What contribution do non-UK or EU nationals make to the general taxation pot of UK plc? (that was a rhetorical question so it does not require an answer)

The argument you make about occupying a course place that was put on by a British university appears to be entirely specious. If you are saying that course had specified that only 20% of the student intake could be native British, I suspect that you will find that is very clearly against the law and discriminatory where British nationals are concerned. It would also be wrong on ethical grounds, were the university institution funded out of taxes which had been paid by British nationals. You are in no position to know whether any British nationals who desired a place on that particular course had been turned down because all of the places were filled. (by 80% non British nationals if I am inferring correctly from your statement)

You obviously contributed to the funding of the course... but that is what the fees are being levied to achieve. The course should not be subsidised for non-nationals, especially when the indigenous nationals have to pay the full cost of their university education. If you have not noticed the uproar over university fees in the UK recently then you must have been living in a cave. If you think this is sharp practice, just examine course fees for non-US nationals who wish to undertake a university course in the USA. My wife (a non-US national and a Japanese citizen) completed a PhD in the US. It cost her 3 times the local fee. I hardly think a PhD course is lazing around and not contributing to the local society but I know enough to see that it is not the simple transaction which it appears to be on its face.

Are you a drain or resource? I cannot tell. I am happy that you are not claiming state sponsored benefits. Software engineers? I've known quite a few in my time. If you are pleading that you are a special case because you can manipulate software, I am disinclined to accept that rationale. Wealth generation? Yes, you may work for a company that brings money into the UK. If so, I applaud your contribution. I think it could just as easily be the sort of work that is done by someone who is a native British person and was trained locally too.

It is implied in your response that somehow the course you undertook was too hard (your words) for indigenous students. You may be correct. I deplore and lament the current provision of statutory education in the UK. It seems to me that it is more geared to mediocrity rather than excellence, to my jaundiced eye. As an Englishman, I feel I am entitled to say that and make my representations to my local MP. As a parent school govenor, I do what I can to stem the tide of dropping standards in our local school. To read the words of a non-UK/EU national who is complaining about what he has found here and implicitly suggesting that local people are too thick to undertake a particular course of training... appears to me to be more than a little disingenuous.

If you think that your net fiscal contribution to UK plc has covered all of the facilities that you have used (to your own benefit) while you have been resident here, then I cannot gainsay that. I would challenge the notion that you have paid for everything you enjoy because taxes just don't work like that. We all contribute a tiny fraction of the cost of what we actually enjoy and have the use of and it can take a lifetime to cover the costs of some of the facilities we enjoy.

e.g. Did the time you visited the A&E department or the GP's surgery (both facilities provided out of local taxes) get covered by your contribution? In other words, could a hospital or a GP's surgery have been built with your contribution to date? Perhaps the university you attended was built with your contribution? Obviously not; in all of the foregoing examples. The roads you use and the services with which you have availed yourself of are not provided because you paid for your university course or some chemotherapy.

Society asks no more of you than that you will be a good citizen while you reside here and contribute to the health and wealth of the host nation. As a teacher, there is every chance that you are a positive influence on the society of the host nation and for that I thank you sincerely. Your fiscal contribution is insufficient to have provided the facilities which you have enjoyed to date and it is neither rampant xenophobia nor racism which causes me to point those facts out. I have contributed my own taxes to the public purse all of my working life. (I am semi-retired now) I can see that I have had the better part of that deal, despite some vociferous disagreement with how my taxes have been spent on some occasions.

 

[Nik_Endeavour]

How representative an example do you consider yourself?

Your circumstances are rather unusual.

I must admit that the father treatment is very unusual but the payment for fees is what a great deal of international students go through. I understand that the government has to make sure that the native population gets the best deal possible which is very understandable but I really do not think the immigration problems come from legal, work permit, highly skilled immigrants. I know of 5 others on same position as myself and feel made a bit onto a scapegoat for government failings.

To illustrate a point with some other comparable countries: Germany passed guidelines when Schroeder was chancellor that every engineering graduate from German universities (where it only costs a few hundred Euros per semester) shall receive an Aufenthaltserlaubnis (permit to reside and work), graduate from Canadian universities receive extra points in their points based residence applications.

The EU has also established the so called Blue Card to make it easier for these workers to work anywhere in the EU (bar UK, Ireland).

Last time I checked the Germans are having unprecedented growth and the Canadians are sailing the economic crisis quite nicely.

Where I am from (somewhere in non EU Europe) the Canadians set up an embassy for 4 years (late 90s) and gave residence permits to about 60 000 doctors/engineers/business people and then left.


Again I might be very biased but I really do not think that young, educated, eager to succeed immigrants are detrimental to any economy. The failing of the Goverment is that allows/allowed non skilled immigrants to come here drain the system. The list of of shortage occupations doesn't have teachers/cardiologists/aeronautical engineers anymore (Gordon Brown said he listened to the people and decided to curtail the list) but has curry chefs in there.

I have no say in the benefit system and a chunk of the non working population because I do not want to alienate anyone but if I could find a job in this country so can anyone that is born here.


The problem is Mr IDS is being a bit hypocritical fuelling some xenophobia in the process especially when they awarded a contract to Siemens rather than Bombardier and even worse shouting faul play when Labour tried the same thing.

 

[Nik_Endeavour]

Jepho,

I understand your point of view and the amount of funds I wrote above were just the plus amount in the purse of UK Plc I have personally contributed to without taking much out. In the last 10 years I have been here I too have paid my taxes (road, council, NI and PAYEE whenever they applied).

I also fully understand this is England and this is your country and I still feel a guest here but I feel your disappointment is directed at the wrong type of immigrant. I was trying to point out that some come here ready to generate wealth (primary and secondary education was given somewhere else).


I in no circumstance was insinuating that the native students were thick to continue the course (I wouldn't if only for personal reasons, they are my friends to this day. They even recommended me for a position in their respective companies). I only pointed out that they switched to an easier course because there was less determination (their birthright is to live and work here and an easier course like Computer Networking and Internet Technologies gave them access to the job market just like Software Engineering). I doubt that the University discriminated against British/EU students because it would have caused national outrage.

You say that foreign students funding their education from their personal funds to have usurped the place of a native students doesn't make economical sense. If there there no foreign students and maybe 20% more native would be in the course be a viable economic activity to run it? Maybe, maybe there were not that many applicants.

 

[Dryce]

I

Again I might be very biased but I really do not think that young, educated, eager to succeed immigrants are detrimental to any economy.

I don't think in principle that people disagree with that.

But again it's part of the myth.

When the UK accepts somebody then we don't just get the person and their value - but unlike other economies we also take on the liabilities.

My wife's country doesn't let kids start school unless they have an identity card. You don't get an ID card unless you were properly registered at birth or gain citzenship. To be properly registered at birth your parenst need to be citizens.

Here in the Uk when we take in economic migrants (aka asylum seekers) we end up educating their kids and providing health care where there is no guarantee of return.

And if they take jobs then there's the question as to whether they are displacing other labour (for whom HMG may be liable for benefits and local councils liable for rebates). So that has to be balanced against the cost.

And then we have population density and resources required. That requires more investment and potentially more imports.

And it doesn't help that the population burden is crammed disproportionately into the south east.

No immigrants aren't all bad. But we're not allowed - in this purported democracy - to openly discuss that *immigration* isn't all (that) good.

 

[Robert-Black]

I see a simple answer.

Stop the export of cash.
Insist all new migrants are prohibited from receiving any form of benefit for 12 months.
Deport any migrant immediately if the break the current Laws in force. Even for dropping litter.

Might be deemed cruel but we need to get a firm plateau of wellness before we can address ill.

I actually agree but, imo i would up your 12 months to 36 a healthcare plan would be mandatory as the NHS would be off limits for 36 months also.

Deport for any offence deemed prisonable or with a suspended sentence.

A couple of things i would like to see.

1: The welfare state, which in its current state seems about as safe with its funds as a sieve is at holding water.
If people are paid money to stay home, which is given to them as well yadda yadda yadda, lots are going to take it. There are loads of jobs that need doing 24/7 i.e. if it snows, there is plenty of long term unemployed labour to get up in the wee hours and start shifting it, if they dont like it they could always take on a job an immigrant would otherwise have.

2: Our prisons are very expensive to run and way too expensive, they're run like hostels with bells on i.e. libraries, gyms, decent food etc.
Daily very long hours on chain gangs, might claw some money back, a big human wheel to generate some electricity, will keep inmates fit too, who needs gyms also as this would all be very hard toil, a normal job on release might seem more appealing.

Who am i trying to kid western governments are way too soft to even consider anything remotely like this.

 

[Deleted member 37751]

sweetpea, I don't disagree, but this is simply an expected outcome of East European countries (and soon also Turkey) joining the EU. And, I have recently met quite a few Greek nationals seeking employment in the UK. I don't see how this can be avoided other than through the UK leaving the EU, and this is clearly a far bigger issue than the comments made by IDS.

My point remains - what does IDS want us to do exactly? It is a mystery to me why he made those comments. Our staying within or parting from the EU is not an issue for employers, and until something is changed with regards to the UK relationship with the EU we will always have people coming from other EU countries to seek employment here. So what does IDS want from us?

I refer you to my first post in this thread ' this is the trick that Gordon Brown tried and within a few weeks the refineries went on strike' .

IDS is just blowing smoke up peoples backside with these statements.

This country has been sidomised that much by the EU, it has no control of whether the indigenous population comes first or not.
I would class myself as 'left-leaning' politics-wise but I would be classed as a raging 'little Englander' where the EU is concerned if you get my drift.

 

[rascalmaster]

i think you'll find (contrary to the stereotype, i know...) that a fair few migrants have come here, worked very hard, and pay a fat slice of tax... and because they have had to fight to become british citizens... (& had to swear an oath of allegiance to the queen and her corgis); are actually very proud of being british.
i think every citizen needs to learn to be proud to be british and what this country's ideals are...
and the rest will follow!

 

[Dryce]

i and because they have had to fight to become british citizens...

A fair number don't change citizenship - eg. EU

And a load of the non-EU ones maintain dual citizenship or only have PR.

And a whole load of those rich ones fall into that second group because of tax domicile options.

 

[Charles Morgan]

A kiwi friend of mine paid thousands and went through all the hoops over a 5 year period in order to become a British citizen, despite HMG seemingly changing the rules each year.

I have nothing against immigration, heavens enough British citizens have left for pastures new, I am delighted that numerous hardworking people try their hardest for their families and their new country and know numerous who are great assets to this country. A benefits system that entraps people in worklessness is not a great way to maximise the employment chances of native workers though, and when only a few countries allowed new EU entrants access to their economies, it was less beneficial than it might have been.

 

[jepho]

Jepho,

I understand your point of view and the amount of funds I wrote above were just the plus amount in the purse of UK Plc I have personally contributed to without taking much out. In the last 10 years I have been here I too have paid my taxes (road, council, NI and PAYEE whenever they applied).

Money given to the university is not exactly money that contributes to the net wealth of UK plc, per se. It is money handed over for the provision of a particular type of training. The course has to cost something to provide in the sense that the infrastructure has to be maintained and the staff have to be paid. It was not money that was available to the UK for the further development of the university concerned, nor other universities; which by all accounts are not receiving sufficient funding to permit them to exist (and grow) in any realistic sense.

Paying taxes is the minimum expectation from residents (albeit temporary or permanent) and I am pleased to learn that you have met that minimum expectation. As a UK national, I don't receive any concessions when being billed by HMG or the rest of the executive machinery and I would not be able to understand where concessions were being applied to immigrants.

I also fully understand this is England and this is your country and I still feel a guest here but I feel your disappointment is directed at the wrong type of immigrant. I was trying to point out that some come here ready to generate wealth (primary and secondary education was given somewhere else).

I have no issue with immigrants who come to the UK prepared to contribute. You appear to have come with that aim in mind and I think that is the correct attitude with which to have arrived on our shores. Looking at your particular case though, we can agree that you were not yet fully baked when you arrived. You needed more training and it is at this point that I have to question what you did. The university course which permitted you to have a place (empirically) would have had to deny that place which you occupied, to a native. Places are finite and one would hope that the country of one's birth would afford its nationals every facility, in advance of economic migrants.

At some point I can see that any country has to afford its immigrants access to all of the facilities enjoyed by the local population but I would want to examine at which point that process should take place. You have not stated where you were born and neither did you say anything about the facilities which I would enjoy in your country, were I an immigrant. For the purposes of making a comparison are you willing to offer this information?

I in no circumstance was insinuating that the native students were thick to continue the course (I wouldn't if only for personal reasons, they are my friends to this day. They even recommended me for a position in their respective companies). I only pointed out that they switched to an easier course because there was less determination (their birthright is to live and work here and an easier course like Computer Networking and Internet Technologies gave them access to the job market just like Software Engineering). I doubt that the University discriminated against British/EU students because it would have caused national outrage.

This was not clear to me from your initial response to my post. I don't agree that the nuanced version is that an easier course was the preferred option because of birthright. I would be interested to see the research that supports such a viewpoint. If it was conjecture, then it has no place in the discussion.

You say that foreign students funding their education from their personal funds to have usurped the place of a native students doesn't make economical sense. If there there no foreign students and maybe 20% more native would be in the course be a viable economic activity to run it? Maybe, maybe there were not that many applicants.

I state that because it makes no sense for a country to ignore its own people in favour of economic migrants. We have seen direct labour costs fall as a result of economic migration and that means local people have suffered a loss in real terms... in respect of salaries paid and job prospects. Why would any country deliberately alienate its native workforce. For example, many of our hospitals went to the Philippines to recruit staff.

We had no difficulty filling the posts with native staff who were trained here. It became fashionable to reduce staff costs by employing Filipino staff who were trained back home. The rules did not permit their training to be taken as equivalent to UK training and so they had to work in an officially observed category for two years. At the end of the two years they could then work according to their training and title. They were employed at the lowest pay spine and so they displaced native staff and this cannot be right.

I have no particular axe to grind against economic migrants from any country, race or creed. I happen to think it should be understood that native staff should be offered the first opportunities to have jobs, education and training which permit them to live in a settled manner in the country of their birth and to raise their families in that country.

While I am a humanist, by natural inclination, it has become less than acceptable (political correctness rears its ugly head and would stifle any talk of such things) to talk about the practicalities of economic migration in the UK, lest one becomes labelled as a nationalist or a racist... or even worse. I want my children to enjoy the use of and the access to the facilities which I have contributed to all my life... before they are ceded to any economic migrant. I don't want to see assumptions made, on my behalf, about whether my birthright makes me choose an easier pathway to the job market because I was born here.

 

[312 Sprinter]

Across the EU we have an ageing population, and we don't have the means to support that population. It is estimated that by 2050 the working age population will decline by 48 million, leaving 2 workers for every pensioner as opposed the the 4 there are today. By far the quickest and easiest way to raise the number of working people in the economy is to import working age people. For all the political posturing and the attraction of the idea that immigration is bad to a slightly xenophobic electorate I can't see that any politician will seriously limit immigration any time soon. If they do the sums won't add up.

 

[Nik_Endeavour]

Money given to the university is not exactly money that contributes to the net wealth of UK plc, per se. It is money handed over for the provision of a particular type of training. The course has to cost something to provide in the sense that the infrastructure has to be maintained and the staff have to be paid. It was not money that was available to the UK for the further development of the university concerned, nor other universities; which by all accounts are not receiving sufficient funding to permit them to exist (and grow) in any realistic sense.

Jepho really...are you saying that money paid to a university course positively contributing (if only financially) does not contribute to the net wealth of UK Plc? If that is not obvious to you than it would be difficult to have an objective discussion. As a school governor you should know that schools, like colleges and universities are given money for the courses they run and the number of students in them which translates effectively to a set amount of money per student (Current for A-Level students is about £2000) but there is a minimum amount of students otherwise the running costs become prohibitive (teachers/lecturers wages and equipment). Going to the university course I attended not only I DID NOT take a natives place because there would be no need to (more students more funds remember) but I also saved HMG having to pay extra to keep the course running (university courses do not shut shop immediately when there are no students) but this was positive amount of GBP injected in the UK economy akin to buying a UK built ahem car

You have not stated where you were born and neither did you say anything about the facilities which I would enjoy in your country, were I an immigrant. For the purposes of making a comparison are you willing to offer this information?

I am Albanian and you would enjoy all the facilities available to a citizen apart from voting. While they are not much you would be allowed to. My friends bf is British (not just Albanian with a British Citizenship, a Brit through and through) and he works at a local radio station whom she also works. The only hassle would be that you would have to register your residence with a local police station or exit the country every 3 months.

I don't agree that the nuanced version is that an easier course was the preferred option because of birthright. I would be interested to see the research that supports such a viewpoint.

It is not conjecture it personal experience. My friends switched courses because there were enough places in the industry to achieve the goal of being employed. There was no need to stay in a more difficult/boring/strenuous course. I did because I needed something niche that would not be easily available there having no competition. On a student visa (which expires in October) you have 3 months of legal residence window from completing the course of finding a job and they applying for a work permit on your behalf. I have to get a job faster and be employable with 3 months otherwise I cannot legally work. I did not have the luxury of waiting 3 months and 1 day like a native would. I would have to be better, more qualified than a native to be employed. The employers saw that thats why I got a job. I was employed NOT because I was foreign but DESPITE being foreign. A bit like why you chosen a merc instead of a rover...

They were employed at the lowest pay spine and so they displaced native staff and this cannot be right.

Fortunately I have some experience with Filipino staff as well as native staff and they were both delightful in nights I spent in hospital. You should ask yourself though why the NHS employed to from the Philippines and not natively. After all they have to pay taxes/pay rent/eat and send remittances home and are subject to minium wages dictated. It might that people would blame the NHS for being to expensive or maybe because there were not enough trained nurses in the UK (I believe there are not). While there are nursing colleges you anger should be directed at why native people do not choose to do the long shifts/crap pay/hard work/caring attitude but opt for a different job.

While I am a humanist, by natural inclination, it has become less than acceptable (political correctness rears its ugly head and would stifle any talk of such things) to talk about the practicalities of economic migration in the UK, lest one becomes labelled as a nationalist or a racist... or even worse.

Unlike a number of immigrants and maybe a bigger number of native population I believe that is your right to be politically incorrect and a nationalist (not sure about racism though) against me because as stated above this is England/Wales/Scotland/NI and I am still a guest here and will always be regardless if I become a citizen or not. It is your right to point fingers at the ills of the country but for all the educated man you seem to be it seems to haven fallen in populist trap of IDS. This drivel is as old as history itself. Blame the immigrants for being employable and with it for other ills of the society.

Here is a link to what the Economist thinks about it:

Immigration to Britain: Blaming foreigners for being employable | The Economist


Don't worry though even though education is only one of the few exports with inward capital towards the UK (which according to you does not contribute to total wealth) the new government is reducing student visas (against a very vocal lamentation from the Universities) there are others willing to cash in (USA, Canada, Australia and the UAE). I for one will not be here for long having already applied for legal immigration to the US.

Anyway this is a Mercedes Benz forum and I think we are getting on peoples nerves.