Domino

and yet the CBI amongst others are complaining that Uni's aren't turning out enough engineers - but when they looked at the courses available it was found that they didn't cover current skills. The Uni's aren't meeting the needs of industry because they don't discuss forward planning of courses and skills.

as to degrees in theatre arts/media studies, a little bit like a degree in Hospitality or Tourism, or even Journalism - look at the poor quality English language skills found every day on webnews.
all just an excuse to justify keeping people in school for longer as there are no jobs for them.
I remember having a temp who had a degree in Modern Dance, excellent receptionist just kept complaining it was a waste of a good degree.

jackytoo

That's rubbish put out by the government in the hope someone will believe it 98% knows it's wrong. It did not include all benefits.

" a former government official claimed migrants were 20 per cent more likely to be claiming working tax credit than Britons. Nearly 500,000 migrants are claiming the in-work benefit, a former HM Revenue and Customs official said. Ministers have previously said they do not know how many foreigners claim tax credits."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...-tourists.html

me me

Sell the big issue, work the hours needed to be eligible for working tax credits, then claim housing benefit (in some cases 400 pound a week), and a whole host of others. not to mention free NHS.

The claimant will not then be classed as getting JSA, will be classed as contributing to the economy, when we all know what a crock that is.

Q.But what advantage are incomers like that to the UK.

A. NONE

agoreira

Meanwhile, we are kicking out people like this. We can't kick out rapists, murderers etc but our colonial cousins, well that's OK.

IamStu

I don´t mean to put out your flames but ...

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/1...9A40MD20131105

My wife (an economist) has often claimed the benefits of immigration far outway the negatives! Apparantly so

agoreira

I wouln't ever take what an economists says too seriously. Their track record is not brilliant.
http://shaundacosta.wordpress.com/20...s-of-all-time/

me me

Apparently there are economists that disagree with your wife, and all their opinions and that of your wife are only formed by the data they are given to work with.

I would not know where your wife gets her info from, but these guys from the migration observatory, must be quite well clued up with first hand info, not info gleaned from google or the press.

And for every 12 ecomonists that say immigrants to the UK make a net contribution, there will be a dozen economists that disagree.

And for every 6 links that show immigration is good for the countries finances there will be another half dozen that show immigration is bad.

The time factor involved can make a difference, if the figures are calculated on a yearly basis, it can look like net benefit, but taken over 5 years it can come out as a negative benefit to the UK, with immigrants taking out more than they put in.

Lots of variables arranged to fit the required result.

It is all a numbers game, and the game will be played depending on what side of the fence the statisticians are being paid to portray. ie for or against immigration.

http://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk...immigration-uk

cricketman

That looks like an excellent source, unlike many others that pontificate about immigration

Of course it still only assesses the fiscal impact, there are other impacts on wages, society, education etc.

I summarise simply that those of us who have ever been an immigrant (like myself and most on this forum) would be hypocritical in the extreme to not allow others to have the same opportunities that we have enjoyed.

me me

Not having any inside information on immigration and the pluses or minus it brings, or any idea how a net benefit or a negative figure is calculated, I would like to put my own case and a study, to be commented on.

I do not know what I am classed as, in the immigration calcs for positive on negative benefit to the country.

I am the daughter of 2 Spanish immigrants, I was born in the UK as were my siblings and the siblings of my OH.

OH was the eldest, born in Spain before his parents went to live and work in the UK. His siblings were born in UK.

All 4 our 4 parents worked and paid taxes, but in return both sets of children were educated and had free health care, dentists etc.
Would us British born children, (except my OH) be counted as immigrant children, as we were born to immigrants, or as native children as we were born in the UK.

All the children born to the original 4 Spainsh immigrants, worked too, so are we classed as being immigrants children who are a net benefit to the country or are we classed as British net contributors to the economy.

If all the children born to the original 4 Spanish immigrants ended up on the dole with a hoard of kids each, would we be classed as immigrants taking out of the social secrutiy pot or would we be Brits taking out of the pot?

So as you can see the variable just in my and OH case can be read in so many different ways.

As I have said I do not know how we are calculated or where we figure on the figures to show if our families are net contributors or "taker outers" of the British money pot.

If anyone can tell me, you are a better man than I am. Or woman.

me me

Coming from the same standpoint as you, I agree about the opportunities, and others having the same ones.

The only problem is, having a country is like having a family, if you have 3 children you may be able to give them a good uni education, then child number 4 may not be able to go to uni as the family finances don´t permit it.

Then what if you go on to have child 5 and 6.......the will never have the same opportunities as the first 3 either.

Surely just because one group of people benefited through immigration, it cannot be wrong to deny others the same opportunity if the country cannot sustain it.

In the same way that a couple cannot have unlimited children and expect the latter ones to still have the same opportunities in life, when the family finances cannot afford it.

Surely running a country is family planning on a larger scale.

IamStu

Spot on meme, like you say its a numbers game. Stats can prove whatever the heck one likes, for or against any argument!

I believe my wifes "knowledge" come´s from L.S.E. Certainly not "from Google or the Press"!

cricketman

If it were, then we would be living in a socialist state where people actually care about the well being of each other

As it is, we don't and free market economics insist on year on year GDP growth being the ultimate goal. In this environment then the more immigrants the better as more bodies means more overall production and spending power - no matter if the average production/spending power actually reduces

cricketman

A poor understanding of stats and the inability to interpret numbers is what allows people to think that stats can prove or disprove anything

The truth is that there are a lot of very poor or immoral scientists and economists out there who misuse stats to either gain notoriety or because they are being paid by corporations or governments to do so

An intelligent and well planned statistical analysis will only ever reveal the truth

jackytoo

They do that a lot with Commonwealth Countries. They now often refuse visas for talented students of classical music who have gained scholarships and would be no cost to the country.

I don't see how the Government can accurately say immigrants are a benefit seeing as they don't know how many are receiving benefits. read they didn't count HB. Increased burden on the NHS is a cost, so is the emergence of TB. Used to be a different migration. Now it is mainly illiterate, E. Europeans with 8 kids each. etc.

IamStu

Your last comment reads as though we agree What ever that truth might be