very quiet..

One of yours actually drove his electric car down the road to get help when his dad ended up unconscious after an epileptic fit. About 4 or something.

Stupid google cant find that one, I'll have to molotov google HQ again,

So you are happy for unlimited immigration to mean that recent arrivals mean that people who have lived in the area all their lives are told that their child cannot have a place at the same school as their sibling? Despite the impracticalities of having children at two different primary schools?

That is rather the point, too many people arrived over too short a period and as they were EU citizens, no restriction could be placed on their arrival, despite it being impossible to cater for the sudden influx.

SteveW

That is not at all the case. There was never a problem with immigration in reasonable numbers. 250,000 to 300,000 a year is a real problem. The various negative terms that it has been expressed in are a symptom, not a cause.

SteveW

Discrimination on the grounds of age *is* legal where it has an effect (age limits for buying dangerous products, driving, signing contracts, sexual intercourse, certain types of work). The problem age discrimination is in not taking on experience older workers or forcing them out when they are still perfectly able to perform the work; or not providing medical treatments/surgery because they don't have many years left.

SteveW

On Tue, 18 Feb 2020 23:27:50 +0000, Steve Walker snipped-for-privacy@walker-family.me.uk> wrote: <snip>

Our LEA seemed to? If the Chinese can build a hospital in 10 days ...

How many EU born patients needed to be craned into the ambulances?

Like I said, you are conflating genuine migrant workers with those on the take. It happens in all walks of life. And why is that any different to native people not working at all but still being a burden to the NHS?

Is it illegal?

How much is it? How much would it cost to remedy? Who is allowing it to happen if it's illegal.

And what if they do send it home. That means they are less likely to bring their family over here as I'm sure you wouldn't want that.

Some people you mean, typically people *looking* for reasons to persecute 'foreigners'?

Quite, so are you are admitting it's a non issue?

They can, always, when they are often being forced into corners or camps (if they are lucky)?

See above.

But it's rarely those seeking asylum. It's often those who are reasonably well off and who can afford to pay the traffickers who want to get them and their families to safety.

Selectively I'm guessing.

And you blame them for that?

Quite.

And we don't, by a very long way.

Anywhere (in the EU).

But it's a bad place to live because it's (now) full of foreigners?

There is indeed.

True, and we are desperate to get many of those posts filled. And try asking for a raise when several companies around you have gone to the wall and another is shedding 37,000 jobs worldwide?

You would have to ask them (how they feel about being laid off).

And, it's the EU's fault it hasn't been dealt with I'm guessing?

What, you don't have pride either?

Higher wages will be consumed by a higher cost of living. No such thing as a free lunch?

Proving that it's only a function of supply and demand.

Legally you mean?

I have no issue us leaving the EU and changing the immigration rules, as long as it work. I can't see it working, so the whole thing will be a waste of time and huge cost and disruption for many.

No, I was just saying we aren't innocent in all of this.

Have you heard of the foxes and hares?

So, give us your solution and how you*know* it's going to make matter better for most?

It can help when you have not invested in all sorts of things in the past and still need time for things to settle down.

For example, we have been slowly tweaking the pension age so that we don't have to burden today's earners so much (and with life expectancy now stalling). We are trying to educate people so that they are healthier so don't put a burden on the NHS. We are trying to reduce pollution levels so we don't make people ill (and need medical care), etc etc.

Unfortunately we (the natives) are also making the problem worse. We are living longer but having fewer children to live in these houses with us (as they can't afford their own place) so unless someone downsizes, we end up with 1/2 people living in a house designed for 4.

Increasing the costs to a company by increasing the wages often means either reducing staff numbers (not so good for those outed) or increasing the cost of product. An alternative is invest in automation (high initial cost), doing even more people out of jobs, and still unlikely to be competitive with countries with lower wage levels.

In utopia it can work by moving over to areas that give higher margin (to pay higher wages) but how long would that last before other countries do the same (for less).

Given that the *world* population is increasing, do you think we can limit the population increase in the UK, without dealing with the world population issue itself?

Cheers, T i m

ITYM...the government couldn't be bothered to apply the perfectly reasonable restrictions that the EU allows.

The Chinese building was prefabricated, kept in storage since SARS.

It's also rather odd that we didn't see shops etc saying they couldn't cope with the extra numbers. Or the food and fuel etc supplies.

Cite, OOI? I thought it was just 'modeled on' the SARS one?

And if the case, how long did it to take them to build it for SARS?

Butanyroadup, if they can re-model / expand a (UK) hospital (or my old college) whilst keeping it fully operational, why not (also) a school?

How many prefab homes were built during the war?

People are having pre-fabricated homes shipped from around the world and assembled here and some of the (very basic) WW2 prefab homes are still being lived in today.

It is suggested that we will need another ~700,000 people working here to see us over the re-balancing of pension / life expectancy and then things will settle back to a stable situation (~2030).

The whole point about 'migrant labour' is that it can move ... and there is no reason that a large quantity might still move elsewhere leaving this place with empty homes, hospitals and schools.

I predict this 70 points scheme is just playing lip service to all those that thought voting Leave would get them the things they wanted and as soon as there is a hole in the supply of any particular worker (as there is right now) they will relax the rule (making it pointless).

So we reclaim our fishing waters, assuming there is still some fish left to catch.

Most of the catch landed here is processed by migrant workers and I'm pretty sure they would be classified as unskilled labour. So, if any of the existing workers leave (and I wouldn't blame them for doing so), we would *have* to replace them and from where?

Of the current unemployed, many are long term sick or retired etc and so very few (if any) replacements could be found locally.

Same with care home workers (exemption?), agriculture (exemption?), hospitality (exemption?), cleaners (exemption?) and every other need that arises where there is no way they would ever meet the current £25k/pa threshold.

So what will we have actually changed (for the better)?

How much will checking the entry visa cost us?

What if the EU set the same rules for us wanting to live in the EU? Can you see many Brits wanting to learn the language?

Cheers, T i m

Have you never been outdoors Steve?

That's not even a problem, it's a requirement! We still need another few years at that rate to have enough young workers to keep the system afloat. After that, we can see.

Yes, a symptom of poor planning and no investment by the UK governments, nothing to do with the EU.

Cheers, T i m

This was given to me by Paul (for my attackers) but I think better serves to explain how many of *them* (those who obviously are very binary and irrational in their thinking) get to where they are:

Cheers, T i m

I also understand (from that impeccable source, Twitter) that the roof leaks.

Yes and ambulance adn fire fighters break the speed limits to attend such emergencies but legally they are supposed to adhere to the speed limits.

If you mean the war in Europe then approximately zero (leaving aside the ones built for development and display purposes).

And while some prefabs were squeezed in on bomb sites most were on greenfield estates. If you assume schools all have space for temporary accommodation to be installed and for the essential services (including loos) to be expanded then you don't know inner cities.

Have you told ONS they've got their projections wrong? Eg from their latest (Oct 2019):

"projected net international migration declines at first and then is constant from the year ending mid 2025".

"The UK population is projected to pass 70 million by mid 2031, reaching

"Over the full 25-year period between mid 2018 and mid 2043, the proportion of growth resulting from the balance of births and deaths is projected to be lower, at 16%, and that from net international migration is projected to be higher, at 84%."

Section 87 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 which provides, broadly speaking, exemption from speed limits for vehicles used for fire and rescue, ambulance and police purposes where they'd hinder their functions.

Why do the French want the right to fish there otherwise?

Those sitting on they backside at home claiming benefits.

Nonsense.

More like to comfortable watching daytime TV.

There are many shops and supply chains, there are no immediate extra supplies of houses, school buildings, teachers, etc.

SteveW

Or readily available space to put them.