Immigration, Asylum etc. Pt 3

In-depth debate on all topical issues
Post Reply
User avatar
Ralph
Forum Admin
Posts: 10003
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2012 1:42 pm

Re: Immigration, Asylum etc. Pt 3

Post by Ralph »

Roy Twing wrote:For those who still believe the propaganda that mass immigration is 'good' for us:

"Migrants from Eastern Europe received more in welfare than the average UK citizen — and paid less income tax, figures show"

I'm sure that the truth will show eventually that in fact, the overall migrant 'benefit' to the UK economy was a lie, - but not until,as usual, it's too late.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5776790/e ... in-a-year/


Well I suppose it’s half true, which is better than usual for the Sun.


User avatar
Roy Twing
Registered user
Posts: 5831
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 4:20 pm
Location: 51 23 46 N 0 11 56 W

Re: Immigration, Asylum etc. Pt 3

Post by Roy Twing »

Ralph wrote:
Roy Twing wrote:For those who still believe the propaganda that mass immigration is 'good' for us:

"Migrants from Eastern Europe received more in welfare than the average UK citizen — and paid less income tax, figures show"

I'm sure that the truth will show eventually that in fact, the overall migrant 'benefit' to the UK economy was a lie, - but not until,as usual, it's too late.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5776790/e ... in-a-year/


Well I suppose it’s half true, which is better than usual for the Sun.



"Migrants from Eastern Europe received more in welfare than the average UK citizen — and paid less income tax, figures show" :roll:
Anyone (such as Tick) that uses 'gammon' as a racial pejorative is as much a racist as those who use the word nigger and similar pejoratively.
E & OE

User avatar
Ralph
Forum Admin
Posts: 10003
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2012 1:42 pm

Re: Immigration, Asylum etc. Pt 3

Post by Ralph »

Roy Twing wrote:
Ralph wrote:
Roy Twing wrote:For those who still believe the propaganda that mass immigration is 'good' for us:

"Migrants from Eastern Europe received more in welfare than the average UK citizen — and paid less income tax, figures show"

I'm sure that the truth will show eventually that in fact, the overall migrant 'benefit' to the UK economy was a lie, - but not until,as usual, it's too late.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5776790/e ... in-a-year/


Well I suppose it’s half true, which is better than usual for the Sun.



"Migrants from Eastern Europe received more in welfare than the average UK citizen — and paid less income tax, figures show" :roll:


Net tax contribution £13.6 billion. The Sun new that was a relevant fact. That’s why they deliberately omitted it.

User avatar
Roy Twing
Registered user
Posts: 5831
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 4:20 pm
Location: 51 23 46 N 0 11 56 W

Re: Immigration, Asylum etc. Pt 3

Post by Roy Twing »

Ralph wrote:
Roy Twing wrote:
Ralph wrote:
Roy Twing wrote:For those who still believe the propaganda that mass immigration is 'good' for us:

"Migrants from Eastern Europe received more in welfare than the average UK citizen — and paid less income tax, figures show"

I'm sure that the truth will show eventually that in fact, the overall migrant 'benefit' to the UK economy was a lie, - but not until,as usual, it's too late.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5776790/e ... in-a-year/


Well I suppose it’s half true, which is better than usual for the Sun.



"Migrants from Eastern Europe received more in welfare than the average UK citizen — and paid less income tax, figures show" :roll:


Net tax contribution £13.6 billion. The Sun new that was a relevant fact. That’s why they deliberately omitted it.


Surely it doesn't matter HOW much one group or another pays, - what matters is whether one group or another pays more or less than another?
Unless I've misunderstood, - this report appears to confirm what I've been trying to clarify for some time - that migrants may well make a net contribution, but it seems to be less than the incumbent population, laving other economic considerations aside, - this would bely the racist myth that the left spout, regarding 'lazy brits'. Wouldn't you agree?
Anyone (such as Tick) that uses 'gammon' as a racial pejorative is as much a racist as those who use the word nigger and similar pejoratively.
E & OE

User avatar
Ralph
Forum Admin
Posts: 10003
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2012 1:42 pm

Re: Immigration, Asylum etc. Pt 3

Post by Ralph »

Roy Twing wrote:
Ralph wrote:
Roy Twing wrote:
Ralph wrote:
Roy Twing wrote:For those who still believe the propaganda that mass immigration is 'good' for us:

"Migrants from Eastern Europe received more in welfare than the average UK citizen — and paid less income tax, figures show"

I'm sure that the truth will show eventually that in fact, the overall migrant 'benefit' to the UK economy was a lie, - but not until,as usual, it's too late.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5776790/e ... in-a-year/


Well I suppose it’s half true, which is better than usual for the Sun.



"Migrants from Eastern Europe received more in welfare than the average UK citizen — and paid less income tax, figures show" :roll:


Net tax contribution £13.6 billion. The Sun new that was a relevant fact. That’s why they deliberately omitted it.


Surely it doesn't matter HOW much one group or another pays,- what matters is whether one group or another pays more or less than another?
Unless I've misunderstood, - this report appears to confirm what I've been trying to clarify for some time - that migrants may well make a net contribution, but it seems to be less than the incumbent population, laving other economic considerations aside, - this would bely the racist myth that the left spout, regarding 'lazy brits'. Wouldn't you agree?


It does matter of you’re trying to pretend immigrants are a drain & in reality they’re net contributors. I agree ‘lazy brits’ is racist/xenophobic nonsense. Ironically the sort of racist/xenophobic nonsense the owner of the Sun indulges in.


http://www.theweek.co.uk/people-news/ph ... t-st-barts

Why promote the propaganda of a multi billionaire, Austrailian/American newspaper baron who clearly loathes ‘brits’?

User avatar
Roy Twing
Registered user
Posts: 5831
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 4:20 pm
Location: 51 23 46 N 0 11 56 W

Re: Immigration, Asylum etc. Pt 3

Post by Roy Twing »

Ralph wrote:
Roy Twing wrote:
Ralph wrote:
Roy Twing wrote:
Ralph wrote:
Roy Twing wrote:For those who still believe the propaganda that mass immigration is 'good' for us:

"Migrants from Eastern Europe received more in welfare than the average UK citizen — and paid less income tax, figures show"

I'm sure that the truth will show eventually that in fact, the overall migrant 'benefit' to the UK economy was a lie, - but not until,as usual, it's too late.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5776790/e ... in-a-year/


Well I suppose it’s half true, which is better than usual for the Sun.



"Migrants from Eastern Europe received more in welfare than the average UK citizen — and paid less income tax, figures show" :roll:


Net tax contribution £13.6 billion. The Sun new that was a relevant fact. That’s why they deliberately omitted it.


Surely it doesn't matter HOW much one group or another pays,- what matters is whether one group or another pays more or less than another?
Unless I've misunderstood, - this report appears to confirm what I've been trying to clarify for some time - that migrants may well make a net contribution, but it seems to be less than the incumbent population, laving other economic considerations aside, - this would bely the racist myth that the left spout, regarding 'lazy brits'. Wouldn't you agree?


It does matter of you’re trying to pretend immigrants are a drain & in reality they’re net contributors. I agree ‘lazy brits’ is racist/xenophobic nonsense. Ironically the sort of racist/xenophobic nonsense the owner of the Sun indulges in.


http://www.theweek.co.uk/people-news/ph ... t-st-barts

Why promote the propaganda of a multi billionaire, Austrailian/American newspaper baron who clearly loathes ‘brits’?


Well personally, I think it’s extremely important/relevant.
I assume the exchequer needs to make a ‘profit’ from the taxpayer in order to cover the costs that the nation incurs. These costs will rise as the population increases, - if the group which is the main reason for those increasing costs does not contribute as much as the rest of the taxpayers, then they are, in effect, a drain.
I’m more than happy to accept if my take on this is wrong by the way.

By the way - the Sun is on a par with the guardian on my list of preferred 'news' sources - in this case though, that link appeared on a newsfeed, and so I used it for expediency.
Anyone (such as Tick) that uses 'gammon' as a racial pejorative is as much a racist as those who use the word nigger and similar pejoratively.
E & OE

User avatar
Ralph
Forum Admin
Posts: 10003
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2012 1:42 pm

Re: Immigration, Asylum etc. Pt 3

Post by Ralph »

Roy Twing wrote:
Ralph wrote:
Roy Twing wrote:
Ralph wrote:
Roy Twing wrote:
Ralph wrote:
Roy Twing wrote:For those who still believe the propaganda that mass immigration is 'good' for us:

"Migrants from Eastern Europe received more in welfare than the average UK citizen — and paid less income tax, figures show"

I'm sure that the truth will show eventually that in fact, the overall migrant 'benefit' to the UK economy was a lie, - but not until,as usual, it's too late.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5776790/e ... in-a-year/


Well I suppose it’s half true, which is better than usual for the Sun.



"Migrants from Eastern Europe received more in welfare than the average UK citizen — and paid less income tax, figures show" :roll:


Net tax contribution £13.6 billion. The Sun new that was a relevant fact. That’s why they deliberately omitted it.


Surely it doesn't matter HOW much one group or another pays,- what matters is whether one group or another pays more or less than another?
Unless I've misunderstood, - this report appears to confirm what I've been trying to clarify for some time - that migrants may well make a net contribution, but it seems to be less than the incumbent population, laving other economic considerations aside, - this would bely the racist myth that the left spout, regarding 'lazy brits'. Wouldn't you agree?


It does matter of you’re trying to pretend immigrants are a drain & in reality they’re net contributors. I agree ‘lazy brits’ is racist/xenophobic nonsense. Ironically the sort of racist/xenophobic nonsense the owner of the Sun indulges in.


http://www.theweek.co.uk/people-news/ph ... t-st-barts

Why promote the propaganda of a multi billionaire, Austrailian/American newspaper baron who clearly loathes ‘brits’?


Well personally, I think it’s extremely important/relevant.
I assume the exchequer needs to make a ‘profit’ from the taxpayer in order to cover the costs that the nation incurs. These costs will rise as the population increases, - if the group which is the main reason for those increasing costs does not contribute as much as the rest of the taxpayers, then they are, in effect, a drain.
I’m more than happy to accept if my take on this is wrong by the way.

By the way - the Sun is on a par with the guardian on my list of preferred 'news' sources - in this case though, that link appeared on a newsfeed, and so I used it for expediency.


The Guardian, whether you agree or disagree with its politics isn’t owned by a foreign multi billionaire who has inherited a fierce dislike of the British from his father.

When it comes to immigration you’re resisting facts. EU immigrants are not “in effect, a drain” they are net contributors. There’s no way to dance around that simple fact. The “profit” you talk about is £13.6 billion.

User avatar
Roy Twing
Registered user
Posts: 5831
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 4:20 pm
Location: 51 23 46 N 0 11 56 W

Re: Immigration, Asylum etc. Pt 3

Post by Roy Twing »

Ralph wrote:
Roy Twing wrote:
Ralph wrote:
Roy Twing wrote:
Ralph wrote:
Roy Twing wrote:
Ralph wrote:
Roy Twing wrote:For those who still believe the propaganda that mass immigration is 'good' for us:

"Migrants from Eastern Europe received more in welfare than the average UK citizen — and paid less income tax, figures show"

I'm sure that the truth will show eventually that in fact, the overall migrant 'benefit' to the UK economy was a lie, - but not until,as usual, it's too late.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5776790/e ... in-a-year/


Well I suppose it’s half true, which is better than usual for the Sun.



"Migrants from Eastern Europe received more in welfare than the average UK citizen — and paid less income tax, figures show" :roll:


Net tax contribution £13.6 billion. The Sun new that was a relevant fact. That’s why they deliberately omitted it.


Surely it doesn't matter HOW much one group or another pays,- what matters is whether one group or another pays more or less than another?
Unless I've misunderstood, - this report appears to confirm what I've been trying to clarify for some time - that migrants may well make a net contribution, but it seems to be less than the incumbent population, laving other economic considerations aside, - this would bely the racist myth that the left spout, regarding 'lazy brits'. Wouldn't you agree?


It does matter of you’re trying to pretend immigrants are a drain & in reality they’re net contributors. I agree ‘lazy brits’ is racist/xenophobic nonsense. Ironically the sort of racist/xenophobic nonsense the owner of the Sun indulges in.


http://www.theweek.co.uk/people-news/ph ... t-st-barts

Why promote the propaganda of a multi billionaire, Austrailian/American newspaper baron who clearly loathes ‘brits’?


Well personally, I think it’s extremely important/relevant.
I assume the exchequer needs to make a ‘profit’ from the taxpayer in order to cover the costs that the nation incurs. These costs will rise as the population increases, - if the group which is the main reason for those increasing costs does not contribute as much as the rest of the taxpayers, then they are, in effect, a drain.
I’m more than happy to accept if my take on this is wrong by the way.

By the way - the Sun is on a par with the guardian on my list of preferred 'news' sources - in this case though, that link appeared on a newsfeed, and so I used it for expediency.


The Guardian, whether you agree or disagree with its politics isn’t owned by a foreign multi billionaire who has inherited a fierce dislike of the British from his father.

When it comes to immigration you’re resisting facts. EU immigrants are not “in effect, a drain” they are net contributors. There’s no way to dance around that simple fact. The “profit” you talk about is £13.6 billion.


The 'profit' is the amount of exchequer expenditure (minus borrowing) - £13.2billion is around 0.2% of total expenditure.

As to the 'merits' of the guardian vs the sun - who cares. The BBC is the only media that we all have a say in.
Anyone (such as Tick) that uses 'gammon' as a racial pejorative is as much a racist as those who use the word nigger and similar pejoratively.
E & OE

User avatar
Ralph
Forum Admin
Posts: 10003
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2012 1:42 pm

Re: Immigration, Asylum etc. Pt 3

Post by Ralph »

Roy Twing wrote:
Ralph wrote:
Roy Twing wrote:
Ralph wrote:
Roy Twing wrote:
Ralph wrote:
Roy Twing wrote:
Ralph wrote:
Roy Twing wrote:For those who still believe the propaganda that mass immigration is 'good' for us:

"Migrants from Eastern Europe received more in welfare than the average UK citizen — and paid less income tax, figures show"

I'm sure that the truth will show eventually that in fact, the overall migrant 'benefit' to the UK economy was a lie, - but not until,as usual, it's too late.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5776790/e ... in-a-year/


Well I suppose it’s half true, which is better than usual for the Sun.



"Migrants from Eastern Europe received more in welfare than the average UK citizen — and paid less income tax, figures show" :roll:


Net tax contribution £13.6 billion. The Sun new that was a relevant fact. That’s why they deliberately omitted it.


Surely it doesn't matter HOW much one group or another pays,- what matters is whether one group or another pays more or less than another?
Unless I've misunderstood, - this report appears to confirm what I've been trying to clarify for some time - that migrants may well make a net contribution, but it seems to be less than the incumbent population, laving other economic considerations aside, - this would bely the racist myth that the left spout, regarding 'lazy brits'. Wouldn't you agree?


It does matter of you’re trying to pretend immigrants are a drain & in reality they’re net contributors. I agree ‘lazy brits’ is racist/xenophobic nonsense. Ironically the sort of racist/xenophobic nonsense the owner of the Sun indulges in.


http://www.theweek.co.uk/people-news/ph ... t-st-barts

Why promote the propaganda of a multi billionaire, Austrailian/American newspaper baron who clearly loathes ‘brits’?


Well personally, I think it’s extremely important/relevant.
I assume the exchequer needs to make a ‘profit’ from the taxpayer in order to cover the costs that the nation incurs. These costs will rise as the population increases, - if the group which is the main reason for those increasing costs does not contribute as much as the rest of the taxpayers, then they are, in effect, a drain.
I’m more than happy to accept if my take on this is wrong by the way.

By the way - the Sun is on a par with the guardian on my list of preferred 'news' sources - in this case though, that link appeared on a newsfeed, and so I used it for expediency.


The Guardian, whether you agree or disagree with its politics isn’t owned by a foreign multi billionaire who has inherited a fierce dislike of the British from his father.

When it comes to immigration you’re resisting facts. EU immigrants are not “in effect, a drain” they are net contributors. There’s no way to dance around that simple fact. The “profit” you talk about is £13.6 billion.


The 'profit' is the amount of exchequer expenditure (minus borrowing) - £13.2billion is around 0.2% of total expenditure.


I’m not sure what that means. If EU immigrants disappeared overnight, judged purely on what they pay in tax Vs what they take out, the country would be £13.6 billion worse off.

User avatar
Zambo
Registered user
Posts: 25632
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 8:18 am
Location: VAR office

Re: Immigration, Asylum etc. Pt 3

Post by Zambo »

Who wants immigrants to disappear overnight?

Any balanced thinking person, surely realises the benefits of immigration, but just wants it controlled to ensure that our services are not over-stretched even further than they are. It's also stupid to keep letting anyone in, without knowing their value to this country. They also need to be screened for previous criminal activity.
When your heart is blue, there is nothing you can do. Keep Right On

User avatar
Roy Twing
Registered user
Posts: 5831
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 4:20 pm
Location: 51 23 46 N 0 11 56 W

Re: Immigration, Asylum etc. Pt 3

Post by Roy Twing »

Ralph wrote:
Roy Twing wrote:
Ralph wrote:
Roy Twing wrote:
Ralph wrote:
Roy Twing wrote:
Ralph wrote:
Roy Twing wrote:
Ralph wrote:
Roy Twing wrote:For those who still believe the propaganda that mass immigration is 'good' for us:

"Migrants from Eastern Europe received more in welfare than the average UK citizen — and paid less income tax, figures show"

I'm sure that the truth will show eventually that in fact, the overall migrant 'benefit' to the UK economy was a lie, - but not until,as usual, it's too late.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5776790/e ... in-a-year/


Well I suppose it’s half true, which is better than usual for the Sun.



"Migrants from Eastern Europe received more in welfare than the average UK citizen — and paid less income tax, figures show" :roll:


Net tax contribution £13.6 billion. The Sun new that was a relevant fact. That’s why they deliberately omitted it.


Surely it doesn't matter HOW much one group or another pays,- what matters is whether one group or another pays more or less than another?
Unless I've misunderstood, - this report appears to confirm what I've been trying to clarify for some time - that migrants may well make a net contribution, but it seems to be less than the incumbent population, laving other economic considerations aside, - this would bely the racist myth that the left spout, regarding 'lazy brits'. Wouldn't you agree?


It does matter of you’re trying to pretend immigrants are a drain & in reality they’re net contributors. I agree ‘lazy brits’ is racist/xenophobic nonsense. Ironically the sort of racist/xenophobic nonsense the owner of the Sun indulges in.


http://www.theweek.co.uk/people-news/ph ... t-st-barts

Why promote the propaganda of a multi billionaire, Austrailian/American newspaper baron who clearly loathes ‘brits’?


Well personally, I think it’s extremely important/relevant.
I assume the exchequer needs to make a ‘profit’ from the taxpayer in order to cover the costs that the nation incurs. These costs will rise as the population increases, - if the group which is the main reason for those increasing costs does not contribute as much as the rest of the taxpayers, then they are, in effect, a drain.
I’m more than happy to accept if my take on this is wrong by the way.

By the way - the Sun is on a par with the guardian on my list of preferred 'news' sources - in this case though, that link appeared on a newsfeed, and so I used it for expediency.


The Guardian, whether you agree or disagree with its politics isn’t owned by a foreign multi billionaire who has inherited a fierce dislike of the British from his father.

When it comes to immigration you’re resisting facts. EU immigrants are not “in effect, a drain” they are net contributors. There’s no way to dance around that simple fact. The “profit” you talk about is £13.6 billion.


The 'profit' is the amount of exchequer expenditure (minus borrowing) - £13.2billion is around 0.2% of total expenditure.


I’m not sure what that means. If EU immigrants disappeared overnight, judged purely on what they pay in tax Vs what they take out, the country would be £13.6 billion worse off.


Question is,hypothetically of course - would the saving(s) to the exchequer due to having to provide services and infrastructure to a few million fewer consumers outweigh that paltry sum.
Anyone (such as Tick) that uses 'gammon' as a racial pejorative is as much a racist as those who use the word nigger and similar pejoratively.
E & OE

User avatar
finchman
Registered user
Posts: 6192
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2010 8:58 am
Location: Beverley Hills of the North

Re: Immigration, Asylum etc. Pt 3

Post by finchman »

Zambo wrote:Who wants immigrants to disappear overnight?

Any balanced thinking person, surely realises the benefits of immigration, but just wants it controlled to ensure that our services are not over-stretched even further than they are. It's also stupid to keep letting anyone in, without knowing their value to this country. They also need to be screened for previous criminal activity.


+1
Nobody can argue with that.


But some fucker will.
Joel,Boyce,Alcaraz,Scharner,Espinoza,McCarthy,McArthur,Gomez,(Watson),McManaman,Maloney,Kone,...LEGENDS!

User avatar
Roy Twing
Registered user
Posts: 5831
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 4:20 pm
Location: 51 23 46 N 0 11 56 W

Re: Immigration, Asylum etc. Pt 3

Post by Roy Twing »

Zambo wrote:Who wants immigrants to disappear overnight?

Any balanced thinking person, surely realises the benefits of immigration, but just wants it controlled to ensure that our services are not over-stretched even further than they are. It's also stupid to keep letting anyone in, without knowing their value to this country. They also need to be screened for previous criminal activity.


The point of that report I mentioned is that although migrants may well contribute more than they take out (although I take that with a substantial pinch of salt), it appears they 'contribute' less than the rest of us.
If so, given the insane strain upon this relatively overcrowded country, the question has to be - why mass immigration?
Anyone (such as Tick) that uses 'gammon' as a racial pejorative is as much a racist as those who use the word nigger and similar pejoratively.
E & OE

User avatar
Ralph
Forum Admin
Posts: 10003
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2012 1:42 pm

Re: Immigration, Asylum etc. Pt

Post by Ralph »

Roy Twing wrote:
Zambo wrote:Who wants immigrants to disappear overnight?

Any balanced thinking person, surely realises the benefits of immigration, but just wants it controlled to ensure that our services are not over-stretched even further than they are. It's also stupid to keep letting anyone in, without knowing their value to this country. They also need to be screened for previous criminal activity.


The point of that report I mentioned is that although migrants may well contribute more than they take out (although I take that with a substantial pinch of salt), it appears they 'contribute' less than the rest of us.
If so, given the insane strain upon this relatively overcrowded country, the question has to be - why mass immigration?




If you don’t believe the statistics why link to that Sun article? They quote government statistics but deliberately omit the statistics that show EU immigrants are net contributors because they’re pushing an anti Brexit agenda on behalf of anti British xenophobe Rupert Murdoch.

BTW

Not even the Sun is claiming EU immigrants are contributing less than the rest of us. They’ve left out statistics that don’t suit & chosen their words carefully.

User avatar
Ralph
Forum Admin
Posts: 10003
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2012 1:42 pm

Re: Immigration, Asylum etc. Pt 3

Post by Ralph »

If you want to know the real reason, Rupert Murdoch, despite having a weird antipathy towards the British, has such a keen interest in Brexit.....

https://www.indy100.com/article/this-te ... yMaFTE890x

Post Reply