The EU Referendum

This area for you to discuss any other topics
Paul from Barking
Posts: 380
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 9:59 pm

The EU Referendum

Post by Paul from Barking » Fri May 27, 2016 11:01 pm

Seeing as a thread (which I didn't start) elsewhere has been locked for being in the wrong place and a few people being upset with other people forming, holding and expressing an opinion....

If anyone wants to discuss opinions and share their views please feel free - I will respect any view from any body no matter how different they are from mine on the basis that mine are respected - it's called democracy.

I intend to vote to stay in the EU because I think leaving will be terribly damaging to the UK's economy and the prospects of our young people.

Many people are screaming - either publicly or privately that it's all about too many migrants bing here. I disagree.

I would welcome any number of migrants of any background here on just a few provisos.

To all and every newcomer, no matter where they come from: INTEGRATE with us to the very best of your abilities. If you learned English as a 2nd language in later teenage years or adulthood, it doesn't matter that you will make mistakes with our language - just please use it!!!

Part of living in the UK is mixing in and accepting the way it's done here. If you don't want to do that, with absolute respects, please find somewhere else in the world to go and live where you can fit in so that those newcomers who've come here can be allowed to enjoy being British thenselves and this UKIP manifestation will ebb away.

I said on the other thread that voting to leave the EU will be like taking a laxative to cure a head ache. Think about it when you go to vote

Paul from Barking
Posts: 380
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 9:59 pm

Re: The EU Referendum

Post by Paul from Barking » Sat May 28, 2016 12:44 pm

The immigration problem can be solved quite easily with just a few changes in the rules - and we don't have to leave the EU to be able to do this.

Benefits rules:

Change the allowed persons rules so that only those people who have lived in the UK for a period of 5 years would be eligible. Until a person qualifies to receive benefits in this country, then they receive NOTHING WHATSOEVER as a benefit of any kind from the government here.

This would mean: No council tax rebates, no rent rebates, no housing benefits, no free dentistry or other medical care (other than in an emergency), no subsidised prescriptions, no child benefits, no pension credits no tax benefits. In other words NOTHING by way of any benefit to a non-qualifier until qualified.

So how would a newcomer or other person qualify?

Quite simply, the clock starts running on the day the individual registers to pay council tax. As an example, today is 28 May 2016. A person arriving from Poland / Pakistan / Portugal or anywhere else in the world goes and rents a flat in Barking @ £850 a month. That person writes to LBB&D and say "My name is xxxxxxxx, I have taken up residence at xxxxxxxxxx". Such a newbie would have to pay all the council tax without any rebate. There would be no help with the rent were it to double. If they brought in or procreated whilst here any children, then until 27 May 2021 absolutely NO CHILD BENEFITS... Just the bills.

This is unfair? I can hear some say. Why? The country is great - but coming here to ponce off of it and the rest of us isn't what we want and the fact that some immigrants do reflects poorly on all of them... I - and I think most people - only want people here who can add to the country, not sponge off of it.

"Well this would stop people from being able to come here to do jobs that our own people don't want to do" says the major employers. Perhaps true... but let's work the problem: Ask yourself Would you clean the toilets? If the answer to this question is 'no', Is that it's because of the job itse;f or what the person wanting the toilet to be cleaned is prepared to pay??? Put another way, you might not want to go and clean the bogs in Parsloes Park which have festering shit up the pan and piss over the floor over a morning for £50.... But if the employer couldn't get an immigrant (subsidised by the rest of us with all manner of housing and other benefits) to do this for that price, they would have to pay more. Now you may not want the bog cleaning job @ £50, maybe not @ £100 or even @ £200.... but perhaps one of our own people would take the job if it actually paid more!!!!!! The same can be said for all of those jobs we don't do - like fruit picking, litter collecting, etc, etc. Pay a proper rate for the job and people will do it from this country - not mass migrants who are pilloried and exploited!

Now, some of you will point out a flaw in the "must have been registered on the council tax register" regarding young people.... eg: What about the 21 year old lad who's left home and is on minimum wage and has problems paying the rent.... He won't be old enough to have done his 5 years on the Councul Tax register to qualify.... Great point. So a second qualifying question goes to those who've had to answer no to the first: "Have you alternativly lived with a parent or guardian in a household in the UK where that parent or guardian was him or herself registered on the council tax register for a period of at least five years?

I will repeat for those of you who think I am a racist: I do not care where people come from or what colour / gender they are. I care about what they are like We should not be subsidising companies to emply foreigners to do jobs that they won't pay enough to our own people to do.

Paul from Barking
Posts: 380
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 9:59 pm

Re: The EU Referendum

Post by Paul from Barking » Sat May 28, 2016 2:09 pm

The thing is, properly remunerated doctors (for example) would still be able to come to the country because they would be able to pay for everything from their salaries.... Droves uf unskilled people would not be able to live here because they would be unable to pay the rent and the council tax. They (the unskilled) need our benefits system to support them coming here. Take that support away and they wouldn't come because they would soon realise that they would be unble to pay to stay. And this applies to the "economic migrants" waiting in Calais. NO BENEFITS until they have properly registered and only contriuted for a period of not less than 5 years. I'd wager a large sum that once they realised that there is no tub of gold at the end of the rainbow - or more to the point no council house, TV, and spending money and no other support, then they wouldn't come!

Paul from Barking
Posts: 380
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 9:59 pm

Re: The EU Referendum

Post by Paul from Barking » Sat May 28, 2016 3:20 pm

5 years is a very long time to give your brother's wife's sister a subsidy of £400 a month so that they can pick strawberries......... And then beyond to once they are qualified to getting your money back for subsidising this relative. Not to say it won't happen - but hundreds at most ..... not hundreds of thousands!

To be fair, I don't really know that much about TTIP other than they are bilatteral arrangements between the EU and the US to try to reduce tariffs and encourage trade. What the potential pitfalls nd or benefits would be, I don't at this pont know enough to comment either way. Perhaps I should go and read up on it (both sides of any view).

rechitski kinzhal
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 7:24 pm

Re: The EU Referendum

Post by rechitski kinzhal » Sun May 29, 2016 2:56 pm

A couple of points, Paul.
I agree this referendum is "not all about immigration". But immigration is one huge big problem.
I would be voting out even if zero EU nationals were relocating here. "TTIP" is one huge issue and I would suggest you do read up on it.
But you said you would welcome "any number of migrants here". Really? Where do you propose putting them, and is your suggestion that anyone from anywhere in the world should be allowed to freely settle. Wouldn't that be somewhere in the range of billions of people?
The latest immigration figures show the NET migration into this country as more than the population of Northampton, and well over the population of Middlesbrough for the total population increase. And yet people who say they want unlimited immigration say we should build more houses. But houses is only one very small part of the problem. Try driving from one end to the other of Northampton or Middlesbrough and you will see that apart from houses you need roads, transport links, shops, schools, hospitals, parks, community centres, places of employment, entertainment centres, water supplies, refuse disposal sites ..... the list is endless. If it is taking the country 25 years to build each of HS2, the proposed new airport or Crosslink, then how long do you think it would take to build the entire infrastructure for a large new town? And we need to build a new one every year!
It was five years ago that England became the most densely populated country in Europe, and third most densely populated in the world, behind Bangladesh and South Korea (save for some small island states).
We are often told that old peoples care, and the cost of pensions is supported by a large proportion of EU migrants. But some of those have been here nearly twenty years now and very soon they will be retiring and will rightly be expecting a pension and possibly full-time care. And the number will increase every year. And the majority will not have earned enough to save substantial amounts of money and so will expect our government to foot the bill. How?
I think you, Paul, do not now live in Barking ...... but I spent 80 minutes yesterday on a bus going from Barking to Ilford simply because of congestion. How many people are wasting several hours everyday in congested areas due to an inability of the government to improve the road and public transport system.
If we are still to encourage unlimited migration, just when will the "full up" signs be put up?

rechitski kinzhal
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 7:24 pm

Re: The EU Referendum

Post by rechitski kinzhal » Sun May 29, 2016 3:22 pm

There should be lots of general information coming out soon, so I thought I would just mention a couple of things as they have affected me directly, and a friend and an industry in general.

1. My wife (N) is from a non-EU country. We have acquaintances where the husband is a Polish citizen living here with a wife (A) from the same non-EU country as my wife. These are the costs and conditions I had to go through to get her residence, with the costs applied to our acquaintances in brackets ...
N Spousal visa £900 (A £60)
N Indefinite Leave to Remain £900 (A free of charge)
N Conditions - I had to prove I earn at least £18,000pa or my wife would have been refused entry (A - no such requirement). N had to sign a document saying she would seek no benefits (A was able to claim benefits from the first day she arrived .... and did). N had to pass a test in English language and also a Life in the UK test (A - no such requirement). Having got permanent residence N is NOT allowed free movement in other EU states, she must apply for a visa in whichever country she wishes to go .... and if she wants a day trip to France followed by a week in Spain, she would require a visa from both France and Spain. EU regulations specifically state that my wife should be given such a visa free of charge, but now every one of the EU states, except UK, now requires a personal interview and charge for the service (A gets unlimited access to all EU countries without a visa).
If my wife and I were discriminated against in such a way because of our colour, religion, sexuality or disability there would be the most almighty uproar ..... but (as I was told by the EU when I wrote to them) "it is wrong, but these are the rules. This government has no option but to discriminate against its own citizens in favour of other EU citizens.

2. I have a very good friend (M) who is a GP ..... his parents came here as immigrants from Nigeria in the sixties. M decided after University to go to medical college back in Nigeria as the college is regarded as world class and takes students from all over the world including Europe. After qualification he returned to UK and had to sit many exams and tests before he would be allowed to work here. Well that sounds reasonable to me (and him), except that if you are from another EU state having qualified at that same college, you can walk straight into a job in UK with no tests and not even the ability to speak English.

3. Our fishing industry has almost collapsed completely due to the EU. The rules of the EU say each state can tender to see who fishes in waters that were always ours. The result is tens of thousands of UK fishermen lost their jobs, whilst we import fish from Holland and Spain caught by their trawlers three miles off the English coast.

For further information please check-out www.brexitthemovie.com

Paul from Barking
Posts: 380
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 9:59 pm

Re: The EU Referendum

Post by Paul from Barking » Mon May 30, 2016 2:22 am

Rechitski,

Sounds like your wife is the sort of migrant we want.... prepared to contribute for a reasonable time first before claiming benefits....

As I've tried to explain - although a fair numbe ro fo migrants do make a net contribution to the UK, a great deal need benefits subsidies to hold down the low waged jobs they're doing. They are being exploited by unscrupulous employers and their presence here means we pay (those in work paying tax) for them to do jobs which our own people can't afford to do.

If the subsidies weren't there then a great number of the migrants (perhaps 90%+) wouldn't come as they couldn't afford to. What's the problem?

rechitski kinzhal
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 7:24 pm

Re: The EU Referendum

Post by rechitski kinzhal » Mon May 30, 2016 8:58 am

Hi Paul,
I can see no circumstances in which my wife would ever claim benefits. Many of these migrants you mention only come here on the basis that they will receive them.
You mentioned that a fair number of migrants "do make a net contribution" - yes, I hear this a lot but is it true or is it just manipulating statistics? Take a typical family of two parents and two children arriving from the EU - they immediately receive full time education (each child costs the government £9k pa), and health care (the government spends £3k pa per person). So just on those two items the government is spending £30k pa, and a family would need to be earning well over £100,000 per annum to cover them, let alone all the other services the government provide. I doubt there are more than a few thousand out of the 2.5 million newcomers who are earning that.
The "net contribution" argument just relates to paying more tax than the benefits they claim ..... but as we know, a whole host of services need to be provided for and paid for by the government (or more accurately, you and me).
As you rightly say, many of these people are working for unscrupulous employers - what exactly is the benefit to our economy of having such businesses in this country? Their staff costs are being subsidised by the taxpayer, and what tax are these businesses actually paying .... well we know the answer to that in regards to Amazon and Starbucks, and I can confidently say that applies to many, many other employers.
In my opinion there are many businesses, and by definition, many migrants, that really are a drain on this country.
And no-one ever seems to speak about the countries they come from - Romania, Bulgaria, Poland, the Baltic Republics and others - all countries that need a lot of help with their economy, yet EU rules are actively encouraging the most dynamic, educated and physically fit citizens of those countries to just leave their homeland with the result that these countries struggle even more as they have a higher proportion of less educated, unfit, aged and infirm citizens. And who is paying to prop up these countries?
In my opinion, the whole structure of the EU is unsustainable and it most definitely will fail. The question is, will it take us with it, or will we have got out before the ship finally sinks?

Dagdale
Posts: 794
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:33 pm

Re: The EU Referendum

Post by Dagdale » Mon May 30, 2016 12:08 pm

There is much I can bring up about this main issue regarding our vote on June 23rd, just be honest with ourselves, unless vast avenues of' 'remain' are walking about with rose tinted glasses, were all seeing a large fundamental change in our country right now, and quite simply its gone too far in this little island. If we do remain green belt land is already in line for vast developments (seeing it already on my own backyard) and its clearly on record that 5 to 6 'New Birmingham's ' are in the pipeline to cope with the demand. We desperately need strong leadership and border controls, we (or should I say they) should never have allowed this to mature. June 23rd is the most important day of our lives!

Paul from Barking
Posts: 380
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 9:59 pm

Re: The EU Referendum

Post by Paul from Barking » Tue May 31, 2016 12:53 am

I will repeat. I think that if we leave the EU, we will be taking a laxative to cure a headache.

I came across this on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/cmbaksa/videos ... 471203327/

And I really do think that if / when the economic migrants coming to the country were presented with absolutely no benefits whatsoever for a peariod of at least 5 years as a minimum and maybe even a few months or years more, the tsunami of people coming will stop because the people coming won't be able to afford to live here without the support benefits currently gives them.

We do needa variety of qualified individuals - this country does not need 300,000 people coming here to ponce off of our benefits systems to which they have not contributed.

rechitski kinzhal
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 7:24 pm

Re: The EU Referendum

Post by rechitski kinzhal » Tue May 31, 2016 5:09 pm

Errm, you've got me Paul. How exactly does your first paragraph tie-in with the next three? It seems you do realise we are better off out!
IMO if immigration were the only issue I would vote out. If loss of sovereignty were the only issue I would vote out. If the fact the EU is a poorly run dictatorship were the only issue I would vote out. If the fact that it discriminates against me as a person and Africa as a continent were the only issue I would vote out. But these are all (amongst others) reasons!
Have you noticed how the remain camp are always saying "yes, we know the EU is very poor in many ways but we will reform it" ...... well when faced with the threat of losing one of the main contributors they still would nit give us meaningful concessions. The EU will continue to act against our interests for as long as Gernany as leader, and the poor countries as major financial aid recipients can keep it going.

Paul from Barking
Posts: 380
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 9:59 pm

Re: The EU Referendum

Post by Paul from Barking » Wed Jun 01, 2016 11:56 pm

rechitski kinzhal wrote:Errm, you've got me Paul. How exactly does your first paragraph tie-in with the next three? It seems you do realise we are better off out!
IMO if immigration were the only issue I would vote out. If loss of sovereignty were the only issue I would vote out. If the fact the EU is a poorly run dictatorship were the only issue I would vote out. If the fact that it discriminates against me as a person and Africa as a continent were the only issue I would vote out. But these are all (amongst others) reasons!
Have you noticed how the remain camp are always saying "yes, we know the EU is very poor in many ways but we will reform it" ...... well when faced with the threat of losing one of the main contributors they still would nit give us meaningful concessions. The EU will continue to act against our interests for as long as Gernany as leader, and the poor countries as major financial aid recipients can keep it going.
If we vote out we will still have people bunking on lorries from Calais and on their arrival some muppet in a council office will give them the keys to a council flat and instruction in 15 languages on how to ponce off our welfare system.

A laxative to cure a headache

rechitski kinzhal
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 7:24 pm

Re: The EU Referendum

Post by rechitski kinzhal » Thu Jun 02, 2016 7:25 am

Absolutely agree with your comments there, Paul, but that is not an EU issue except insofar as it shows that one of the member countries (France) totally ignores EU rules and refuses to do anything about illegal migrants camped on its territory.
You really do seem to agree with all the "leave" arguments.
And I agree that should we leave the EU illegal immigration will still be an issue, but of course in that scenario we would be free to make our own rules (whether we would, of course, I have my doubts about).
You haven't come up with any good reasons for staying ....... so join us!!!!!!!!

Paul from Barking
Posts: 380
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 9:59 pm

Re: The EU Referendum

Post by Paul from Barking » Sat Jun 04, 2016 5:24 pm

rechitski kinzhal wrote:Absolutely agree with your comments there, Paul, but that is not an EU issue except insofar as it shows that one of the member countries (France) totally ignores EU rules and refuses to do anything about illegal migrants camped on its territory.
You really do seem to agree with all the "leave" arguments.
And I agree that should we leave the EU illegal immigration will still be an issue, but of course in that scenario we would be free to make our own rules (whether we would, of course, I have my doubts about).
You haven't come up with any good reasons for staying ....... so join us!!!!!!!!
25,000,000 people died in Europe in WW2. The EU has encouraged trade and thus has kept the old sparring partners doing something a little less distructive than war.

Nie weider, never again, plus jamais

rechitski kinzhal
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 7:24 pm

Re: The EU Referendum

Post by rechitski kinzhal » Sat Jun 04, 2016 6:18 pm

This is a point so often brought up by the Remain campaign. But it is baseless, isn't it?
You could say NATO has helped keep the peace but what exactly has the EU done?
It didn't help in Yugoslavia, did it? And if you read the details it is clear that the Ukraine conflict was a direct result of the EU cosying up with Ukraine and getting them to move away from their natural friends, Russia (very provocative statement, I know, but absolutely true, without doubt).
Interesting that the "peace in Europe" thing wasn't mentioned until Remain started to run out of arguments. Do you think Cameron was correct then, that WW3 is just around the corner if we leave?

Post Reply