*** The official Keep Britain in the EU thread ***

[Blue Valkyrie]

And how would you solve the problem of there now being more people fighting for the available jobs because of immigration ?

It's not hard to imagine that the new immigrants will increase demand at many existing businesses, causing job creation at those.

Also a few may set up their own businesses, creating new job opportunities there.

And increase the tax take, perhaps resulting in a job or 2 being created.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

It's not hard to imagine that the new immigrants will increase demand at many existing businesses, causing job creation at those.

Also a few may set up their own businesses, creating new job opportunities there.

And increase the tax take, perhaps resulting in a job or 2 being created.

There are more people now fighting for each individual vacancy so even if more vacancies have been created by immigrants, as a candidate you have less of a chance.

 

[topbanana36]

Says a lot about the politicians and businesses if they think we need an undemocratic establishment to prop us up. No confidence in British people! So glad sovereignty, borders and most of our laws has been handed over to Brussels. I doubt many on NSC have read the 900+ pages of the Lisbon treaty because I think if people have any knowledge of it then they would not be jumping up and down to stay in this joke of a project.

 

[Sorrel]

the trouble with this referendum is that it offers such a binary choice and I don't like either of them. I don't want the UK to be absolutely out of the EU - I want us to be in a close partnership with our neighbours and work together positively. And I also don't want to be part of a federal European state.

If I vote yes then my vote will be considered to be in favour of further EU integration - and I'm not.

If I vote to leave then my vote will be considered in favour of a separatist UK - and I'm not.

So I don't know. I'm leaning towards an "out" vote as I think that has more possibilities of flexibility afterwards: plenty of different arrangements could be suggested. Whereas "remain" will result in no change except the continuance of the status quo and the ignoring of any UK suggestions from now on, as the rest of the EU know that we're in no matter what.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

I agree. But I'd introduce and robustly enforce a minimum living wage. Irrespective of the EU and immigration I'd have this anyway as I prefer to not let markets, and cocks like Mike Ashley, dictate standards of basic living. This way the workers get a decent salary and folk have freedom to move.

I remember seeing somewhere that the incoming living wage (evil tory policy) will be at least 10 times higher than the equivalent Romanian level and significantly greater than some other EU members. Guess what happens next?!

Mass immigration completely negates wage inflation in some sectors meaning it will always remain at the minimum with the UK tax payer picking up the tab for paying hundreds of thousands of economic migrants at rates they will never achieve in their countries. Also making it much harder for low skilled Brits to find a job. Is this really sustainable HT?

 

[beorhthelm]

And of course, after Brexit we can decide on our own minimum living wage, without any potential interference from the EU if someone doesn't like it.

we do currently decide our minimum wage, and considerably higher than it is from most of europe, hence why so many young europeans are happy to come here an work on wage what locals consider too little. and fair play to them for making that effort.

one area we are told what to do by EU is in the area of VAT. not allowed to reduce or zero rate anything than is currently non-zero rated. so when there was a suggestion to zero rate ladies sanitary products, EU say not allowed. meanwhile countries with lower VAT on some products have opened up to multinational online vendors setting up there, undercutiung the UK based shops and online vendors.

 

[jgmcdee]

I just can't see how this country can sustain mass immigration of 300000 every year with no way of controlling it

We are fully able to control non-EU migration and yet in 2014 net non-EU migration to the UK was 197,000[1]. So it is obvious that regardless of what the politicians say there is no political will to reduce migration.

[1] http://www.migrationobservatory.ox....Term Migration Flows to and from the UK_0.pdf

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

And of course, after Brexit we can decide on our own minimum living wage, without any potential interference from the EU if someone doesn't like it.

When have the EU ever interfered with the minimum wage, which was brought in years ago?

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

When have the EU ever interfered with the minimum wage, which was brought in years ago?

well they've interfered with everything else, time to get shot of this pathetic waste of British tax payers money and start putting it to something worthwhile within this country might be a good idea
regards
DR

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Mass immigration completely negates wage inflation in some sectors meaning it will always remain at the minimum

Hence my idea of a robustly enforced living wage.

picking up the tab for paying hundreds of thousands of economic migrants at rates they will never achieve in their countries.

Why would the tax payer pay? Employers should pay employees salaries.

Is this really sustainable HT?

If you fix the wage then the only competition is in the quality of the candidate to do the job. Good for business and good for the economy if employers are taking the best candidate and not just the cheapest option.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

Hence my idea of a robustly enforced living wage.

The living wage is already on the way (thanks to the Tories). My point was employers will only ever pay the bare minimum ie what they can get away with or mandated by the government when certain sectors are flooded with cheap labour from the EU.

Why would the tax payer pay? Employers should pay employees salaries.

Does the the public sector employ millions of people? Who pays their wages? Upwards/differential wage inflation is an additional cost.

If you fix the wage then the only competition is in the quality of the candidate to do the job. Good for business and good for the economy if employers are taking the best candidate and not just the cheapest option.

That supposed competition used to consist of UK citizens 66m now it's 500m + EU citizens but if you're prepared to have in most cases the poorest unskilled members of the UK population compete in this market then fair enough.

If your criteria is what is good for business and the economy then having no minimum/living wage might be the best option as the cheapest is often the best option.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

The living wage is already on the way (thanks to the Tories). My point was employers will only ever pay the bare minimum ie what they can get away with or mandated by the government when certain sectors are flooded with cheap labour from the EU.

The main issue is low-skilled jobs. And these can be addressed with a living wage as I suggest. Higher skilled migrants plug gaps in our work force and/or provide very welcome competition and are a huge benefit. I'm not convinced they're significantly lowering salaries.

 

[looney]

The main issue is low-skilled jobs. And these can be addressed with a living wage as I suggest. Higher skilled migrants plug gaps in our work force and/or provide very welcome competition and are a huge benefit. I'm not convinced they're significantly lowering salaries.

Then you need to do some research, IT immigrationhas supressed wages in the US for so long its no longer value to go to college there for IT qualifications, similar impacts in the UK.

Also if every growth spurtthe economy makes migrants come in to pick the low hanging fruit this has 2more impacts It raises the level of risidual unemployment which is a direct costwhich isn't factored in. It also makes it harder to get on the lower rungs of employment reducing social mobility. Which Ended in the UK in 2001. Coincidence?

 

[JC Footy Genius]

The main issue is low-skilled jobs. And these can be addressed with a living wage as I suggest. Higher skilled migrants plug gaps in our work force and/or provide very welcome competition and are a huge benefit. I'm not convinced they're significantly lowering salaries.

Agree with you about the higher skilled migrants plugging gaps where needed which would/could continue outside of EU membership.

A low skilled British worker will always find it more difficult to find work if the job market in their particular sector is awash with cheap Eastern European Labour no matter the level of minimum/living wage. I just think immigration should be reduced to manageable levels and more emphasis placed on reducing the 1.75 million unemployment figure.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Then you need to do some research, IT immigrationhas supressed wages in the US for so long its no longer value to go to college there for IT qualifications, similar impacts in the UK.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/jobs/11602670/Here-are-the-workers-most-in-demand-in-the-UK.html

"Technology is fast-moving with plenty of chances of promotion, and demand for IT professionals is surging. "

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

A low skilled British worker will always find it more difficult to find work if the job market in their particular sector is awash with cheap Eastern European Labour no matter the level of minimum/living wage.

I disagree. If you have a minimum living wage, which removes salary under-cutting , the competition is then just down to the quality of the candidate. If it's a straight choice between a UK candidate and a non-UK candidate why would the UK person lose out?

 

[cheshunt seagull]

People have asked for specifics so looking at the impact of EU membership on my work. A large part of my work is involved in helping people to start and grow businesses. The funding we receive from the European Regional Development Fund has been crucial in letting us run programmes that have led to the creation of 100s of sustainable real jobs in London. The same is the case in the business support sector across the UK but this gets very little publicity. The UK government talks a lot about supporting small business but their actions are very different.

Horizon 2020 funding is enabling us to take part in international research which is looking to provide solutions to the most pressing social and economic challenges. We would lose all of this as well. Research would still take place outside Horizon 2020 of course but would be driven much more by corporate agendas and commercial opportunity not on the basis of actual need.

The EU is far from perfect, for example the decimation of democracy in Greece has been disgraceful, but it is much better to work for change from within than be stuck on a limb outside.

 

[beorhthelm]

The main issue is low-skilled jobs. And these can be addressed with a living wage as I suggest. Higher skilled migrants plug gaps in our work force and/or provide very welcome competition and are a huge benefit. I'm not convinced they're significantly lowering salaries.

im bemused why that you dont think the same competition and benefits apply further down the skill range, or why gaps arent there to be plugged either. increasing competition for labour will suppress wages, this is basic economics. we have the second highest minimum wage in europe, twice as much as most countries, so it seems we have addressed this issue.

I disagree. If you have a minimum living wage, which removes salary under-cutting , the competition is then just down to the quality of the candidate. If it's a straight choice between a UK candidate and a non-UK candidate why would the UK person lose out?

because the quality, the attitude of the UK candidate is poorer? the migrant worker will usually have far more interest and energy for the job (main qualities for low pay work), they've made effort to be here after all, so more likely to put in the effort on the job.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

because the quality, the attitude of the UK candidate is poorer? the migrant worker will usually have far more interest and energy for the job (main qualities for low pay work), they've made effort to be here after all, so more likely to put in the effort on the job.

So the employer should employ the UK person you claim has a poor attitude? Come on, there has to be some assistance from the UK worker to help resolve there/this situation.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

im bemused why that you dont think the same competition and benefits apply further down the skill range, or why gaps arent there to be plugged either. increasing competition for labour will suppress wages, this is basic economics. we have the second highest minimum wage in europe, twice as much as most countries, so it seems we have addressed this issue.

I have already addressed this.

And the UK might have a high minimum wage but it needs to be viewing in the context of the cost of living. It's no good having a minimum wage of £7 an hour if it costs you £8 an hour to live.