FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Freedom of Movement
Freedom of Movement
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By *oi_Lucy OP Couple
over a year ago
Barbados |
OK, something I've just seen pointed out that makes some sense as a possible theory. Whilst both of these things are well known, I'd never seen them put together:
1) As we know, 'Freedom of Movement' in the EU means that someone can move to another country in the EU for up to 3 months. After 3 months they have to prove they have the resources/insurance/job/etc not to be a burden on the country. As we know, the UK is (one of?) the only country that doesn't actually enforce this (we also never implemented the restriction on the new eastern European countries joining, but that is a different matter).
2) Also, we know that migrants in the UK are a net economic benefit. The only reason we don't like them here is basic racism / xenophobia / tabloid-induced-paranoia.
So the theory is that the reason we never bothered to enforce the 3-month rule is that it would require us to actually track immigrants coming in, and would probably require us to have a national ID system of some kind. Neither of which we want due to cost and ethical/privacy reasons. And seeing as the immigrants are an economic benefit and necessary for our workforce, there was no point in enforcing the 3-month rule.
-Matt |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andS66Couple
over a year ago
Derby |
Are we spending on the infrastructure to support immigration?
If now, why not? And shouldn't we? If immigration is a net fiscal benefit, then why aren't we spending that money on the infrastructure to support them?
Also the studies done do not take account of worker displacement costs, the suppression of wages (and therefore lower tax take), and children of immigrants born in the UK are counted as UK citizens and not a cost of immigration - so therefore their cost (education, health etc) is not allocated to immigration. Other costs that are not taken into account in government figures include housing benefit costs (somewhere between 1 and 2 Billion), and costs of translators and translations in hospitals and other public services.
It's a very difficult subject, and there are various studies ranging from a net benefit of c40 Billion to a net cost of over 100 Billion. Studies are not helped either by the lack of reliable data - calculations and studies are littered with estimates, guestimates, and fudge factors. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Are we spending on the infrastructure to support immigration?
If now, why not? And shouldn't we? If immigration is a net fiscal benefit, then why aren't we spending that money on the infrastructure to support them?
Also the studies done do not take account of worker displacement costs, the suppression of wages (and therefore lower tax take), and children of immigrants born in the UK are counted as UK citizens and not a cost of immigration - so therefore their cost (education, health etc) is not allocated to immigration. Other costs that are not taken into account in government figures include housing benefit costs (somewhere between 1 and 2 Billion), and costs of translators and translations in hospitals and other public services.
It's a very difficult subject, and there are various studies ranging from a net benefit of c40 Billion to a net cost of over 100 Billion. Studies are not helped either by the lack of reliable data - calculations and studies are littered with estimates, guestimates, and fudge factors."
Whilst I personally think they are a NET benefit you are correct, there is a lot of contradictory data and it's difficult to actually say for sure one way or another.
However the point of the OPs post was to point out two things:-
1. Government could control EU immigration a lot better than it does or has without any change to our EU status.
2. Government chooses not to do this because it believes increasing immigration improves the economic statics (it definitely increases GDP for example).
This applies to governments of Red, Blue and Blue with a touch of Yellow. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Of course the question that BREXITers have to ask themselves is if no government has controlled EU immigration as much as they could have even while in the EU, what makes them think they'll start doing it when we ever leave? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Of course the question that BREXITers have to ask themselves is if no government has controlled EU immigration as much as they could have even while in the EU, what makes them think they'll start doing it when we ever leave?"
That's Daft !!!
The reason it's not been Controlled is because we had to give Freedom of Movement while in the E U !  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Of course the question that BREXITers have to ask themselves is if no government has controlled EU immigration as much as they could have even while in the EU, what makes them think they'll start doing it when we ever leave? That's Daft !!!
The reason it's not been Controlled is because we had to give Freedom of Movement while in the E U ! "
You've totally missed what was said in the op Suity  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Of course the question that BREXITers have to ask themselves is if no government has controlled EU immigration as much as they could have even while in the EU, what makes them think they'll start doing it when we ever leave? That's Daft !!!
The reason it's not been Controlled is because we had to give Freedom of Movement while in the E U ! "
I had the freedom to move to the Netherlands. But I had to jump through hoops to do it.
1. To rent I need a bank account and proof of wage.
2. To work I needed a bank account to pay into.
2. To get a bank account I need an address and a national social security number.
3. To register for a social security number I needed an address |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Of course the question that BREXITers have to ask themselves is if no government has controlled EU immigration as much as they could have even while in the EU, what makes them think they'll start doing it when we ever leave? That's Daft !!!
The reason it's not been Controlled is because we had to give Freedom of Movement while in the E U ! "
http://www.literacytrust.org.uk/adult_literacy/adult_literacy_help
That might help you out since you seemed to be unable to read the posts in this thread. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Of course the question that BREXITers have to ask themselves is if no government has controlled EU immigration as much as they could have even while in the EU, what makes them think they'll start doing it when we ever leave? That's Daft !!!
The reason it's not been Controlled is because we had to give Freedom of Movement while in the E U !
That's the normal procedure in almost any EU country . The lack of such procedures in the UK is rather a matter of local or national negligence
I had the freedom to move to the Netherlands. But I had to jump through hoops to do it.
1. To rent I need a bank account and proof of wage.
2. To work I needed a bank account to pay into.
2. To get a bank account I need an address and a national social security number.
3. To register for a social security number I needed an address"
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oi_Lucy OP Couple
over a year ago
Barbados |
"Of course the question that BREXITers have to ask themselves is if no government has controlled EU immigration as much as they could have even while in the EU, what makes them think they'll start doing it when we ever leave?"
Indeed. And considering May was home sec for how many years? And couldn't hit her own targets despite having the tools to do so. Does make me wonder f she really wanted to hit them. Remember her in front of the select committee when she was asked which would take priority if immigration was necessary for economic growth.
-Matt |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago
North West |
"Are we spending on the infrastructure to support immigration?
If now, why not? And shouldn't we? If immigration is a net fiscal benefit, then why aren't we spending that money on the infrastructure to support them?
Also the studies done do not take account of worker displacement costs, the suppression of wages (and therefore lower tax take), and children of immigrants born in the UK are counted as UK citizens and not a cost of immigration - so therefore their cost (education, health etc) is not allocated to immigration. Other costs that are not taken into account in government figures include housing benefit costs (somewhere between 1 and 2 Billion), and costs of translators and translations in hospitals and other public services.
It's a very difficult subject, and there are various studies ranging from a net benefit of c40 Billion to a net cost of over 100 Billion. Studies are not helped either by the lack of reliable data - calculations and studies are littered with estimates, guestimates, and fudge factors."
The import of generally young and healthy migrants is and always has been of benefit to the host country. You dont need a swathe of studies to figure that out.
The import of "wives" and relatives via the non EU immigration route is also clearly going to be burdensome if the culture being imported is that of stay at home close relations.
What is also very evident and also needs no swathe of studies is that a falling population is catastrophic for the host country.
Common sense trumps studies. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Of course the question that BREXITers have to ask themselves is if no government has controlled EU immigration as much as they could have even while in the EU, what makes them think they'll start doing it when we ever leave? That's Daft !!!
The reason it's not been Controlled is because we had to give Freedom of Movement while in the E U ! "
Try reading my whole post because I said that under current EU free movement rules we could have done more.
For a start we don't have to allow anyone to stay here who can't show they have the means to support themselves and their dependents. We don't have to allow anyone in who does not have adequate health insurance. These rules currently apply to EU citizens but we choose not to enforce them. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Of course the question that BREXITers have to ask themselves is if no government has controlled EU immigration as much as they could have even while in the EU, what makes them think they'll start doing it when we ever leave? That's Daft !!!
The reason it's not been Controlled is because we had to give Freedom of Movement while in the E U !
I had the freedom to move to the Netherlands. But I had to jump through hoops to do it.
1. To rent I need a bank account and proof of wage.
2. To work I needed a bank account to pay into.
2. To get a bank account I need an address and a national social security number.
3. To register for a social security number I needed an address"
The point is is that free movement is free movement of LABOUR not people. That's the way most of the rest of the EU sees it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Of course the question that BREXITers have to ask themselves is if no government has controlled EU immigration as much as they could have even while in the EU, what makes them think they'll start doing it when we ever leave? That's Daft !!!
The reason it's not been Controlled is because we had to give Freedom of Movement while in the E U !
Try reading my whole post because I said that under current EU free movement rules we could have done more.
For a start we don't have to allow anyone to stay here who can't show they have the means to support themselves and their dependents. We don't have to allow anyone in who does not have adequate health insurance. These rules currently apply to EU citizens but we choose not to enforce them. "
We do enforce them though. Plenty of people are deported for not exercising treaty rights |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
For years the tories used the eu as a scapegoat anything bad that was happening was due to eu rules and anything good was down to the British government in a way they brought brexit on themselves look at the immigration data as much people was coming in from out side the eu as inside and they do have total control of people coming from outside so why wasn't those numbers slashed if they really wanted to crack down on immigration? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oi_Lucy OP Couple
over a year ago
Barbados |
"For years the tories used the eu as a scapegoat anything bad that was happening was due to eu rules and anything good was down to the British government in a way they brought brexit on themselves look at the immigration data as much people was coming in from out side the eu as inside and they do have total control of people coming from outside so why wasn't those numbers slashed if they really wanted to crack down on immigration?"
In some ways that would be the only actual benefit of Brexit. That our government would no longer be able to blame all its failings on the EU and would have to actually get it's shit together.
Though I bet the tabloids would still be blaming the EU for the UKs problems after we left.
-Matt |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"For years the tories used the eu as a scapegoat anything bad that was happening was due to eu rules and anything good was down to the British government in a way they brought brexit on themselves look at the immigration data as much people was coming in from out side the eu as inside and they do have total control of people coming from outside so why wasn't those numbers slashed if they really wanted to crack down on immigration?
In some ways that would be the only actual benefit of Brexit. That our government would no longer be able to blame all its failings on the EU and would have to actually get it's shit together.
Though I bet the tabloids would still be blaming the EU for the UKs problems after we left.
-Matt"
They will blame remainers |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Are we spending on the infrastructure to support immigration?
If now, why not? And shouldn't we? If immigration is a net fiscal benefit, then why aren't we spending that money on the infrastructure to support them?
Also the studies done do not take account of worker displacement costs, the suppression of wages (and therefore lower tax take), and children of immigrants born in the UK are counted as UK citizens and not a cost of immigration - so therefore their cost (education, health etc) is not allocated to immigration. Other costs that are not taken into account in government figures include housing benefit costs (somewhere between 1 and 2 Billion), and costs of translators and translations in hospitals and other public services.
It's a very difficult subject, and there are various studies ranging from a net benefit of c40 Billion to a net cost of over 100 Billion. Studies are not helped either by the lack of reliable data - calculations and studies are littered with estimates, guestimates, and fudge factors."
Independent bodies like Migrationwatch UK say that immigration is a net drain on the economy and not a benefit for some of the reasons you just gave, they also cite many other reasons you've not listed. Even Lib dem MP Vince Cable was saying a few months ago that immigration is not a net benefit when all things are taken into consideration such as the cost of schooling immigrants kids and other drains on public services that they use. Vince Cable said it was most likely cost neutral in his view when all the pros and cons were weighed up against each other there was neither a benefit or a drain. Very high levels of immigration should not only be measured in economic terms though, there is a cultural cost to be paid, and a negative cost to the well being of society when too much immigration, too quickly causes tensions in communities and this has been happening in many parts of the country. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Are we spending on the infrastructure to support immigration?
If now, why not? And shouldn't we? If immigration is a net fiscal benefit, then why aren't we spending that money on the infrastructure to support them?
Also the studies done do not take account of worker displacement costs, the suppression of wages (and therefore lower tax take), and children of immigrants born in the UK are counted as UK citizens and not a cost of immigration - so therefore their cost (education, health etc) is not allocated to immigration. Other costs that are not taken into account in government figures include housing benefit costs (somewhere between 1 and 2 Billion), and costs of translators and translations in hospitals and other public services.
It's a very difficult subject, and there are various studies ranging from a net benefit of c40 Billion to a net cost of over 100 Billion. Studies are not helped either by the lack of reliable data - calculations and studies are littered with estimates, guestimates, and fudge factors.
Independent bodies like Migrationwatch UK say that immigration is a net drain on the economy and not a benefit for some of the reasons you just gave, they also cite many other reasons you've not listed. Even Lib dem MP Vince Cable was saying a few months ago that immigration is not a net benefit when all things are taken into consideration such as the cost of schooling immigrants kids and other drains on public services that they use. Vince Cable said it was most likely cost neutral in his view when all the pros and cons were weighed up against each other there was neither a benefit or a drain. Very high levels of immigration should not only be measured in economic terms though, there is a cultural cost to be paid, and a negative cost to the well being of society when too much immigration, too quickly causes tensions in communities and this has been happening in many parts of the country. "
Independent from government perhaps, but Migrationwatch has a very specific agenda that is anti-immigration in a way that a government body couldn't be.
Immigration has great economic benefits as well as cultural benefits including language, the arts, food, music etc. To try to be mono-cultural is to actually be anti British. We have always been a multicultural society. To deny this is to deny this country's history and heritage. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Independent bodies like Migrationwatch UK
They are an anti-immigration right wing pressure group. Not really independent in the sense of 'neutral', however they describe themselves.
"
And Vince Cable of the Lib dems who's comments I highlighted. Is he a right wing front as well?  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andS66Couple
over a year ago
Derby |
"
Independent bodies like Migrationwatch UK
They are an anti-immigration right wing pressure group. Not really independent in the sense of 'neutral', however they describe themselves.
And Vince Cable of the Lib dems who's comments I highlighted. Is he a right wing front as well? "
Of course he is! In fact, he's so far out to the right he could well be the reincarnation if Hitler!
They've probably not even trade the full report from migrationwatch. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Independent bodies like Migrationwatch UK
They are an anti-immigration right wing pressure group. Not really independent in the sense of 'neutral', however they describe themselves.
And Vince Cable of the Lib dems who's comments I highlighted. Is he a right wing front as well? "
I think you're missing the point, or at least the point I'm trying to make.
Whether immigration is a benefit to the economy is a debateable point but it's definitely beyond doubt that it improves the main key economic indicator used to measure the economy which is GDP. An increasing GDP allows government to claim that the economy is growing, which is why all governments, regardless what they say, have no real interest in bringing it down, whether in the EU or not. Which leads me back to my original question which is, why do you think the government will do more to control immigration when we leave the EU when it's not even doing everything it can to control it now? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oodmessMan
over a year ago
yumsville |
Why would we all have to carry ID cards for the apparent 100k economic migrants? Surely this would lead to a bit of a totalitarian authority, whereby 'show us your papers', would be a prerequisite for the sake of migrants who, if they were unable to find employment, would go back to their original country?
I'd foresee the majority of economic migrants being employed on a contractual basis where they'd know exactly how long they have employment for and would be looking around for future contracts before their termination (with a grace period at the end).
Even if they were here without skills or in a skilled/semi-skilled capacity (where contracts are shorter in length), then we already have powers within our legal system to punish those who take on undocumented workers, jeopardise rights, H&S, or house..? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Of course the question that BREXITers have to ask themselves is if no government has controlled EU immigration as much as they could have even while in the EU, what makes them think they'll start doing it when we ever leave?"
If freedom of movement only applied to EU citizens then why didn't the conservative government manage to reduce immigration from other nations the targets they set? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ir1967Man
over a year ago
in da sticks, london, amsterdam, madrid |
"Of course the question that BREXITers have to ask themselves is if no government has controlled EU immigration as much as they could have even while in the EU, what makes them think they'll start doing it when we ever leave?
If freedom of movement only applied to EU citizens then why didn't the conservative government manage to reduce immigration from other nations the targets they set?"
Spot on, certainly nothing to do with EU but local choice made |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
