What a silly thing to say when your graph shows the funding wasn’t cut at all and spending increases slowed down.“We’re not starving the patient, we gave him a piece of toast only yesterday!”
Canada has a higher immigration population% and higher average annual incomes than the UK, as well as a comprehensive welfare state. Norway’s the same. You were seeming to suggest this was impossible?Canada’s wages are stagnating, hasn’t recovered to pre-pandemic levels. Coincidentally, at the same point net migration has reached its highest point.
I was talking about education, not the NHS.You say this with a straight face despite the fact that the coalition never cut NHS spending.
‘Real term’ cuts aren’t cuts, you can’t run a business (or a healthcare system) like that.
Besides, this government has increased the NHS budget above ‘real terms’ and we’ll see how they get stuck into waiting lists. Also in the news this weekend that the amount of people going abroad for treatments has grown again to 500k.
What a silly thing to say when your graph shows the funding wasn’t cut at all and spending increases slowed down.
Important context here was there was a global recession too.
The country will have a wider conversation about it funds the NHS in our lifetime because its funding model isn’t sustainable.
Canada’s healthcare system is an insurance based system, ironically. We’ll skirt over that fact.I listen to a fair bit of Canadian radio to get hockey news. Its quite funny to hear them talking about the collapse of public services and then talking about having to wait a couple of hours in the ER. If only we had their 'problems'
It’s quite funny that @SBT doesn’t seem to see that the spending averages out for the period.The spending did peak under Labour when the economy was booming. People conveniently forget that the 2008 banking crises effectively collapsed the economy and our spending was not sustainable
Canada has a higher immigration population% and higher average annual incomes than the UK, as well as a comprehensive welfare state. Norway’s the same. You were seeming to suggest this was impossible?
You’re desperate to frame our country’s problems as a binary choice between mass immigration or a welfare state. Our country has urgent issues with both, but your fixation on immigrants as this one easy trick to fix our economy is a completely false choice.
He is right about one thing, you do talk about immigration like it's a silver bullet and the issue that undercuts all the others. At least that's how it comes across.Norway doesn’t have mass migration. Their peak was 28k net migration. High for that population, yes but that country has immediately rowed back on this.
As for Canada, there’s similarities with the UK and public opinion is turning sharply against immigration. What you omit is that Canada has a points based system and their emphasis has been on high skilled workers. The UK’s make up of migrants, particularly non-EEA, is low skilled.
I’ve never said fixing immigration fixes the economy. We have fundamental economic issues that need to be addressed. That is another subject matter altogether.
He is right about one thing, you do talk about immigration like it's a silver bullet and the issue that undercuts all the others. At least that's how it comes across.
Of course we are. I’m happy to admit for me it’s the cost of living and standard of public services in that order which matter the most.In my view, it’s become the most important issue facing the country atm. There’s a reason Reform is leading in the polls. It’s probably the easiest issue to fix because all it entails is introducing and enforcing controls. Restricting dependents alone is credited with reducing net migration by nearly 300k.
The reason for that is simple, there is so much underlying anger that if governments continue to fail on this, bad things will happen. We’ve already seen Tommy Robinson rehabilitated in some quarters.
Welfare and public service reform are much more difficult. These are much more difficult policy areas to ‘fix’ and this Labour government is quickly finding out it can’t just solve issues by chucking money at the problem.
With respect, you and others on here are guilty of your own mantras on policy areas. Pre-election a few posters more or less dumbed down fixing public services to ‘just spend more’ and all evils lead to ‘14 years’.
Of course we are. I’m happy to admit for me it’s the cost of living and standard of public services in that order which matter the most.
If immigration were that easy to fix, the hardliners of the last Tory governments would have cut it drastically. It went up. Why?
Of course we are. I’m happy to admit for me it’s the cost of living and standard of public services in that order which matter the most.
If immigration were that easy to fix, the hardliners of the last Tory governments would have cut it drastically. It went up. Why?
I’ve used this example before, but when the social care visa was introduced, there was an average of 9 dependents per Zimbabwean applicant.Poor quality people in senior government roles (Johnson, Bravermann etc) focussing solely on ‘illegal immigration’ taking eye off the ball intentionally or otherwise on visas* etc. No plan or strategy around the requirements and management of needs in the wider economy and public services. Also by the looks those bbc articles a home office that culturally appeared unwilling to deliver any meaningful change in this area
*the shambles of tens of thousands of dependents coming over with student visa applicants and others gaming the system sums this up. It was pathetic mismanagement.
???I’ve never said fixing immigration fixes the economy.
What’s more important to you; The welfare state or mass migration?
So people want an option that doesn't exist, how do you make that work?In polling, the public are happy for immigrants to come and work in the NHS but not happy for those workers to bring their whole families.
All the evidence points this way but those at the top can't / won't accept it. Covid and WFH is the biggest indication of that. The number of people I know that have been told to come back to the office despite every available metric showing better results when people are working from home is ridiculous.I have increasingly thought about whether we should start considering a working week much lower than FT which people can get buy on. Work-life balance is increasingly important and could help mental health in this country (and the problems caused by it) no end.
It would also increase the number of people in employment as you could effectively have 2 PT workers instead of 1 FT and many people who don't want to feel their life is literally get up, go to work, come home, go to bed, repeat could be tempted. Of course it does increase costs on employers as you have extra costs involved with training more people etc. but I think it would improve productivity and reduce absenteeism enough to not be an issue.
Of course you'll have the usual lot saying people can't afford to or that those people are just lazy and work-shy, but frankly prices have to be set at a level that is affordable enough for people to buy them.
'Help, I need a doctor! But only if his wife and children aren't in the country.'In polling, the public are happy for immigrants to come and work in the NHS but not happy for those workers to bring their whole families.
Is it collapsing now that restrictions are in place? No.So people want an option that doesn't exist, how do you make that work?
We saw when this was applied to the care sector within weeks the care system was on the verge of collapse and the changes had to be reversed.
What do you do if you need workers but the workers won't come on the terms you want to enforce?
Gendered language there BSB, v unexpected. Try the following:'Help, I need a doctor! But only if his wife and children aren't in the country.'
'Help, I need a doctor! But only if their spouse, children, parents, aunties, uncles and cousins aren't in the country.'
"Help I need a doctor"'Help, I need a doctor! But only if his wife and children aren't in the country.'
You and your textbooks again eh!Gendered language there BSB, v unexpected. Try the following:
So you don’t think he’s suggesting there’s a choice to be made between the two? In the preceding sentence he said that mass immigration and a comprehensive welfare state are “contradictory” priorities!That’s desperate even for you.
So you don’t think he’s suggesting there’s a choice to be made between the two? In the preceding sentence he said that mass immigration and a comprehensive welfare state are “contradictory” priorities!
He hasn’t asked me anything about itNo - I think he did asked you something on your NHS graph as well which you failed to respond to?
What is 'welfare'?The welfare state isn’t the economy…
The impact of mass migration has, in fact, had an impact on the welfare state. Right now, 1 in 6 people on welfare is foreign born and in relation to social housing, in major cities foreign born people are massively over represented (47% in London alone).
Then there’s the NHS and pensions. The reason that the OBR is now picking up the hidden costs of mass migration is because young migrants eventually get old and will need to use the NHS and of course, be eligible for the pension. So yeah, the more low-income migrants you let in, it has massive financial repercussions down the line. The OBR’s specific number was £150k per migrant below media wage who arrives U25.
Given that the pension is already unsustainable, one of the v justifications for mass migration, the lack of social housing and indeed NHS waiting lists… it’s fair to say that mass immigration stresses the welfare state.
You talk about funding for the NHS being the root of all evils, but one thing that’s also happened is that population has grown significantly. You almost definitely won’t admit is the NHS has to cope with serving more people and that strains things too.
The underlying assumptions around immigration probably didn’t plan for the extra investment in infrastructure and public services to keep up with importing populations the size of Coventry every year as a minimum.
What don’t help is that when this gets raised, you and others use innuendo to imply there’s something dark at the heart of it. When I laid out my conditions of entry to anyone, but specifically people who are liberal orleft wing (e.g. @Brighton Sky Blue) they actually don’t have any qualms.
The welfare state isn’t the economy…
The impact of mass migration has, in fact, had an impact on the welfare state. Right now, 1 in 6 people on welfare is foreign born and in relation to social housing, in major cities foreign born people are massively over represented (47% in London alone).
Then there’s the NHS and pensions. The reason that the OBR is now picking up the hidden costs of mass migration is because young migrants eventually get old and will need to use the NHS and of course, be eligible for the pension. So yeah, the more low-income migrants you let in, it has massive financial repercussions down the line. The OBR’s specific number was £150k per migrant below media wage who arrives U25.
Given that the pension is already unsustainable, one of the v justifications for mass migration, the lack of social housing and indeed NHS waiting lists… it’s fair to say that mass immigration stresses the welfare state.
You talk about funding for the NHS being the root of all evils, but one thing that’s also happened is that population has grown significantly. You almost definitely won’t admit is the NHS has to cope with serving more people and that strains things too.
The underlying assumptions around immigration probably didn’t plan for the extra investment in infrastructure and public services to keep up with importing populations the size of Coventry every year as a minimum.
What don’t help is that when this gets raised, you and others use innuendo to imply there’s something dark at the heart of it. When I laid out my conditions of entry to anyone, but specifically people who are liberal orleft wing (e.g. @Brighton Sky Blue) they actually don’t have any qualms.
That last part is quite correct with the caveat that I’m not convinced by applying an earnings threshold at a time when immigrants are the only ones willing to accept certain low paid or otherwise undesirable work. Very happy for both of those to be improved of course.The welfare state isn’t the economy…
The impact of mass migration has, in fact, had an impact on the welfare state. Right now, 1 in 6 people on welfare is foreign born and in relation to social housing, in major cities foreign born people are massively over represented (47% in London alone).
Then there’s the NHS and pensions. The reason that the OBR is now picking up the hidden costs of mass migration is because young migrants eventually get old and will need to use the NHS and of course, be eligible for the pension. So yeah, the more low-income migrants you let in, it has massive financial repercussions down the line. The OBR’s specific number was £150k per migrant below media wage who arrives U25.
Given that the pension is already unsustainable, one of the v justifications for mass migration, the lack of social housing and indeed NHS waiting lists… it’s fair to say that mass immigration stresses the welfare state.
You talk about funding for the NHS being the root of all evils, but one thing that’s also happened is that population has grown significantly. You almost definitely won’t admit is the NHS has to cope with serving more people and that strains things too.
The underlying assumptions around immigration probably didn’t plan for the extra investment in infrastructure and public services to keep up with importing populations the size of Coventry every year as a minimum.
What don’t help is that when this gets raised, you and others use innuendo to imply there’s something dark at the heart of it. When I laid out my conditions of entry to anyone, but specifically people who are liberal orleft wing (e.g. @Brighton Sky Blue) they actually don’t have any qualms.
It’s 10% of GDP and a quarter of all government spending!The welfare state isn’t the economy…
Where?You talk about funding for the NHS being the root of all evils
Where have you got that stat on London's social housing population?The welfare state isn’t the economy…
The impact of mass migration has, in fact, had an impact on the welfare state. Right now, 1 in 6 people on welfare is foreign born and in relation to social housing, in major cities foreign born people are massively over represented (47% in London alone).
Then there’s the NHS and pensions. The reason that the OBR is now picking up the hidden costs of mass migration is because young migrants eventually get old and will need to use the NHS and of course, be eligible for the pension. So yeah, the more low-income migrants you let in, it has massive financial repercussions down the line. The OBR’s specific number was £150k per migrant below media wage who arrives U25.
Given that the pension is already unsustainable, one of the v justifications for mass migration, the lack of social housing and indeed NHS waiting lists… it’s fair to say that mass immigration stresses the welfare state.
You talk about funding for the NHS being the root of all evils, but one thing that’s also happened is that population has grown significantly. You almost definitely won’t admit is the NHS has to cope with serving more people and that strains things too.
The underlying assumptions around immigration probably didn’t plan for the extra investment in infrastructure and public services to keep up with importing populations the size of Coventry every year as a minimum.
What don’t help is that when this gets raised, you and others use innuendo to imply there’s something dark at the heart of it. When I laid out my conditions of entry to anyone, but specifically people who are liberal orleft wing (e.g. @Brighton Sky Blue) they actually don’t have any qualms.
'Yes, 'bruv'?'Weirdly, this has not been covered in this thread, but it is pretty interesting given the upset regarding Palestine Action. There are also some videos floating around of this counter protest and lots of people in masks. One clip from a poor guy trying to offer his support really is awkward:
UKIP banned from protesting in Tower Hamlets over disorder fears
Police say any UKIP members assembling in the area, which has a high Muslim population, face arrest.www.bbc.com
Bret Clement?'Yes, 'bruv'?'
'Two jars of lager and a Guinness'
Where have you got that stat on London's social housing population?
Social Housing
Questions to the Mayor: 92% of social housing tenants were from the UK or Ireland as of December 2022. Do you agree that the Government’s new proposal of ‘British homes for British Workers’ does nothing to solve the housing crisis and instead stokes division?www.london.gov.uk
That last part is quite correct with the caveat that I’m not convinced by applying an earnings threshold at a time when immigrants are the only ones willing to accept certain low paid or otherwise undesirable work. Very happy for both of those to be improved of course.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?