EU Freedom of movement, has there ever been a more idiotic idea in history?

Scroll to see replies

This is not what happens at all, economic growth is not zero sum.

All that's happened to create convergence is that we grow at our usual 2-3% while less developed economies should grow faster. There's little evidence that per capita growth slows due to increased immigration because as yet it's not at levels where it's causing unemployment (hence the additional labour force is marginally increasing potential output per capita as things stand), population growth during the last decade was only about 0.7% per year and real output pre-recession was higher (and indeed it was in 2014 and will be this year too).

Now it's true that an Australian is probably more productive than a Polish immigrant (and ideally we'd have not opened the border right now) but the claim that the UK is becoming poorer is simply not true.

I did not say wealth is zero-sum.

The person I quoted implied the standard of living between Romania and UK would be negligible by saying immigration would slowly stop. This implies Romania will have a similar standard of living (or there's nobody left in Romania to migrate here!). So either Romania 's standard of living improves to the level of a G5 country (UK), or the UK standard of living decreases to Romania's level. And its pretty obvious which one of the two is more likely!

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 81

billydisco

Here's a short and sweet Q for all you leftie, pro-immigration....... persons.

If EU immigration from countries like Romania and Slovakia is so ****ing great, why bother having immigration controls for non-EU people?

After all, if Eastern European immigration is so great, why don't we allow every Afghan to come here?

Reply 82

billydisco

Original post by P357

Your obsession with anything "romanian" is nothing short of astounding...it's gotten to the point that the instance i see your name i think "romania"...
Now i KNOW there's gotta be a back-story to this...Did you get dumped by one or something?

Relax dude...immigration figures clearly state that europeans(westerners and easterners) only make up about 20% of the overall intake.

Because its renowned for being the poorest country in the EU.....

(Congratulations for the typical idiotic "i'll make personal attacks because I can't say much else" approach)

Reply 83

billydisco

Original post by SotonianOne

it's been proven by subsequent studies that european migrants produce more in tax than they take in spending

1x French entrepreneur contributes £11bn
100,000 Eastern European immigrants consume £10bn

= £1bn surplus

Now do you see the stupidity in using a net contribution figure to proclaim all immigrants should be allowed here?

Reply 84

kbw

Original post by Rakas21

Personally i'd more or less like free movement with most countries that have a GDP per capita above $30k (a few restrictions). Unfortunately the choice right now is to vote for governments who want to let immigrants from poor countries in, or vote for a government that wants severe immigrant restrictions.

That's more or less my position too. That would bring us to a position similar to the EEC we voted on in 1975, plus the "core" Commonwealth & USA. Add in a points based system for countries outside those criteria and you're sorted.

Original post by Helloworld_95

In time we definitely should, however as of right now we lack the technology to make that kind of population density viable and so reducing immigration and giving foreign aid instead is what we can do right now.

We have plenty of space - we're currently at 262 people/km2. Bangladesh is at 1100/km2, and Macau at 21,190/km2. If the entire population of Africa (1.1 billion) came over, we would still only have a density of 4528/km2. We can easily squeeze them in Stop trying to avoid the logical conclusion of your argument. Or accept that it's flawed.

Reply 85

Helloworld_95

Original post by billydisco

So we increased the population by 2 million for no economic gain and your response is, there was no economic loss? Is this a wind-up?

Where there's no or small economic change what matters is societal change, if you think it's a wind up to give people an additional right then you should really start researching what it is to be a human person.

Original post by billydisco

Immigrants dont use the hospital?
Immigrants dont use the doctors?
Immigrants dont use our schools?
Immigrants dont use our roads/trains?
Immigrants don't live in houses?
Immigrants don't claim child benefit (cough.... Poland)?
Immigrants don't consume police resources (I know this one is bull****!)?

Pull the other one mate.

Wow, really? I guess in your dialect of English if someone does something less it means that don't do it at all. Jesus, maybe you should join one of the adult learning classes intended for the uneducated immigrants you hate so much.

Original post by billydisco

Oh so whilst:

-British schools are overflowing
-Maternity wards are overflowing
-Housing shortage
-Transport infrastructure bottleneck

I should be ****ing grateful because more immigrants means we're multilingual?

Seriously, go and live in an area like Slough for a year, next door to a 10-member Eastern European family and then come back and repeat all this *******s.

Because those totally aren't part of a wider issue... You pay your teachers and medical staff like crap, you tax the working class to the point where they can't afford to buy a house and so there's less incentive for people to build them and you have a shocking rail system because you're afraid to take advice from the countries which have done it right.

Yes, you should, for one multilingual speakers have better thinking patterns which is obviously going to be good for the economy and society, secondly it helps with the route to federalisation which is sorely needed and would reduce taxes significantly, thirdly we end up with a more culturally diverse society which if you hadn't noticed by the fact that our language is about as much of a mix as a pack of haribo or that many staple foods originate pretty much everywhere else but the UK, I'm telling you now that it's a massive part of what being British means.

Reply 86

P357

Original post by billydisco

Because its renowned for being the poorest country in the EU.....

(Congratulations for the typical idiotic "i'll make personal attacks because I can't say much else" approach)

yeah that's bulgaria.

lol,sounds like ive hit a soft spot

(The country's still not being flooded with them though.The odd roma beggar is a pest but hardly a tragedy, given that they're a minority ethnic group themselves.)

Reply 87

Bill_Gates

stupidest idea in our century brah

Reply 88

Helloworld_95

Original post by kbw

Great examples, a country which has absolutely nothing going for it and one which is the size of a pea, imports absolutely everything and its only green space is two country clubs and mountainous areas they can't build on.

Reply 89

SotonianOne

Original post by billydisco

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/european-immigrants-contribute-5bn-to-uk-economy-but-noneu-migrants-cost-118bn-9840170.html

umm the study focused particularly on the countries that joined in 2004

Reply 90

The_Mighty_Bush

We had total freedom of movement in Europe in the 19th century.

Reply 91

billydisco

Original post by Helloworld_95

Inviting people from third-world countries will now benefit our society culturally (after admitting they contributed ****-all economically)? This is hilarious.

Original post by Helloworld_95

You said they use public services less- how would you know this?

Original post by Helloworld_95

You pay your teachers and medical staff like crap, you tax the working class to the point where they can't afford to buy a house and so there's less incentive for people to build them and you have a shocking rail system because you're afraid to take advice from the countries which have done it right.

You just contradicted yourself in the same paragraph- congratulations. You moan teachers and medical staff are paid low wages and then moan about tax. What do you think pays teacher and medical staff salaries? Tax! You cant have it both ways. Oh wait, you're a leftie- money grows on trees.

Original post by Helloworld_95

Yes, you should, for one multilingual speakers have better thinking patterns which is obviously going to be good for the economy and society

Could you cease with the bull**** please?

Original post by Helloworld_95

secondly it helps with the route to federalisation which is sorely needed

The UK doesn't want to become part of a federal Europe.

Original post by Helloworld_95

thirdly we end up with a more culturally diverse society which if you hadn't noticed by the fact that our language is about as much of a mix as a pack of haribo or that many staple foods originate pretty much everywhere else but the UK, I'm telling you now that it's a massive part of what being British means.

You mean the "make British less British so we can enforce a federal Europe on it more easily" plan?

Reply 92

billydisco

Original post by The_Mighty_Bush

We had total freedom of movement in Europe in the 19th century.

Its the 21st century today though mate....

Reply 93

billydisco

Original post by SotonianOne

But my point is immigration would benefit the UK even more if we were allowed to control it......... do you really not understand this? Seriously?

Reply 94

billydisco

Original post by kbw

I'd rather have countryside and open spaces than all those people...... hows that logically stand-up for scrutiny?

Reply 95

SotonianOne

Original post by billydisco

But my point is immigration would benefit the UK even more if we were allowed to control it......... do you really not understand this? Seriously?

how about you take down the curtain of unintelligence and notice that I did not oppose immigration controls, in fact I am in favour of them, I am instead simply pointing out your complete fallacy by claiming that europeans take out more than they bring in because that's what mirror & express say?

Reply 96

billydisco

Original post by SotonianOne

I-am-not-talking-about-immigration-I-am-talking-about-Eastern-European-immigration

Let me give you a bit of advice mate- i'm not stupid. I don't talk about things I know nothing about, so dont talk to me like i'm some idiot living in Notting Hill without any clue what its like living amongst these people. I've had a greater variety of life experiences than you could possibly imagine. Mirror and Express? Don't be such a tool, I don't even read tabloid newspapers.

Eastern European immigration has destroyed my home town, turned it in to a complete ghetto. The town centre is full of young adult males, wandering around at night looking for either people to mug, or women to rape. They dont work, 4 to 10 member families living in two-bedroomed terraced houses (because it takes two families to afford the rent), leaving the door open all weekends with music blaring out, kids running riot. They roam around, looking to take anything which isn't bolted to the floor. Why? Because this is their culture- they have no idea how to behave in this country. The local police even admit the amount of problems involving Eastern Europeans completely stretches their resources.

Why the ****ing hell would I support all this? Tell me, how has the above benefited the UK? And I haven't even mentioned what has happened to the local schools, hospitals and doctors surgeries due to the number of immigrants using them. Completely OVER-burdened is putting it mildly.

What do you think its going to be like with Albania and Kosovo joining the EU? Do you think they'll stay over there, dirt poor, or wander over to the UK where unemployed people may receive up to £26,000 for doing absolutely nothing? Gee I wonder, erm- they'll come here too?

This was a couple of years ago, but one in three Romanians in London had been arrested:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9896121/Up-to-one-in-three-Romanians-arrested-figures-show.html

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 97

Helloworld_95

Original post by billydisco

Inviting people from third-world countries will now benefit our society culturally (after admitting they contributed ****-all economically)? This is hilarious.

Great argument to the contrary you have there...economics aren't everything you know and most people would say implementing a human right a no economic loss is a resounding success.

Original post by billydisco

You said they use public services less- how would you know this?

It's not exactly a secret, out of the top 4 results of a Google search for 'immigrants use of public services' 3 of those claim lower use of public services and the other says they don't know.

Original post by billydisco

Haha, some of us are socially left but fiscally right you know. I've seen how poorly the UK manages its money, that is the problem, not the amount of money it has. Ironically for you calling me a leftie my stance on healthcare and education is pro subsidisation rather than pro universal.

Original post by billydisco

Could you cease with the bull**** please?

As soon as you learn a little about international politics

Original post by billydisco

The UK doesn't want to become part of a federal Europe.

If you really believe that you need to do some research past reading your daily mail in the morning. We're taking our time getting there sure, but in the long run we are most certainly pro federalisation.

Original post by billydisco

You mean the "make British less British so we can enforce a federal Europe on it more easily" plan?

No although it makes more sense to be a European as well as just a Brit.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 98

SotonianOne

Original post by billydisco

Yet again, you have completely avoided my point.

The point stands. "Eastern Europeans" have paid more in tax clumped together than they have taken out in spending, clumped together.

There's no point arguing with you when your only evidence is anecdotal and subjective. I live in a city with what I believe is the highest Polish proportion, bar "Boston" wherever that is. Almost 10% of this city came from that nation, around 27 or 28k, far higher than elsewhere. It would be far better with immigration controls, yes, as there are a lot of bad apples and people who shouldn't be here, but to claim they have been a net loss, not only here but nationwide, is complete and utter fallacy. They have regenerated parts of this dead city and set off what I could easily call a construction boom, despite a "recession" happening, as well as offset the waste that was a net loss to this country in Southeast Asians.

Therefore, your anecdotal evidence is completely useless to me.

Chinese, Far East Asians, Western Europeans (French, Germans, Dutch), Central Europeans (Poles, Lithuanians, Estonians), Indians, some Southern Europeans (Italians, Spaniards), South Africans and Anglosphere immigrants have been nothing more than an asset to this country. Calling it anything different would be a fallacy.

As long as they pay more in tax than they take in spending, I couldn't give a **** about what conditions they create. They can go and set up camps along the M25 and build temples to their Gods in Hyde Park and I'd be satisfied.

People who do not, that is Southeast Asians (Indonesia, Malaysia, Sri Lanka), Africans, Altaic Asians (Turkey, Tajiks), Arabs, South Americans (inc. Mexico), Eastern Europeans (Romanians, Bulgarians) that have taken out more in spending than in tax are the ones that should be focused on and be case-by-case handled, rather than clumping them all together because you like their similarities in skin colour.

By the way, learn geography.

What do I think it's going to be when Kosovo and Albania join the EU? Nothing, because they're not joining.

Now look at those Romanian figures again and look at how many are Gypsies who have Romanian passports and how many are native ethnic Romanians. I mean, France was able to and deported the vast majority of them, why can't you put on glasses and do the same?

Reply 99

L i b

Original post by billydisco

Will be if we build more houses like you suggest. Countryside vs building more houses due to Eastern European immigration..... oooooo its a toughie.... not!

Who gives a genuine ****? A lot of the countryside is pointless. Large parts of "greenbelt" land that is no more than wasteground, redundant agricultural land and buildings that look terrible, bits of the country that are not remotely populated and only useful for putting a road through.

It's not all some enchanted woodland or swathes of unspoilt meadows from Sutherland to Southampton.

So they weren't allowed in due to EU Freedom of Movement laws?

Well, no. Most people can get into this country: whether they are allowed to stay or not is entirely on the shoulders of our domestic institutions and agencies.