Some folk just aren't getting it
Oh they get it, they just don't give a **** and would rather attack anyone they deem as "left" while claiming to be the victims.
roli case, this is not a thread for researched and considered out points, please return to condemning the PM and joining the urgent race to the far right, where we will find and exploit that magic money tree, as promised by magic grandad. may he rest in peas.
Point of order if we're talking about research and considered points - Magic Grandand didn't subscribe to MMT framework if that's what you're getting at and was firmly in the camp of tax and spend. (Fully costed blah)
It's amazing how often these sort of points exhibit the most amount of ignorance whilst trying to attack ignorance.
Just watched the whole speech and follow up questions and thought it was all quite reasonable.
Acid test: If Starmer's exact words were coming out of Farage's mouth would you have called it reasonable? Has anyone ever said anything that Farage says is reasonable?
I'm sensing a bit of the usual Centrist-twistery here.
Onto more important matters now please Sir Kier.
Good luck with that - he's motivated (badly) by Labour's shitty polling and recent performance.
ordinary hard working people,
Natives or migrants?
Can't see why the idea that we should control immigration so as to minimise issues and maximise its benefits for the existing population is in any way controversial.
Is controlling immigration a controversial issue..... what makes you suggest that?
What is currently being discussed here is the racist language and rhetoric used by Keir Starmer. And the effect it is likely to have in the prevailing political climate.
I haven't seen much in the way of criticism of policy announcements by Starmer, have you?
Personally I think that reducing net migration is probably a sensible policy goal. But I can say all that without throwing in the "immigration has done incalculable damage to the UK" bollocks. Apparently Keir Starmer can't.
Controlling immigration is absolutley nessesary, but we have to look at it in context... we need x amount of low skill workers as well as highly skilled workers.
Starmer basically saying that you can't come to the UK to work, unless you have a sponsor or a PHD is just blimming stupid...
...as always there is a middle ground somewhere in between that can be a net benefit for both the UK tax payer and immigrants.
'Illegal' immigrants are a different matter, but there doesn't seem to be any fair and transparent process to make those surgical choices.
IMHO, the whole 'immigration issue' is home grown one that can be solved by making the process more fair and more robust.. Sucessive govermnents have not only failed to do this one simple thing, they have activley ignored it.
Surely not?
And in case we have forgotten how we felt about the Rwanda gimmick :
https://singletrackworld.com/forum/off-topic/rwanda/
Nicely summed up in the very first post :
Just when you think this Government couldn’t get any worse. I despair.
Not the same policy at all though, is it. “Echoes” says it all. Refusing to allow people to apply for asylum once here is not the same as allowing them to apply, carrying out due process, and then relocating those found not to have a case to stay.
Okay as someone who's glad we have this govt over the alternatives on offer I get heart sink from the soundbites on immigration. But it's a white paper. Let's see where it actually lands as legislation. I suspect that a bit of public wailing from the likes of me may be part of the messaging they want.
Also, labour has a bit of a (dishonourable, union/grassroots informed) history with immigration controls, thinking 1968 act and early 70s expelled Ugandan asians. European court setting that one eventually right...
We don’t want to go back to those times though, do we.
Not the same policy at all though, is it.
No of course it isn't the same policy, it is a different policy.
But the comment made by the Green Party co-leader is absolutely spot-on, wouldn't you say?
The comparison is that it is another asylum linked nonsensical gimmick. And not least because the Albanians have made it clear that they aren't interested, wtf was the point of the trip?
And what would we be saying if Starmer was a Tory prime minister?
I’d be saying the same thing if this policy was from any party, in any country. The difference between the relocations being of those who go through a fair system, and completely denying people the chance to apply for asylum is absolutely key to this. As I think you’ll find I said in the thread you linked to (or at least in one or two of the other similar threads where the mad hat unworkable unfair and likely illegal Tory policy was talked about).
Also, labour has a bit of a (dishonourable, union/grassroots informed) history with immigration controls, thinking 1968 act and early 70s expelled Ugandan asians. European court setting that one eventually right...
I don't honestly don't know what you are referring to but be that as it may are you suggesting that it's okay for Starmer to use racist-friendly rhetoric because 60 years ago the Labour Party was allegedly a bit racist?
If we are going down that whataboutry road you can find much more recent examples of racism within the Labour Party, in fact as recent as Keir Starmer's current leadership :
The difference between the relocations being of those who go through a fair system, and completely denying people the chance to apply for asylum is absolutely key to this.
Well if you want to focus solely on the difference between the two policies the obvious one is that Rwanda was for successful asylum applications whilst Starmer's Albania was for unsuccessful asylum applications.
But people are understandingly more interested in the similarities between the two policies, ie both are clearly nonsensical gimmicks designed to appeal to racists and bigots.
Nicely summed up here. :
Green Party co-leader Carla Denyer said: “Mere months after rightly denouncing the last government’s failed Rwanda scheme as a gimmick and a waste of taxpayer money, Starmer is now looking for his own knock off version.
“Instead of wasting more taxpayer money trying to look tough, it’s time Starmer got a grip of the real driving force behind smuggling gangs: the fact that for most people who might need and be eligible to seek asylum in the UK, there is simply no safe and managed way to do so.”
I don’t agree with her (Politician skipping past details for soundbites shocker) in her conflation of the two policies. I do agree with her about improving routes to claiming asylum here.
"Island of strangers" I admit does seem unnecessary but I assume he's referring to a perceived lack of integration which some people find troubling. I grew up in a diverse city where fairly distinct geographical divisions between different races and religions persist. It never really bothered me, but some people find it troubling.
I don't know the context in which he said "incalculable damage" but assume it was a dig at the Tory open doors experiment. That would've been careless wording but he was right to criticise what the Tories did.
If Farage was saying the same things I might have interpreted it differently. But Farage has made a few openly racist comments in the past while leading parties with lots of racist members so I think we all know what he's about. I'm prepared to give Starmer the benefit of the doubt and concentrate on the actual policy, which seems sensible.
Ordinary hard working people - as opposed to: wealthy people living in leafy areas who are generally sheltered from any negative effects of immigration and likely to benefit from the availability of cheap labour as well as upward pressure on rent and house prices, and at the other end of the spectrum the people who could work but choose to live off the state instead. Nationality, race or religion aren't factors in whether somebody is an ordinary hard working person in my mind.
he was right to criticise what the Tories did.
What do you mean? The Tories should have limited immigration of care workers and NHS staff?
Shouldn't have allowed net immigration to rise to an all time record of nearly 1 million people in 2023.
So now you want to blame the Tories for the global pandemic?
The reason that net migration was an all time record 906K in 2023 was because in the preceding couple of years immigration into the UK was severely restricted due to the pandemic, in 2020 net migration was 34K, the lowest figure for about 25 years, although obviously Starmer won't use that figure as he attempts to demonise immigrants.
The 2023 net migration figures represents the surge caused by people who had put immigration into the UK on hold, by 2024 the figure had significantly fallen.
As I have repeatedly said there is probably a very good case for reducing net migration but that case can be made perfectly adequately without the Prime Minister publicly claiming that those who arrived in 2023 have caused incalculable damage to the UK. FFS
That is precisely the sort of hate-fuelled rhetoric which inspires knuckle-dragging morons to attack people who look like the immigrants who have 'done incalculable damage to the UK'.
Starmer is of course fully aware of that, he isn't a complete idiot and won't have forgotten about the anti-immigration race riots of last summer, but like Nigel Farage he obviously doesn't care as long as he can get some personal political milage out of his divisive rhetoric.
The reason that net migration was an all time record 906K in 2023 was because in the preceding couple of years immigration into the UK was severely restricted due to the pandemic
I'm open to being convinced that this is true but if so would expect to see it replicated in other comparable countries. Having just searched for comparable data on France and Germany, it appears they were both well short of record levels in 2023.
I also checked Australia and Canada and they both do seem to have experienced spikes, albeit having gone through different COVID experiences.
Shouldn't have allowed net immigration to rise to an all time record of nearly 1 million people in 2023.
So which immigrants should they have stopped from coming? Be specific, with numbers please.
Having just searched for comparable data on France and Germany, it appears they were both well short of record levels in 2023.
It really isn't reasonable to compare immigration trends between different countries. There are a whole lot of different factors affecting individual countries with regards to immigration, currently Israel is experiencing negative net migration, I wonder why that might be?
But okay if you want to play that card and claim that the pandemic didn't play a significant part in the UK's net migration figures I'll play too......how about 2020 when the figure was 34K then ?
Surely we should be celebrating the fact that the Tories managed to bring net migration to its lowest levels in 25 years, lower than even under Labour?
And what about the fact that net migration was actually falling when Labour came to government in July 2024?
Of course none of this addresses the issue of Starmer's highly incendiary, divisive, and dangerous rhetoric, which blamed those immigrants (whatever the figures) of causing incalculable damage to the UK.
That is the single most important aspect of Starmer's now infamous speech, his rhetoric, not the figures which he used, and what people right across the political spectrum and the media are discussing.
Surely we should be celebrating the fact that the Tories managed to bring net migration to its lowest levels in 25 years,
...and then taking it to its highest level since....?
So the very latest opinion poll out now, taken after Sir Keir Starmer's speech accusing immigrants of causing incalculable damage to the country, gives Reform a 12 point lead over Labour
https://findoutnow.co.uk/blog/voting-intention-14th-may-2025/
It turns out that Reform voters don't appear to be deserting Nigel Farage for the new racist Starmer Labour Party.
Who could have anticipated that? I thought the whole point of the dangerous and divisive rhetoric was that it was justified because it would bolster support for Labour?
I guess Starmer just needs to crank up the dog-whistling and racist immigrant blaming a tad more. That should do it.
Again, Starmer's lack of political nous (which I thought he had) is ridiculous and frightening.
How can he not see that engaging in a dog-whistle death spiral with an insurgent populist party, with no track record to examine, is futile? Anyone who votes Reform is a lost cause. He has to shore up the support of moderates, FFS. Or we'll stay home on polling day.
Ten months. And all he has done is play into Farage's hands.
What a prat.
GB news?, The perfect stablemate for starmer’s rhetoric…….what a ****ing t watt
Ten months. And all he has done is play into Farage's hands.
What a prat.
Agreed... what the chuff is he doing? none of this recent bullshit was nessesary...
Maybe he got spooked by the headlights, like when Cameron got spooked into calling the brexit referendum by Farrage & the extreme right.
What a ****ing coward.
The plot is falling apart. I'm fully expecting Starmer to pull off a mask and Farage pop up like Mission Impossible.
Because of all the back-hole bullshit where we started and the inability to have a plan and spend some decent money on fixing things at the level it needs - Starmer has simply decided this 'pick on the weak" route to be easier.
People won't buy it as they expect Labour to substantially improve their lives. Nothing"s really changed about mine for the better. There's a bit more pothole actions but literally - that's it.
I also think we will still get a bad economic downturn - there's more evidence: lack of food on the shelves recently that I've seen. Not enough investment going into green projects - not enough schemes or grants being delivered for business.
Basically interest rate drops are the only systematic positive thing that is happening on the macro front.
That won't be enough I'm afraid.
The plot is falling apart. I'm fully expecting Starmer to pull off a mask and Farage pop up like Mission Impossible.
Because of all the back-hole bullshit where we started and the inability to have a plan and spend some decent money on fixing things at the level it needs - Starmer has simply decided this 'pick on the weak" route to be easier.
People won't buy it as they expect Labour to substantially improve their lives. Nothing"s really changed about mine for the better. There's a bit more pothole actions but literally - that's it.
I also think we will still get a bad economic downturn - there's more evidence: lack of food on the shelves recently that I've seen. Not enough investment going into green projects - not enough schemes or grants being delivered for business.
Basically interest rate drops are the only systematic positive thing that is happening on the macro front.
That won't be enough I'm afraid.
Maybe he got spooked by the headlights, like when Cameron got spooked into calling the brexit referendum by Farrage & the extreme right.
Yep. And the forces unleashed by that ****ing stupid referendum are now really coming back to bite.
Which is yet another message Starmer really ought to be getting through his thick skull. For the likes of Farage and his voters, enough is never enough. Fantastic soundbite from Call Me Dave about UKIP/Reform types never taking 'yes' for an answer.
Sadly, CMD needed to be less good at neat soundbites after the event and more good in the not losing his bottle department.
Maybe he got spooked by the headlights, like when Cameron got spooked into calling the brexit referendum by Farrage & the extreme right.
Oh come on, this thread isn't the place to discuss the issue in detail but both Labour and the LibDems strongly supported calling a referendum on EU membership.
In fact the party which you back, the LibDems, were the first in parliament to call for an EU referendum, not the Tories. Only the SNP were consistently opposed to an EU referendum.
Which is yet another message Starmer really ought to be getting through his thick skull. For the likes of Farage and his voters, enough is never enough. Fantastic soundbite from Call Me Dave about UKIP/Reform types never taking 'yes' for an answer.
sadly true
Shouldn't have allowed net immigration to rise to an all time record of nearly 1 million people in 2023.
So which immigrants should they have stopped from coming? Be specific, with numbers please.
Health and care workers down to about 50k and short term only. Dependents limited to children under 16 only and applicant to demonstrate funds or salary offer sufficient to cover the costs of their upbringing.
Student visas, can't give you a number but refuse adult dependents and see where that gets us. Make staying in the country after graduation contingent on receipt of a graduate job offer with a minimum salary of something like £28k and see where that gets us.
Something like that. I haven't read the labour white paper yet but I'd expect that has some reasonable ideas.
Do you think net immigration of 1 million per year is good and sustainable and won't have any negative effects on anybody already living here?
Do you think net immigration of 1 million per year is good and sustainable and won't have any negative effects on anybody already living here?
We don't have 1 million net migration per year.
And you don't think that false and alarmist figures plus dangerous and divisive rhetoric will have any negative effect on people already living here?
If you have forgotten about the sensitivity of the subject of perhaps try to remember the riots across the UK last summer 💡
Ernie, are you saying that the large increase in immigration was only a rebound post-COVID? The graph doesn't seem to support that.
Although it's also worth posting this page in case anyone is thinking of Reform-advert style poor huddled masses looking for handouts:
In YE June 2024, 417,000 non-EU+ nationals came to live in the UK for work-related reasons. This is closely followed by study-related immigration (375,000 people). These estimates are consistent withHome Office data on visas granted to non-EU+ nationals.
Other reasons non-EU+ nationals came to live in the UK in YE June 2024 were:
asylum (84,000 people)
family reasons (76,000 people)
humanitarian reasons (67,000 people)
So of that million people, 79% were workers and students who are here legally on visas, which can be controlled at any time. So why the need for all this bluster? They are letting people conflate the small boat people with legal immigration, which is pretty disgraceful.
After the ward election fiasco one minister said 'we're the only party with a plan' (after 1 year in office!) What people were voting against was nothing to do with plans but rather what they'd already delivered. By killing off party democracy and creating inertia through fear, the leadership lose touch with the grass roots and hence become dependent on McSweeney, think tanks, advisors, pollsters, to direct policy and ofcourse it's a disaster.
Electoral statistics do not reveal the reasons and motives behind people's votes, those people voting Reform were not all thick racists, many naively thought they were protesting against the status quo. For party activists, door knocking in defence of austerity, militarism and racism doesn't seem like an attractive sell. This particular tanker has little chance of changing course in the next four years and it's likely to end with the implosion of the party as well as an increase in poverty and p poor growth. Boom.
Health and care workers down to about 50k and short term only. Dependents limited to children under 16 only and applicant to demonstrate funds or salary offer sufficient to cover the costs of their upbringing.
Student visas, can't give you a number but refuse adult dependents and see where that gets us. Make staying in the country after graduation contingent on receipt of a graduate job offer with a minimum salary of something like £28k and see where that gets us.
What would be the impact to cap health care at 50K?
How many dependants over 16 and insufficient funds if under 16?
How many student visa adult dependants?
It's great that you have some ideas but without any numbers they are pointless as not worth putting any effort into those ideas if a)the numbers are small and b)it would make no difference to anything anyway
If you reduced from your made up 1 million a year to say 500k per year what is the actual outcome of that and do any positives (can you name them please) outweigh the negatives (tax income, public services etc,.)
People just wanting something to be lower because they do is not really cutting it unless they are racist so have a 'justified' reason behind it although they will never be happy as there are clearly too many people here already who they don't like and worse still many were as British as they are.
Health and care workers down to about 50k and short term only. Dependents limited to children under 16 only and applicant to demonstrate funds or salary offer sufficient to cover the costs of their upbringing.
Student visas, can't give you a number but refuse adult dependents and see where that gets us. Make staying in the country after graduation contingent on receipt of a graduate job offer with a minimum salary of something like £28k and see where that gets us.
What would be the impact to cap health care at 50K?
How many dependants over 16 and insufficient funds if under 16?
How many student visa adult dependants?
It's great that you have some ideas but without any numbers they are pointless as not worth putting any effort into those ideas if a)the numbers are small and b)it would make no difference to anything anyway
If you reduced from your made up 1 million a year to say 500k per year what is the actual outcome of that and do any positives (can you name them please) outweigh the negatives (tax income, public services etc,.)
People just wanting something to be lower because they do is not really cutting it unless they are racist so have a 'justified' reason behind it although they will never be happy as there are clearly too many people here already who they don't like and worse still many are as British as they are.
Health and care workers down to about 50k and short term only. Dependents limited to children under 16 only and applicant to demonstrate funds or salary offer sufficient to cover the costs of their upbringing.
Student visas, can't give you a number but refuse adult dependents and see where that gets us. Make staying in the country after graduation contingent on receipt of a graduate job offer with a minimum salary of something like £28k and see where that gets us.
What would be the impact to cap health care at 50K?
How many dependants over 16 and insufficient funds if under 16?
How many student visa adult dependants?
It's great that you have some ideas but without any numbers they are pointless as not worth putting any effort into those ideas if a)the numbers are small and b)it would make no difference to anything anyway
If you reduced from your made up 1 million a year to say 500k per year what is the actual outcome of that and do any positives (can you name them please) outweigh the negatives (tax income, public services etc,.)
People just wanting something to be lower because they do is not really cutting it unless they are racist so have a 'justified' reason behind it although they will never be happy as there are clearly too many people here already who they don't like and worse still many are as British as they are.
Student visas, can't give you a number but refuse adult dependents and see where that gets us. Make staying in the country after graduation contingent on receipt of a graduate job offer with a minimum salary of something like £28k and see where that gets us.
How many University's do you think that might close down?
Due to the tuition fee cap alot of Uni's rely on overseas students to make up the losses. The higher education sector employs close to 500,000 across the country & gives good jobs in areas where not many opportunities exist.
They also contribute £265 billion to the economy.
A rare voice of sanity.
Ernie, are you saying that the large increase in immigration was only a rebound post-COVID?
i am saying firstly that net migration is not one million a year, secondly that net migration fell last year, thirdly that dangerous rhetoric is dangerous,. and fourthly that you have screwed up the formatting on this page with your graph 😵💫
It's not my area of knowledge at all but it appears like the USA we have a right-wing split which is another boxed in job.
1) Right-wingers that believe we need migration to push the labour pool up which does eventually affect employment supply and demand and wages somewhere along the way.
2) Right-wingers that want shut of foreigners full stop.
Those two groups are in opposition and will ultimately destroy the capitalism's version of stablity in an economic model.
A rare voice of sanity.
Fair enough but Dunt has cheerleaded Starmer though all his other terrible decisions.
fourthly that you have screwed up the formatting on this page with your graph
In the spirit of disagreement I will say that the graph looks fine to me 🙂
But seriously though - it is a huge upward trend, isn't it? And the very existence of this graph is always going to be a huge political problem for any government, even if it's not a practical one (or a formatting one).
Is a spike a trend?
Also the graph shows that net migration peaked at half the claimed 1 million.
G
What would be the impact to cap health care at 50K?
How many dependants over 16 and insufficient funds if under 16?
How many student visa adult dependants?
It's great that you have some ideas but without any numbers they are pointless as not worth putting any effort into those ideas if a)the numbers are small and b)it would make no difference to anything anyway
If you reduced from your made up 1 million a year to say 500k per year what is the actual outcome of that and do any positives (can you name them please) outweigh the negatives (tax income, public services etc,.)
People just wanting something to be lower because they do is not really cutting it unless they are racist so have a 'justified' reason behind it although they will never be happy as there are clearly too many people here already who they don't like and worse still many are as British as they are.
I answered the questions I was asked. I think it's only fair that you answer some of my questions before you ask me even more.
What would you expect to happen to wages in a particular sector if the supply of employees trained and willing to work in that sector experiences a very large increase?
In deciles, which socioeconomic class is least likely to be negatively affected when wages for low skilled workers decrease?
What would you expect to happen to house prices and rental costs if the population experiences very rapid growth which is far beyond the country's capacity to build new houses?
Which socioeconomic class benefits most from rising rents and house prices?
What you would expect to happen to the availability of GP appointments when the population experiences sudden rapid growth far beyond the local NHS GP's ability to keep up?
Which socioeconomic class is most likely to have private health care and therefore never need to worry about getting an appointment at the local NHS GP?
One more:
Did any of your friends take their mum with them to uni and if so how was that received on campus?
If we really want to lower immigration then
1, Invest in lifelong education so working people can advance there careers into higher level jobs.
2, Create better working conditions and pay for lower paid jobs.
3, Tackle the cost of living crisis be..
a, Do GBenergy properly creating jobs and lower energy bills (new green deal) with proper investment into a nationalised energy instead of a quango giving money to corporations with guaranteed profits so they can bleed the consumers long term.
b, National house building programme, again nationalised and not a dodgy burn the processes so developers churn out overpriced shite.
4, Improve working conditions and pay at the lower end (so workers can actually afford to live instead of barely surviving) Universal basic income.
Or we could just continue with the hateful policies and punch down on those nasty foreigners, which appears to be the preferred case of the remaining starmerists who have let the mask slip and shown us who they really are now.
I answered the questions I was asked.
But more importantly you have successfully steered the thread away from the issue which currently concerns people, including many Labour MPs, the most..... the use of dangerous Farage-style anti-immigration rhetoric by Keir Starmer.
Did any of your friends take their mum with them to uni and if so how was that received on campus?
Back in my uni days that would depend on two things:
How many pints could she down before chundering.
And.
Is she fit?
🙂
If we really want to lower immigration then
1, Invest in lifelong education so working people can advance there careers into higher level jobs.
2, Create better working conditions and pay for lower paid jobs.
3, Tackle the cost of living crisis be..
a, Do GBenergy properly creating jobs and lower energy bills (new green deal) with proper investment into a nationalised energy instead of a quango giving money to corporations with guaranteed profits so they can bleed the consumers long term.
b, National house building programme, again nationalised and not a dodgy burn the processes so developers churn out overpriced shite.
4, Improve working conditions and pay at the lower end (so workers can actually afford to live instead of barely surviving) Universal basic income.
Or we could just continue with the hateful policies and punch down on those nasty foreigners, which appears to be the preferred case of the remaining starmerists who have let the mask slip and shown us who they really are now.
This should be the only game in town but appears to be too challenging for our amazing grown-up treasury-brained leaders.
Or we could just continue with the hateful policies and punch down on those nasty foreigners, which appears to be the preferred case of the remaining starmerists who have let the mask slip and shown us who they really are now.
Not directly at you but a general response to the many posts along similar lines over the past few pages: do we not think that dismissing anybody who expresses concerns about immigration by implyng they're a narrow-minded racist has had its day now? It's been done to death for at least 15 years but the concerns remain. Perhaps it's time to start listening to people rather than jumping at the opportunity to insult them?
I get that there probably are a fair few people who dislike immigration largely because they are racist or xenophobic or have been tricked into believing a load of rubbish by the likes of Farage.
But there's also legitimate concerns and I think we should have learned by now that dismissing those concerns in such a simplistic and insulting manner will never succeed in winning the argument, and will probably only lead to further entrenchment, division and pushing more people into the seemingly more welcoming arms of the populists.
For the avoidance of doubt I completely agree that immigration shouldn't be the main political point of the day and it annoys me that we're all wasting time arguing about this while other more important things go under the radar. But the reality is the populists will always bring immigration back to the forefront of the debate, so Labour can't just ignore it.
Did any of your friends take their mum with them to uni and if so how was that received on campus?
I left school at 16 and didn't go to university, that was a theoretical possibility, but in reality my parents were working class and didn't encourage that pathway (not out of a lack of love but because they didn't understand the way the world was changing, and wouldn't have been able to provide financial support), and the inner city comprehensive I went to was geared to churning out factory fodder, and the factories had all closed down.
There is a big difference between real opportunity and the theoretical equal opportunity for all that the right and centrists seem to believe in.
do we not think that dismissing anybody who expresses concerns about immigration by implyng they're a narrow-minded racist has had its day now?
No, but I think that making excuses for racist rhetoric while pretending that you are the victim has had its day, not that I expect that will stop you. Punching down while pretending you are the victim is just another policy the centrists have stolen from the far right and are happy to run with.
This should be the only game in town but appears to be too challenging for our amazing grown-up treasury-brained leaders.
Maybe it is too challenging? What makes you think it's simple? On second thoughts, don't answer that. Just beware of people promising simple solutions to complex problems.
On second thoughts, don't answer that. Just beware of people promising simple solutions to complex problems.
Like limiting immigration without realising the many consequences, a few of which have already been pointed out without being responded to.
Just beware of people promising simple solutions to complex problems.
Like kicking out the Tory government and replacing it with a Labour government?
If only it was that simple, eh?
Like kicking out the Tory government and replacing it with a Labour government?
If only it was that simple, eh?
You know how you get annoyed when you get accused of being a troll? That's the kind of pointless, incendiary cobblers that makes people think it.
Do I get annoyed by being called a troll? I wasn't aware, I generally assume that the person can't think of anything else to say.
I am aware that I annoy you intensely though pondo, you make that abundantly clear. Sad really. As is the fact that some people need to take a personal angle on diversity of opinions.
Yes I think politics is a complex subject not solved by simply changing the politicians in charge. Well done for noticing that I wasn't being completely serious 👏
Edit : Btw well done for using the word "incendiary" to describe my fairly casual comment, hyperbole at its finest!
The policy itself isn't so much the issue
Oh it absolutely is. I don't think anyone would argue immigration shouldn't be controlled. But doing it in a way which will cripple the social care sector and massively damage the NHS and other services while bullying people on benefits into jobs they aren't capable of doing will cause massive harm and end up costing loads more money in the long run. It's an idiotic policy even without all the racist rhetoric.
By the way - if the reference to Mums at Uni was with reference to foreign students bringing dependents, it's a double bullshit. The majority of foreign students who bring dependents will be postgrads who have spouses and/or children. What with them being postgrad, they will typically be in their mid 20s and, you know, having a life by then.
And postgrads tend to be involved a lot more with the activities that bring revenue other than tuition fees into the institution - research being the key one.
Make no mistake about it - the university funding model is ****ed. Home tuition fees hadn't been revised upwards since 2014 and represent about 60% of their 2014 value now. The extra £250 (I think) given recently was OK, but it has gone straight out the door again (and more) with the rise in employers NI. Most universities rely on foreign students (undergrad and postgrad) to survive. And since it has been in vogue to demonise foreign students...
Most universities will make a deficit this year. Many (probably most) are making drastic cuts right now. Many will go under. And our HE sector is one of things ministers constantly tout as being a major selling point of the UK.
🤦♂️
do we not think that dismissing anybody who expresses concerns about immigration by implyng they're a narrow-minded racist has had its day now?
No, but I think that making excuses for racist rhetoric while pretending that you are the victim has had its day, not that I expect that will stop you. Punching down while pretending you are the victim is just another policy the centrists have stolen from the far right and are happy to run with.
So a working class brit has to just lay down and accept being priced out of their local property market, accept wages being depressed and accept not being able to get a GP appointment, and if they raise these concerns they should just shut up and stop playing the victim? Aye really good way to win them over. Hasn't worked for 15 years but one day they'll listen.
And "punching down"? Eh? In what sense is a working class brit from a council estate able to "punch down" towards a wealthy foreign student who is so flush with cash that they can afford to bring a whole family with them while they do a £50k post-grad degree!?
So a working class brit has to just lay down and accept being priced out of their local property market, accept wages being depressed and accept not being able to get a GP appointment
No. But those things aren't due to immigration, are they?
Immigrants contribute to the economy. That means doing worth that a) is taxable directly and b) grows businesses which make them pay more tax. We can see from the page I linked to earlier that over half the immigrants are here on work visas which means they are working, and nearly all the rest are literally paying to be here.
Maybe it is too challenging? What makes you think it's simple? On second thoughts, don't answer that. Just beware of people promising simple solutions to complex problems.
Please - allow me.
The point being Labour haven't even attempted solutions. Simple or complex.
I believe what we have in front of us with Labour, Tory and Reform is rigid ignorance towards the state.
I think we could start by understanding our monetary system the way it currently operates. That wouldn't be initially simple but would remove all the made-up nonsense about black-holes, finances etc.
That would by my starting point. And to state the obvious it's Labour that has dumbed it down.
Then my second move would be why are Labour chasing growth before spending - every bit of evidence points to growth being a product from government spending. I.E it comes after investment.
Then pragmatically I would look at why our Chancellor keeps looking for investment abroad rather than her own central bank in this process. I mean she seems entirely happy with the the BoE paying massive amounts of money on interest - money that would fill all her black-holes over night.
It's not really anything to do with simple or complex - it's dogma pure and simple. Political will. There are enough brains to change course they just don't want to.
Immigrants contribute to the economy. That means doing worth that a) is taxable directly and b) grows businesses which make them pay more tax. We can see from the page I linked to earlier that over half the immigrants are here on work visas which means they are working, and nearly all the rest are literally paying to be here.
Migration led work has less to do with tax receipts and more to do with productive capacity. I.E if the jobs are available it doesn't matter who fills them as long as we are moving towards full employment and producing things or services.
But people/migrants doing jobs and buying things does obviously contribute substantially to the economy.
It doesn't really have anything to do with taxation for spending as such though as taxation is a removal of purchasing power from the economy despite what the government tells us.
Do I get annoyed by being called a troll? I wasn't aware, I generally assume that the person can't think of anything else to say.
I am aware that I annoy you intensely though pondo, you make that abundantly clear. Sad really. As is the fact that some people need to take a personal angle on diversity of opinions.
Yes I think politics is a complex subject not solved by simply changing the politicians in charge. Well done for noticing that I wasn't being completely serious
Edit : Btw well done for using the word "incendiary" to describe my fairly casual comment, hyperbole at its finest!
Well, look - let me apologise first of all. I'm just super-angry about what's been going on this week - heck, this year, this past several years - and I took it out on you. I shouldn't have done, and I'm sorry.
I don't generally have strong feelings about most posters - you're a very prolific poster and, if you annoyed me intensely, I think you'd see me on here a lot more. 🙂 Just like in real life, some people I like more than others, sometimes I agree with people (even you, Ernie 🙂 ), sometimes I don't, but I'll generally pass that by unless I feel I have something to contribute. What got me this morning was that this thread seemed in serious danger of breaking out into a civil conversation, someone brings up the issue of politicians offering simple solutions to complex problems, and you lob in this hand grenade of "like voting out the Tories and voting in Labour", as though people must have been stupid to do something so dumb as do a single vote, why didn't we all vote more complexly? I dunno - it touched a nerve, but I was wrong to respond how I did. Sorry!
So a working class brit has to just lay down and accept being priced out of their local property market, accept wages being depressed and accept not being able to get a GP appointment
See my comments from a couple of pages ago. All the above is a result of successive governments failing to address the structural issues in our economy and fiscal policy, and papering over them by importing cheap(er) immigrant labour to do the (mostly public sector) jobs which UK citizens have decided aren't worth doing. Low immigration is only achievable if people already here are willing to do the jobs the immigrants would do. That's only going to be possible if the state funds education and training and pays the wages that the market demands. It's simple supply and demand.
net immigration of 1 million per year
ok, you're not debating in good faith, can't be bothered with this.
No. But those things aren't due to immigration, are they?
Immigrants contribute to the economy. That means doing worth that a) is taxable directly and b) grows businesses which make them pay more tax. We can see from the page I linked to earlier that over half the immigrants are here on work visas which means they are working, and nearly all the rest are literally paying to be here.
If immigration was controlled and at a moderate level it would be fine - you could realistically plan in advance so you had enough skills to build the houses, the infrastructure and provide the additional services. Immigrants themselves would be part of the solution and most people would be fine with it.
You could still question where all this relentless expansion was going; what the point of it all was, especially when your local green belt disappeared once and for all, replaced by rows of crap soulless new builds built to house people who built the houses, but it would at least be controlled and sustainable and that wouldn't cause as many issues.
It's the lack of control and the huge numbers which are the problem. Realistically you can't plan for sudden spikes of up to 900k net immigration per year (I may have erroneously rounded this number up earlier, so I will round it down now for balance) and such chaotic and huge numbers are bound to have an impact.
Perhaps the impact won't be felt by those in the leafy suburbs celebrating as the income from their rental properties continues to increase and not by employers celebrating as staff wages go down, but it'll be felt somewhere.
Lots of work to do this afternoon so must go now. But just thought I'd leave this here since nobody seems to have given much thought to the immigrants themselves. Flawed immigration policy causes horrific abuse of immigrants workers in "national scandal" - how do those plopping themselves on the moral high ground and throwing out accusations of racism feel about this? Not worth a mention?
But just thought I'd leave this here since nobody seems to have given much thought to the immigrants themselves. Flawed immigration policy causes horrific abuse of immigrants workers in "national scandal" - how do those plopping themselves on the moral high ground and throwing out accusations of racism feel about this? Not worth a mention?
Blimey, what hypocrisy. It is the racist rhetoric which Starmer used in a desperate attempt to emulate Nigel Farage, and how that can only further fuel hatred and division in an already highly toxic environment, which bothers me (and a multitude of Labour MPs) not the figures which he used.
And yet all you have been interested in discussing is the net migration figures not the consequences of Starmer publicly accusing immigrants of causing incalculable damage to Britain, and how that feeds into Nigel Farage's racist narrative.
The speech was an absolute disgrace designed to demonise immigrants in a squalid attempt to attract the votes of bigots who will never vote Labour anyway.
A sensible debate about immigration without the inclusion of racist rhetoric is a completely different exercise to the one performed by Starmer a few days ago.
And this is the result
https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/52187-political-favourability-ratings-may-2025
This fall in Starmer’s popularity is concentrated among Labour voters, half of whom (50%) now have an unfavourable view of the prime minister, a 17-point increase from mid-April. The proportion with a favourable opinion has correspondingly fallen from 62% to 45% over the last month.
This is the first time Keir Starmer has recorded a net negative approval rating among Labour voters.
Perhaps the impact won't be felt by those in the leafy suburbs celebrating as the income from their rental properties continues to increase
Again, a little bit louder this time - this not an immigration problem, it's a wealth inequality problem.
Some people have clearly fallen for the everything is the fault of immigration which is not surprising as they have been told that for a long time. Reversing that will be almost impossible given that nobody is even trying to do that.
As I said a few days ago, let's do an experiment and bring immigration down to zero and then see how happy all those on the anti immigration bandwagon are as they feel the effects. Once they have had to accept immigration is required then you can start from a better place in any conversation.
As I said a few days ago, let's do an experiment and bring immigration down to zero and then see how happy all those on the anti immigration bandwagon are as they feel the effects.
The let the toddler burn their hand on the hob after being told ten times not to do it model?
Maybe. It's hardly a way to run a supposedly first world country with a high standard of compulsory education, though.
And when services (continue to) crumble, along will come another populist saying it is all the fault of woke employment laws / net zero / gays / single mothers / etc.
Maybe. It's hardly a way to run a supposedly first world country with a high standard of compulsory education, though.
What people believe and what they fall for suggests that is not the case. Clearly nobody is ever going to lower migration that much because they know full well that it is required and is a benefit to economy overall but they have to pretend it is a problem to deflect from their own failures.
The latest Techne poll out now, still not much evidence of an "Island of Strangers" speech bounce...... Labour down 1 point Reform up 1 point, despite Starmer's speech being apparently well received by Reform voters, iirc 60% liked it. I guess they prefer the real Nigel Farage to Labour's version.
https://twitter.com/techneUK/status/1923325183428854237
a net negative approval rating among Labour voters
Unsurprised.
Assuming he fails to "clarify" what he meant about "incalculable damage" and "island of strangers" very soon, his standing with Labour voters and members will plummet further. Either way... the "might as well give Farage a chance" feeling will grow now with the wider electorate. A PM using words that can be seen as legitimising what Farage stands for, while the Reform party leader is in a position where he can say and do anything without having to worry about delivering anything, is likely to prove to be dangerous, naive, and foolhardy.
Second, the government positioning itself as ‘tough’ on immigration and asylum will not have the intended effect of sidelining the far-right. We believe that accepting their core premise – the main problem facing the country is immigrants – only validates them. Attempting to outbid them with deportations and visa denials will always fall short. They will not be satisfied with falling net migration numbers. They will never be satisfied.
The far-right is on the rise globally. What is needed in this moment is a clear articulation of why they are wrong, and an aggressive defence of core liberal democratic values.
I have never agreed with any comment more.
Decent by-election result for Reform in, err, Scotland...