Next PM? | Page 11 | Vital Football

Next PM?

chris who said:
That's the thing most European migrants came here to work paid our taxes and a lot plan to return home after a period in this country as proved by the post Brexit exit.Meanwhile a lot of non European migrants do come here for family reasons and are more likely to stay .So purely economically the European migrants almost certainly boosted our economy.It is more likely that someone moving much longer distances will lose ties with their original home while European migrants can return home more cheaply and regularly.
Click to expand...
"most European migrants came here to work paid our taxes"
Actually I don't think that is true.
Not because they were tax-dodgers- but because many were on Minimum Wage, so paid little or no tax.

About 3 years ago. Labour commentators noted that UK wage growth was the lowest in Europe - apart from Greece.

"Average" income is usually the Median (otherwise a handful of millionaires would distort upwards.)

If (say) a million immigrants arrive to work in the fields and in hospitality - almost all under the current Median Income - then it is hardly surprising if the new Median is lower.
The fact that the Median Income rose at all was a miracle !

Very approx
Minimum Wage £12,500
Threshold to pay Tax £12,500
Median Income £31,000
 
Tarian said:
"most European migrants came here to work paid our taxes"
Actually I don't think that is true.
Not because they were tax-dodgers- but because many were on Minimum Wage, so paid little or no tax.

About 3 years ago. Labour commentators noted that UK wage growth was the lowest in Europe - apart from Greece.

"Average" income is usually the Median (otherwise a handful of millionaires would distort upwards.)

If (say) a million immigrants arrive to work in the fields and in hospitality - almost all under the current Median Income - then it is hardly surprising if the new Median is lower.
The fact that the Median Income rose at all was a miracle !

Very approx
Minimum Wage £12,500
Threshold to pay Tax £12,500
Median Income £31,000
Click to expand...
Just because someone is on low income does not mean they are not contributing to our economy.Many high earning people pay less tax than those on very low incomes that the fault of bad government.
 
After somebody has been convinced that uncontrolled immigration is a good thing, it’s impossible to debate.
I remember speaking with a lovely lady who was a chief advisor to Alex Salmond around the time of the Brexit debate.
She was obviously totally for free movement and uncontrolled immigration so I said what if everyone decides to go to Scotland instead of the south east?
She got a bit flustered and said that wouldn’t happen.
I replied of course it wouldn’t, but how would you house and provide services if it did.
She replied that she didn’t know.
 
The problems effecting social provision (housing/education/nhs/transport/policing/armed forced etc) has very little to immigration (this is no more than a diversionary tactic) but under investment.
 
RotherhitheGill said:
The problems effecting social provision (housing/education/nhs/transport/policing/armed forced etc) has very little to immigration (this is no more than a diversionary tactic) but under investment.
Click to expand...
How do you know how much to invest when you don’t know how many to invest for?
Build a huge hospital in Maidstone to accommodate a population of 200 thousand only to find that the population grows to 300 thousand.
That’s the current problem in Europe.
 
Tarian said:
Why does "population older and sicker" necessarily return as an answer "more people" ?
What is the cost of all those extra people - especially housing ?
(And what about Saving the Planet ?:oops:)

Why doesn't the answer include:
- later retirement ?
( believe Jean Luc Picard was still Captain of the Enterprise at 70)
- reallocation of jobs within the existing population ?
- variation in working hours / days ?

(How on earth do countries with net-emigration cope ??)


What exactly are Japan's "persistent economic problems" ?

Low "growth"
A statistic presented as equivalent to impoverishment ?

Surely Japan has showed that what matters is GDP per person...
....along with efficiency gains (tech, robots etc). i.e. more bang for their Yen.
AFAIK, Japanese seem a generally content bunch.:oops:
Click to expand...

Take away the immigration of people of younger working age and our demographic profiler is inevitably older and sicker. As to Japan nothing I said is contoversial. Theirs was an economy posted as the envy of the world and we were encouraged to fear, or marvel at their inevitable ascent to the most successful economy in the world overtaking the US. Their problems were an early warning to the rest of us, any of this sound familiar/

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/123015/3-economic-challenges-
japan-faces-2016.asp

We need migrant labour to ease us through our current demography. Migration has solved similar problems throughout history, post war migration was designed to fuill the gaps in our labour force and did so effectively. We are currently suffering bfrom a shortage of labour at all levels and saying other countriues have problems too does not help us.

This government has presided over high levels of migration and will continue to do so while making contray nouises to fit with its ideology and false narrative. The only difference will be that the migrants will increasingly come from further afield. and we will have less control over their numbers.
 
jogills said:
Take away the immigration of people of younger working age and our demographic profiler is inevitably older and sicker. As to Japan nothing I said is contoversial. Theirs was an economy posted as the envy of the world and we were encouraged to fear, or marvel at their inevitable ascent to the most successful economy in the world overtaking the US. Their problems were an early warning to the rest of us, any of this sound familiar/

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/123015/3-economic-challenges-
japan-faces-2016.asp

We need migrant labour to ease us through our current demography. Migration has solved similar problems throughout history, post war migration was designed to fuill the gaps in our labour force and did so effectively. We are currently suffering bfrom a shortage of labour at all levels and saying other countriues have problems too does not help us.

This government has presided over high levels of migration and will continue to do so while making contray nouises to fit with its ideology and false narrative. The only difference will be that the migrants will increasingly come from further afield. and we will have less control over their numbers.
Click to expand...
In the 60's & 70's the German government issued visas to thousands of Turkish workers, principally for their car industry. the visas were for a limited period, so the Turks earnt fairly good money compared to home, but were made to go back for a period before returning, i.e. no settled status. despite labour shortages around Europe, it might have been an attractive proposition here.
 
RotherhitheGill said:
Half watching the TV debate - conclusion, I don't like or trust any of them. :(
Click to expand...
I felt that Rishi and Truss were the strongest. But strangely I felt that while Penny was the weakest she possibly has the best chance of winning. She definitely shot herself in the foot with the final question. She should have gone for one of the other two favourites. For me nothing was really said .Not that impressed by anyone. Rishi seems the strongest leader .But possibly his policies won't sit well with many Tories. Truss's past might well haunt her Liberal and remainer will cause enough doubts among members. Penny doesn't appear strong enough but I can see her winning. If only because there is nobody else.Labour can win the election on the strength of this debate .Not impressed at all.
 
chris who said:
I felt that Rishi and Truss were the strongest. But strangely I felt that while Penny was the weakest she possibly has the best chance of winning. She definitely shot herself in the foot with the final question. She should have gone for one of the other two favourites. For me nothing was really said .Not that impressed by anyone. Rishi seems the strongest leader .But possibly his policies won't sit well with many Tories. Truss's past might well haunt her Liberal and remainer will cause enough doubts among members. Penny doesn't appear strong enough but I can see her winning. If only because there is nobody else.Labour can win the election on the strength of this debate .Not impressed at all.
Click to expand...

Watched it but immediately can’t remember any of it. I think Ms Mordaunt will win if she gets down to the final two after the MP’s vote, but I wouldn’t discount Mr Sunak ‘lending’ some of his votes to someone else to keep her off the final ticket. Then it’s down to Tory party members.
 
PuB said:
Watched it but immediately can’t remember any of it. I think Ms Mordaunt will win if she gets down to the final two after the MP’s vote, but I wouldn’t discount Mr Sunak ‘lending’ some of his votes to someone else to keep her off the final ticket. Then it’s down to Tory party members.
Click to expand...
I have to admit I really didn't know Ms Mordaunt or the other two lowest ranked candidates at all .
I was expecting her to be far more decisive and impressive. Sunak and Truss apart they came across very wishy washy.The past of Truss and Sunak will go against then with members I think.So based on that I think Ms Mordaunt will possibly win .But I really can't see her winning a election . But then nor can I see "more of the same" Sunak winning a election.
 
Last edited:
chris who said:
I have to admit I really didn't know Ms Mordaunt or the other two lowest ranked candidates at all .
I was expecting her to be far more decisive and impressive. Sanak and Truss apart they came across very wishy washy.The past of Truss and Sanak will go against then with members I think.So based on that I think Ms Mordaunt will possibly win .But I really can't see her winning a election . But then nor can I see "more of the same" Sanak winning a election.
Click to expand...
It's 'Sunak' , which I believe is an Indian name.
Not always easy to spell/pronounce , I know.
 
Perhaps the most telling moment was when Rishi Sunak accused Liz Truss of being more socialist than Corbyn. That has to be political suicide for one of them .No doubt at least one will make the final two.But if Starmer, Davey and others can't use that to their advantage it would amaze me.
 
As I wrote after the first one, Sunak and Truss both speak with a leadership air of confidence. Unfortunately if this is how the portray themselves in private hustings today, then I can’t see past them for the final 2. Then another 2 years of “same old” who ever gets it.

Probably just prefer Sunak out the two, but only just.
 
Lockdown #214 - politics aside, they all seem a greasy bunch. Can you honestly say there is one of them you would want to live next door to (exclude the problem of property prices) or go for a drink down the pub with?
 
I watched the first episode when the audience were asked if they trusted polititians and no one put there hand up, then I remembered the pledge re building of 40 new hospitals, (how they would ever staff them heaven only knows) oh yes I should say completion by 2030 and again last night, I would still look out of the window to see if it was raining if told by one of them it was not.
I thought Sunak ducked the question about his wifes tax affairs, simly saying she came from a wealthy family whose father had started a business from nothing.
None of them impressed me, sad state of affairs with so much that needs sorting out in the coming months, cost of living, NI stalemate with the EU, NHS, house building, (there are 100,000 living in temp. accommodation in the UK),
the Russian threat in Europe and climate change re zero emissisions.
I hope I am wrong but the government of the day will need to get it's act together and pretty quick.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.