Farage, in a not at all racist intervention, says that Sunak 'Doesn’t care about our culture and lacks an understanding of British values' after he left D-Day commemorations. This bloke does, though.... Reform candidate said UK should have been neutral against Hitler - BBC News
My point was really about the fallacy of using WW2 rhetoric to justify a political position in 2024. People on every side fall into that trap and I don't think it helps political discourse.
Yeah, but, no, but Stroller started it. I do kinda agree with you on that point, though, particularly when one recalls the people overwhelmingly voting in Attlee’s administration straight after the War.
You assume incorrectly, and I'm also not in finance or based in the City. I do, however, benefit from cheaper immigrant labour, as does the whole country on net - although I'm self-aware enough to realise there are some losers in that equation, even if there are more winners overall. A huge amount of how people vote is imaginary. We have a rapidly aging population, and the only way we're going to be able to afford that is through much higher taxes for social care (& health), which is so controversial that it sunk May's 2017 election campaign dead, or through replenishing our workforce via immigration.
Sorry, Ubes, wasn't anything personal against you - and I'm sure I've done it lots of times before. I just saw an egregious example of it and so made the point. I enjoy your contributions on this thread. Attlee is a great example - in 1945 people wanted to move on and a new social contract was formed. I'd love to look at the history of WW2 rhetoric and see if there was a lull after the war and if it came back into prominence at certain points.
Perhaps, then, I can assume you're a white collar worker, in the office and/or working from home. Those losers you refer to will be almost exclusively manual workers, who are undercut by the cheap labour you're so keen to bring in. Here's the view of Matthew Syed in the Sunday Times this w/e. He's partly from immigrant stock himself, and is hardly a right winger: "[We, the UK, have to] lose our addiction to low-wage labour, which saves money here and there but stores up vast liabilities because such workers are net recipients of tax funds - a classic Ponzi scheme. Instead, we should pay higher wages to attract British workers, while focusing immigration policy on high skilled individuals, who tend to integrate superbly and whose enterprise and ideas will not just boost GDP per capita but enrich our society, as immigrants often do." He, personally, is no supporter of Farage, but believes the greater menace is the advocates of the "liberal consensus" who created the conditions for the rise of populism. For me, he is persuasive.
I think mentioning WW2 on the 80th anniversary of D-Day ought to be acceptable. This is what I find most frustrating about this campaign, and Labour's part in it in particular. Pretending that you can solve health and social care problems without raising taxes, and pretending that you can drastically reduce immigration when you have an aging population and a low birth rate is just dishonest. The Liberals have at least now said that they will raise £9.4 billion from capital gains tax and a bank levy. I believe that Labour will have to do the same and more - hopefully a one-off wealth tax - but they just won't say it.
He is, and I'm fine with his view in theory. I'm not sure it actually pans out in reality. Minimum wage in this country is comparatively high vs most other countries for a start. Secondly, despite this, unemployment has stayed remarkably low despite various economic shocks in recent years. And thirdly, the nuance Syed describes is a world a way from the nonsense Farage et al sprout - most recently with his target of 'net zero immigration'. I'm glad Syed acknowledges the desperate need we have for skilled immigrants - if we could all even just agree on that, then I'd be happy enough.
I'm looking forward to the Lab manifesto as I'm - as it stands - going to vote for them for the first time, but increasingly reluctantly. I'd really rather them be up front about where the pain will be.
There's no reason why the UK couldn't take in skilled migrants, and maintain net zero immigration for a period. That might head off the kind of problems, and voters reaction to those problems, that we're seeing on The Continent. Remember, the issues re migrants is not restricted to economic.
I am not sure we need highly skilled immigration tbh We need care workers, fruit pickers, seasonal farm workers.
Rather interestingly, down in Kent (where I have cause to go regularly these days) the farmers are turning away young kids because it’s cheaper to recruit the immigrants. That in itself can’t be right.
What immigrants...legal ones. That cannot be right...as they have to be paid ( adult) minimum wage. Kids get a lower minimum wage. So the farmers are employing illegal immigrants?
Skilled immigrants in manufacturing, technology, financial services etc would bring real value. Seasonal workers can be given a seasonal visa now anyway. Pay care workers more, and UK residents will apply in greater numbers
Maybe or maybe not. There seems to be quite a lucrative racket in housing 25 blokes in your garage and ferrying them in.
please log in to view this image Just catching up on the newspapers from the weekend - what an embarrassing photo.
