Was it worth the sacrifice.

[Deleted member 22389]

I will read it the way it is intended, our benefits system is generous; and is acting (to a greater or lesser degree) as a draw to migrants from other parts of the EU. I don’t hold the EU to account for this situation, however the sentiment from the EU is evidently to compel the UK Govt to make it LESS generous if you want to reduce immigration. A point I suspect many UK taxpayers would agree with.

As for the massive influx, I disagree, it has happened. You may want to rely on what comes out of the BBC, however the truth on numbers can still be found...............

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...le/313401/nino-analytical-report-may-2014.pdf

https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...rseas-nationals-entering-the-uk-to-march-2014

I would argue a 129% increase in immigration from Romanians and Bulgarians is pretty significant, notwithstanding the steady influx of those nationals from the years since 2007, when compared to the years before?

Or are you going to interpret that in a completely different way too?

Biggest problem the EU has is uncontrolled migration from the outside the EU, they can't stop it. The biggest problem we have is making sure none of the people that arrive in the EU make it over to the UK. The EU will have to come to a decision sooner rather than later. Either they send people back, or each country in the EU takes people in. I can honestly see each country having to take people in, the trouble with this as I see it, once you let one group of people in they will all want to come.

Yes I know it's the Daily Mail, but who's responsibility are these people.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-death-unless-given-legal-status-Britain.html

 

[Silk]

You haven't answered anything . it should be obvious to you if you actually read and yet to understand what I have written that I have answered the question.

Ok, that came out wrong. It should have said " if you actually read and understand what I have written that I have answered the question"

 

[cunning fergus]

You like the Torygraph, don't you?

Saying the system is generous because it is open to abuse (which is actually on a very small scale in terms of proportion of the budget) is like saying banks are generous because they sometimes get robbed. You are failing to provide even a decent argument that it is generous, never mind any actual evidence to back up your argument.

You are funny…………..you must be about 16 years old?

The DWP (that’s the Department for Work and Pensions) confirm that benefit fraud and mismanagement cost the UK taxpayer 3.3m a year (when you get older you will know that the Government always underestimate negative news and overplay positive news…………..it’s what is known as “spin”).

Assuming there are 30m in legitimate paid employment that would mean there is a cost to each taxpayer of £110; it will be more once you take into account those working and not paying tax, but that might need to wait till you get to 6th form.

It might be a small amount to your middle class Mum and Dad living in the leafy tory heartland of Uckfield who can afford to be generous enough to give that kind of money to the UK Government to waste……………….but it is this kind of issue that contributes to why we have a cost of living crisis. When you are all grown up and paying your own way on things like a Albion season ticket, you may reflect on that wasted £110…………………we cannot all be so generous.

 

[cunning fergus]

I'm not disputing you read it how the article intended!

What none of those stats give you is of those new national insurance registrations, how many started paying tax and how many started claiming benefits. All those stats give you are new NI registrations. They do not give you how many then left the country to go back home, how this compares to other migration changes etc.

You appear to be presenting this information purely on the basis of the immigration being motivated by benefits. I have no idea if that is true or not, and certainly isn't contained within any of the information you have posted.

Hold on............the EU indicated that the generosity of UK benefits is a draw. I agree with the sentiment, to a greater or lesser degree, as there are other factors at play such as a dynamic economy; which those in the eurozone are struggling with at the moment.

It was you however that questioned the influx as an event that nerver happened. The NI numbers confirms the applications made in one year, a staggering number in all with a 129% increase from Bulgaria and Romania; with stats from March still to be confirmed.

Stop wriggling, the numbers are accurate and show that the net migration numbers we are fed as a rule are slight of hand...................imagine if the BBC announced instead that in the last 2 years legal immigration into the UK was a minimum of 1.1m people.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Hold on............the EU indicated that the generosity of UK benefits is a draw. I agree with the sentiment, to a greater or lesser degree, as there are other factors at play such as a dynamic economy; which those in the eurozone are struggling with at the moment.

It was you however that questioned the influx as an event that nerver happened. The NI numbers confirms the applications made in one year, a staggering number in all with a 129% increase from Bulgaria and Romania; with stats from March still to be confirmed.

Stop wriggling, the numbers are accurate and show that the net migration numbers we are fed as a rule are slight of hand...................imagine if the BBC announced instead that in the last 2 years legal immigration into the UK was a minimum of 1.1m people.

Wriggling? I've not really made any points, I've been asking questions or querying what you've put up. I've not disputed the numbers, only asked what they mean, I ended my last post 'I have no idea if that is true or not…' hardly wriggling is it. You carry on though, you're obviously spoiling for an argument with someone.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

However you want to look at those PDF's, it's too many people. We should be having no more than 30,000 people come here every year.

 

[Silk]

You are funny…………..you must be about 16 years old?

The DWP (that’s the Department for Work and Pensions) confirm that benefit fraud and mismanagement cost the UK taxpayer 3.3m a year (when you get older you will know that the Government always underestimate negative news and overplay positive news…………..it’s what is known as “spin”).

Assuming there are 30m in legitimate paid employment that would mean there is a cost to each taxpayer of £110; it will be more once you take into account those working and not paying tax, but that might need to wait till you get to 6th form.

It might be a small amount to your middle class Mum and Dad living in the leafy tory heartland of Uckfield who can afford to be generous enough to give that kind of money to the UK Government to waste……………….but it is this kind of issue that contributes to why we have a cost of living crisis. When you are all grown up and paying your own way on things like a Albion season ticket, you may reflect on that wasted £110…………………we cannot all be so generous.

I'm funny. You're a patronising tit.

 

[cunning fergus]

Wriggling? I've not really made any points, I've been asking questions or querying what you've put up. I've not disputed the numbers, only asked what they mean, I ended my last post 'I have no idea if that is true or not…' hardly wriggling is it. You carry on though, you're obviously spoiling for an argument with someone.

Not spoiling for an argument BS, I will treat as I find, you have not been patronising to me, ergo, I am not likewise.

However I am robustly disputing your assertion that an influx from Romania and Bulgaria “never happened”.

For one it’s far too early to tell, for example, these particular stats don’t come out till next May when the position in NI numbers will be more clear, so that’s one challenge.

Secondly, the influx you say “never happened” has already happened, if you take the increase in applications from Romanians and Bulgarians since 2007.

Thirdly, taking year on year data the last 12 months saw a 129% increase to the previous 12 months, the biggest number ever from these 2 countries ever.

Those are facts, not all the facts, but compelling evidence all the same…………………….to say the influx never happened is therefore not borne out by these facts.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

Not spoiling for an argument BS, I will treat as I find, you have not been patronising to me, ergo, I am not likewise.

However I am robustly disputing your assertion that an influx from Romania and Bulgaria “never happened”.

For one it’s far too early to tell, for example, these particular stats don’t come out till next May when the position in NI numbers will be more clear, so that’s one challenge.

Secondly, the influx you say “never happened” has already happened, if you take the increase in applications from Romanians and Bulgarians since 2007.

Thirdly, taking year on year data the last 12 months saw a 129% increase to the previous 12 months, the biggest number ever from these 2 countries ever.

Those are facts, not all the facts, but compelling evidence all the same…………………….to say the influx never happened is therefore not borne out by these facts.

There is no end to the amount of countries that will join the EU, which also means there is no end to the amount of people that can come here for work. We don't have any say on this, which is and will always be a problem. Add to that migration to the UK from outside the EU, plus the thousands of Asylum Seekers entering the EU, we can all see what is really happening and where we might eventually be heading.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Not spoiling for an argument BS, I will treat as I find, you have not been patronising to me, ergo, I am not likewise.

However I am robustly disputing your assertion that an influx from Romania and Bulgaria “never happened”.

For one it’s far too early to tell, for example, these particular stats don’t come out till next May when the position in NI numbers will be more clear, so that’s one challenge.

Secondly, the influx you say “never happened” has already happened, if you take the increase in applications from Romanians and Bulgarians since 2007.

Thirdly, taking year on year data the last 12 months saw a 129% increase to the previous 12 months, the biggest number ever from these 2 countries ever.

Those are facts, not all the facts, but compelling evidence all the same…………………….to say the influx never happened is therefore not borne out by these facts.

Instead of quoting the percentages, why don't you quote the numbers. This huge influx you're talking about of new NI registrations from Bulgaria and Romania amounts to about 65,000 people (129% from the previous year, a 36,000 increase) is that really the mass influx we were presented with?

We don't know how many go back as new registrations arrive that was my point, so your factual data is worthless without context as it's a gross number not net. The labour force survey (ONS) actually shows that there were 122,000 Bulgarians and Romanians working in the UK in March, a fall from 125,000 in December (before the transitional controls were lifted in Jan). Why did it drop? Who knows, surveys seem to suggest Bulgarians and Romanians prefer Germany, Italy and Spain over the UK.

Statistics are facts that can be presented any which way. You're forming very strong opinions on very little context for these facts. At the moment, your 129% increase would fill the Amex on a match day...

 

[Deleted member 22389]

Instead of quoting the percentages, why don't you quote the numbers. This huge influx you're talking about of new NI registrations from Bulgaria and Romania amounts to about 65,000 people (129% from the previous year, a 36,000 increase) is that really the mass influx we were presented with?

We don't know how many go back as new registrations arrive that was my point, so your factual data is worthless without context as it's a gross number not net. The labour force survey (ONS) actually shows that there were 122,000 Bulgarians and Romanians working in the UK in March, a fall from 125,000 in December (before the transitional controls were lifted in Jan). Why did it drop? Who knows, surveys seem to suggest Bulgarians and Romanians prefer Germany, Italy and Spain over the UK.

Statistics are facts that can be presented any which way. You're forming very strong opinions on very little context for these facts. At the moment, your 129% increase would fill the Amex on a match day...

Let's look at this another way. Each NI registration is another person who has access to our system, this includes working benefits, out of work benefits, access to our doctors, schools and hospitals after a certain amount of time. Lots of jobs created, with I should imagine a large majority being low paid minimum wage jobs. A worker from the EU on minimum wage will hardly be paying any tax, if they are claiming working benefits on top of this, along with using our services then common sense tells me we are paying more money out than we are getting back in, but please correct me if I am wrong. May be I am looking at this too simply.

Remember this is only people from EU, it doesn't include NI registration from people outside the EU. It's the numbers.

 

[cunning fergus]

Instead of quoting the percentages, why don't you quote the numbers. This huge influx you're talking about of new NI registrations from Bulgaria and Romania amounts to about 65,000 people (129% from the previous year, a 36,000 increase) is that really the mass influx we were presented with?

We don't know how many go back as new registrations arrive that was my point, so your factual data is worthless without context as it's a gross number not net. The labour force survey (ONS) actually shows that there were 122,000 Bulgarians and Romanians working in the UK in March, a fall from 125,000 in December (before the transitional controls were lifted in Jan). Why did it drop? Who knows, surveys seem to suggest Bulgarians and Romanians prefer Germany, Italy and Spain over the UK.

Statistics are facts that can be presented any which way. You're forming very strong opinions on very little context for these facts. At the moment, your 129% increase would fill the Amex on a match day...

Fine, we can do the numbers; in last 12 months of this data it confirms that HMRC received 63,000 requests for NI numbers (about 237 a day). So that is not including any dependent children or other dependent family members that arrived with those seeking an NI number, so the absolute number of individuals who have arrived in the UK is definitely higher than 63,000. If we add (say) a factor of 33% for non-working family members arriving then the numbers would be nearer 84,000 but this could well be higher (or lower).

Given this data confirms that there has been a 163% increase in applications from Romanians (46,000) and 71% from Bulgarians (17,000), the 2 biggest risers in percentage from the previous 12 months (albeit dwarfed by the new 100,000+ applications from Poles) then there is strong trend based evidence that suggests we will see a further increase in requests for NI numbers for the next period. If we say this year on year trend is halved then the HMRC may receive 69,000 requests from Romanians and 26,000 applications from Bulgarians (so 95,000 over the 12 months or 365 a day) in 2014/15. Add a factor of 33% for the dependents and this means in the region of 126,000 arrivals.

In the last 7 years there has been 255,000 requests from Bulgarian and Romanian nationals, so add the same 33% factor again and we are in the region of 340,000, or a population equivalent to the population of Wearside, add in another 126,000 (for 2014/15) and we are close to 466,000 and the population of 2 cities the size of Portsmouth (or 15x Amex stadiums).

If we overlay your data on the 122,000 workers then that would at least indicate that there would be approximately the same number again who have requested an NI number in order to claim benefits? That is supposition, but evidently not all NI numbers requested would be for workers.

You may still want to hold on to the belief that there is no, or has been no “massive influx” but the evidence on NI numbers suggests different, give or take an error/return rate of say 33%………….you may choose to keep on wriggling.

 

[Bold Seagull]

You may still want to hold on to the belief that there is no, or has been no “massive influx” but the evidence on NI numbers suggests different, give or take an error/return rate of say 33%………….you may choose to keep on wriggling.

I think we've gone about as far as we can go on this one, quite happy to let others now either endorse or continue the discussion. Funny that you should call someone else a 16 year old and yet keep returning to this wriggling comment - it's something my 10 year old daughter would say to my 8 year old son if they were arguing…hey ho.

 

[Garage_Doors]

You haven't answered anything . it should be obvious to you if you actually read and yet to understand what I have written that I have answered the question.

Are you not able to give a straight forward yes or no.
You have continually lied saying you have answered it, but you haven't
Simple yes or no,
"Are your comments re Slave labour? Extermination, serious ones" yes or no
No waffle, yes or no?

 

[Silk]

Are you not able to give a straight forward yes or no.
You have continually lied saying you have answered it, but you haven't
Simple yes or no,
"Are your comments re Slave labour? Extermination, serious ones" yes or no
No waffle, yes or no?

Jesus wept!

I said "I'd like to know what you think the alternative is, with half a million jobs and two million unemployed. Slave labour? Extermination, maybe?"

The clue is in the bit where it says "I'd like to know what YOU think"... I'm clearly not saying I think it. It's a matter of pretty elementary English comprehension, for God's sake.

 

[Garage_Doors]

Jesus wept!

I said "I'd like to know what you think the alternative is, with half a million jobs and two million unemployed. Slave labour? Extermination, maybe?"

The clue is in the bit where it says "I'd like to know what YOU think"... I'm clearly not saying I think it. It's a matter of pretty elementary English comprehension, for God's sake.

Do you think this is a yes no game? Or practicing politician speak?
You seemed unable to use the words yes or no.
I can't have put it more plainly, asking a question is not answering one.

 

[Silk]

Do you think this is a yes no game? Or practicing politician speak?
You seemed unable to use the words yes or no.
I can't have put it more plainly, asking a question is not answering one.

WTF are you talking about?

 

[Garage_Doors]

WTF are you talking about?

What I'm talking about is:

I asked you "Are your comments re Slave labour? Extermination, serious ones" yes or no.
This question requiring either a yes answer or no answer.

You have since lied that you answered it in #204, you didn't you skirted around it claiming your answered it with a question.

You have since gone around the the houses without once saying either yes is was a serious comment or no it wasn't a serious comment.

What so difficult to understand?

 

[Silk]

What I'm talking about is:

I asked you "Are your comments re Slave labour? Extermination, serious ones" yes or no.
This question requiring either a yes answer or no answer.

You have since lied that you answered it in #204, you didn't you skirted around it claiming your answered it with a question.

You have since gone around the the houses without once saying either yes is was a serious comment or no it wasn't a serious comment.

What so difficult to understand?

God almighty. How many times? Read the original message where I said it. Read #204, where I originally answered you. Read #258 where I explained it again. Think. Try to understand. It's not hard.

 

[Creaky]

God almighty. How many times? Read the original message where I said it. Read #204, where I originally answered you. Read #258 where I explained it again. Think. Try to understand. It's not hard.

Too hard for me - can't see a 'yes' nor a 'no'