Plus ça change....

[NotAllThere]

Leaflet apparently published by Max Mosely.



Given some of the comments here concerning immigration, not much has changed in 50+ years.

[Scruff]

Leaflet apparently published by Max Mosely.



Given some of the comments here concerning immigration, not much has changed in 50+ years.

Is this Churchill / Zeity's alter ego?

[vetran]

Those bastards they are still spreading those lies!

Unemployment by ethnic background - Commons Library briefing - UK Parliament

The UK unemployment rate (the proportion of the economically active population who are unemployed) was 4.2% in October-December 2017. The unemployment rate was 3.8% for the White ethnic group compared to 7.7% for people from a BAME (Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic) background, although the rate varied between different ethnic minority groups.

Both these figures have decreased over the past year. In October-December 2017, the unemployment rate was 4.1% for the White ethnic group and 8.0% for people from a BAME background.

Following the recession unemployment rates increased, up to 7.8% for people from a White background and 14.7% for people from a BAME background. The rate for people from a BAME background in the latest quarter (October-December 2017) was just below the post-recession high for people from a white background.

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/1...ousing-crisis/

And yet last year 150,000 homes were built in Britain, which on paper, for the third most densely populated non-microstate in Europe (and England is first), and for a country well below sub-replacement fertility, should be enough. But it’s not, it’s barely even sufficient to house the extra 246,000 people who officially arrived here from March 2016.

https://www.gov.uk/government/public...f-tuberculosis

TB is more common in people born abroad. The rate in the non UK-born population is 15 times higher than in the UK-born population, and 73% of all cases notified in 2015 (4,087) were born abroad.

The decline in the number of cases in the non UK-born population has occurred particularly among new migrants, and 60% of non UK-born TB cases now appear among those who have lived in the UK for more than 6 years.

Not a fan of their extreme solutions but the problems they identified most definitely exist and the government has not dealt with them.

[northernladyuk]

And yet last year 150,000 homes were built in Britain, which on paper, for the third most densely populated non-microstate in Europe (and England is first), and for a country well below sub-replacement fertility, should be enough. But it’s not, it’s barely even sufficient to house the extra 246,000 people who officially arrived here from March 2016.

I'm sure that you and the Spectator have fully considered the impact on the population of increased longevity, and the implications (within the context of 'sub-replacement fertility) for the need to find ways of increasing the working age population, to ensure that there is an appropriately sized workforce to support the aging population.

[NotAllThere]

Unemployment by ethnic background - Commons Library briefing - UK Parliament

So, the problem of there being higher unemployment in ethnic areas is caused by the immigrants and can only be fixed by reducing immigration. Absolutely no other possible solution.
There was nothing successive governments could have done to address the issue except reduce immigration,

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/1...ousing-crisis/

So, the housing crisis is caused by the immigrants and can only be fixed by reducing immigration. Absolutely no other possible solution. There is no way that successive governments could have actually intervened in the housing market at anytime to ensure more affordable and social housing could and would be built.

https://www.gov.uk/government/public...f-tuberculosis

The problem of TB for longer term immigrants is caused by the immigrants and can only be fixed by reducing immigration. Absolutely no other possible solution. Extra funding for the NHS, the abolition of the internal market so the management bloat of the NHS can be removed and the overall efficiency increases - no way. It's all the immigration that's done this.

I wonder why successive governments of all political persuasions have continued to allow it then - and even actively encourage it.

[vetran]

I'm sure that you and the Spectator have fully considered the impact on the population of increased longevity, and the implications (within the context of 'sub-replacement fertility) for the need to find ways of increasing the working age population, to ensure that there is an appropriately sized workforce to support the aging population.

hmm

https://www.mckinsey.com/business-fu...-they-cant-yet

Robots: Is your job at risk? - Sep. 15, 2017

We could of course make people work longer as most jobs are now much less physically demanding. Those that can afford to support themselves can as always retire early. People in physically demanding careers can be retrained.

If we increase people's working lives to 70 as suggested 30 years ago we gain between 5-10 years off each existing worker (so 60-16 = 44 working years so 10 years more is 1/5th more work from one person) without increased costs or congestion / population we may actually see reductions in cost as working longer tends to improve wellness.

http://www.who.int/ageing/publicatio...bal_health.pdf

The world is on the brink of a demographic
milestone. Since the beginning of recorded
history, young children have outnumbered the number of people aged 65 or older will
outnumber children under age 5. Dr

yes its a worldwide phenomena so immigration is only a sticking plaster!

Even the EU have noticed

https://www.ceps.eu/system/files/WD4...%20%281%29.pdf

We conclude by looking at the changes to the length of working lives that will be needed to
keep economic dependency rates constant at current levels towards 2050. As an analogue to
the prospective measures to quantify the challenges of ageing societies, we envisage the
increase in working lives to take place between the ages of 60 to 75.

https://www.cipd.co.uk/news-views/nu...-working-lives

or we could just import more cheap workers and fail to plan for them.

You may find that if you make life cheaper to live people will have more children, most working people tend to put off children until they are financially secure enough to afford them according to research. Having a house is frequently part of that equation.

[NotAllThere]

...
or we could just import more cheap workers and fail to plan for them. ...

Even if the workers are highly skilled and there's a genuine shortage in the UK, successive governments have failed to invest in infrastructure in a sensible meaningful way. PFI has screwed up hospitals, road and school investment, making it way more expensive than ever before. The various NHS reforms have resulted in a costly internal market and a bloated management structure. There's been no meaningful intervention in the housing market, no real efforts to ensure availability of social and affordable housing.

It is the failure to plan for the immigrants, and deal with them once they're here that causes the issues - not immigration nor immigrants themselves. Just successive idiotic populist pocket-lining governments. In legal terms, immigration is the cause in fact (without it, these issues would indeed not exist), but it is not the proximate cause (it is (lack of) government planning that's done the damage).

[vetran]

So, the problem of there being higher unemployment in ethnic areas is caused by the immigrants and can only be fixed by reducing immigration. Absolutely no other possible solution.
There was nothing successive governments could have done to address the issue except reduce immigration,So, the housing crisis is caused by the immigrants and can only be fixed by reducing immigration. Absolutely no other possible solution. There is no way that successive governments could have actually intervened in the housing market at anytime to ensure more affordable and social housing could and would be built.
The problem of TB for longer term immigrants is caused by the immigrants and can only be fixed by reducing immigration. Absolutely no other possible solution. Extra funding for the NHS, the abolition of the internal market so the management bloat of the NHS can be removed and the overall efficiency increases - no way. It's all the immigration that's done this.

I wonder why successive governments of all political persuasions have continued to allow it then - and even actively encourage it.

so do I. I have my suspicions. You seem to be using the La-La-La I'm not listening reasoning.

There are plenty of solutions and a few have been tried, most failed. Uncontrolled & un-managed immigration is not one of them.

Let political parties put on their manifesto - " we will import enough people to fill a city the size Newcastle every year, however we won't build any accommodation, hospitals or roads to support them and we won't do any health or background checks on them and we won't support them to find well paid work" I suspect they won't win the election!

Most people when trying to solve a problem look at the cause then try to fix the issue by either removing the cause (if it is creating few benefits) or managing it (if we like the benefits). It seems we can't talk about the cause as it is racist but I am not seeing sufficient benefits to want to continue in this way. These are statistics produced by respected authorities, they have been happening for 15-20 years , nothing is being fixed.

We don't have any money to spend on the NHS, our Navy is down to one rowboat & there are more potholes than in a stoners jumper. Where will all this cash come from?

[vetran]

Even if the workers are highly skilled and there's a genuine shortage in the UK, successive governments have failed to invest in infrastructure in a sensible meaningful way. PFI has screwed up hospitals, road and school investment, making it way more expensive than ever before. The various NHS reforms have resulted in a costly internal market and a bloated management structure. There's been no meaningful intervention in the housing market, no real efforts to ensure availability of social and affordable housing.

It is the failure to plan for the immigrants, and deal with them once they're here that causes the issues - not immigration nor immigrants themselves. Just successive idiotic populist pocket-lining governments. In legal terms, immigration is the cause in fact (without it, these issues would indeed not exist), but it is not the proximate cause (it is (lack of) government planning that's done the damage).

So we agree a major part of this is the failure to manage immigration & plan for it?

Even Max Mosely could see the issues and successive governments have failed to tackle them.

I'm all for managed immigration, If you tell me my heart surgeon is ranked number 1 in the world that is important to me, if you tell me he is from Ethiopia that really isn't all that important.

[NotAllThere]

so do I. I have my suspicions. You seem to be using the La-La-La I'm not listening reasoning.

I put it down to venal incompetence - the greed, cowardice and stupidity of politicians.

So we agree a major part of this is the failure to manage immigration & plan for it?

Yes, but that is quite different from saying that immigration is bad and immigrants are the cause of the woes. Or even that refugees and asylum seekers are.

Immigration - cause in fact.
Government incompetence - proximate cause.

It's like "All car accidents are caused by cars. Let's ban cars". The existence of cars is the cause in fact. The proximate causes are - drunk drivers, aggressive drivers, etc.

The racism in immigration discussions is in the assumption - voiced regularly here, and seen in Max's leaflet - that immigration is the proximate cause. It really isn't.