FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Immigration Policy
Immigration Policy
Jump to: Newest in thread
That should get us started. | |||
| |||
"I get the reciprocal approach but what would that look like in practice? Legal immigration into the UK comes from many countries would you imagine the USA changing its immigration policy to meet ours? Or do we end up in a position of tiered level countries with different criteria? I agree with points based and the ability to weight the points towards certain skills. I would also add that to be a fully functioning immigration policy it would also need to contain wealth measurements. If a person was investing into the UK above a predefined amount and creating jobs that would be an immigration gold stamp." Reciprocal wouldn't be preferable but I wouldn't necessarily argue against it. I'd agree with your 'gold stamp' | |||
"I get the reciprocal approach but what would that look like in practice? Legal immigration into the UK comes from many countries would you imagine the USA changing its immigration policy to meet ours? Or do we end up in a position of tiered level countries with different criteria? I agree with points based and the ability to weight the points towards certain skills. I would also add that to be a fully functioning immigration policy it would also need to contain wealth measurements. If a person was investing into the UK above a predefined amount and creating jobs that would be an immigration gold stamp." We already have a wealth gold stamp, hence the oligarchs and the money laundering fronts everywhere in London | |||
"I get the reciprocal approach but what would that look like in practice? Legal immigration into the UK comes from many countries would you imagine the USA changing its immigration policy to meet ours? Or do we end up in a position of tiered level countries with different criteria? I agree with points based and the ability to weight the points towards certain skills. I would also add that to be a fully functioning immigration policy it would also need to contain wealth measurements. If a person was investing into the UK above a predefined amount and creating jobs that would be an immigration gold stamp. We already have a wealth gold stamp, hence the oligarchs and the money laundering fronts everywhere in London " Do you have an idea to share with us? | |||
"I get the reciprocal approach but what would that look like in practice? Legal immigration into the UK comes from many countries would you imagine the USA changing its immigration policy to meet ours? Or do we end up in a position of tiered level countries with different criteria? I agree with points based and the ability to weight the points towards certain skills. I would also add that to be a fully functioning immigration policy it would also need to contain wealth measurements. If a person was investing into the UK above a predefined amount and creating jobs that would be an immigration gold stamp. We already have a wealth gold stamp, hence the oligarchs and the money laundering fronts everywhere in London Do you have an idea to share with us?" Oh I have plenty of ideas, mucker. | |||
"I get the reciprocal approach but what would that look like in practice? Legal immigration into the UK comes from many countries would you imagine the USA changing its immigration policy to meet ours? Or do we end up in a position of tiered level countries with different criteria? I agree with points based and the ability to weight the points towards certain skills. I would also add that to be a fully functioning immigration policy it would also need to contain wealth measurements. If a person was investing into the UK above a predefined amount and creating jobs that would be an immigration gold stamp. We already have a wealth gold stamp, hence the oligarchs and the money laundering fronts everywhere in London Do you have an idea to share with us? Oh I have plenty of ideas, mucker. " Pet names again??
Do share... | |||
"I get the reciprocal approach but what would that look like in practice? Legal immigration into the UK comes from many countries would you imagine the USA changing its immigration policy to meet ours? Or do we end up in a position of tiered level countries with different criteria? I agree with points based and the ability to weight the points towards certain skills. I would also add that to be a fully functioning immigration policy it would also need to contain wealth measurements. If a person was investing into the UK above a predefined amount and creating jobs that would be an immigration gold stamp. We already have a wealth gold stamp, hence the oligarchs and the money laundering fronts everywhere in London Do you have an idea to share with us? Oh I have plenty of ideas, mucker. Pet names again??
Do share..."Nah, I think I’m done conversing with you. Your attitude on another thread has revealed you for what you are. Go well. | |||
"I get the reciprocal approach but what would that look like in practice? Legal immigration into the UK comes from many countries would you imagine the USA changing its immigration policy to meet ours? Or do we end up in a position of tiered level countries with different criteria? I agree with points based and the ability to weight the points towards certain skills. I would also add that to be a fully functioning immigration policy it would also need to contain wealth measurements. If a person was investing into the UK above a predefined amount and creating jobs that would be an immigration gold stamp. We already have a wealth gold stamp, hence the oligarchs and the money laundering fronts everywhere in London Do you have an idea to share with us? Oh I have plenty of ideas, mucker. Pet names again??
Do share...
Nah, I think I’m done conversing with you. Your attitude on another thread has revealed you for what you are.
Go well. "
See ya. | |||
"I get the reciprocal approach but what would that look like in practice? Legal immigration into the UK comes from many countries would you imagine the USA changing its immigration policy to meet ours? Or do we end up in a position of tiered level countries with different criteria? I agree with points based and the ability to weight the points towards certain skills. I would also add that to be a fully functioning immigration policy it would also need to contain wealth measurements. If a person was investing into the UK above a predefined amount and creating jobs that would be an immigration gold stamp. We already have a wealth gold stamp, hence the oligarchs and the money laundering fronts everywhere in London " We do have a high worth tier 1 system but as far as I'm aware it applies to cash that can be invested. I would like to see that change to jobs created, that is where serious investors are being sort, not the type you mentioned who have 2 million under the bed and it means nothing to them. | |||
| |||
"CANZUK freedom of movement needs to happen like years ago." I'd be all for CANZUK. Probably because I'd make use of it | |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started."Ha ha ha thanks for the shout out. A good idea is a good idea. So unsurprisingly I totally concur! | |||
"CANZUK freedom of movement needs to happen like years ago." Well that would solve the shortage of bar staff and hospitality workers  | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started."Access to university education for essential workers should be free subject to the students agreeing a minimum service contract (10 years?). It is nonsense that Doctors, Nurses, CPS Lawyers and other key professionals are forced into tens of thousands of pounds worth of debt when they could be educated for free as long as they supported the national economy for a given period of time after graduation. This could apply equally across all parts of the Civil Service and would stop post graduate students deciding (quite rightly at the moment) to go and earn their money in other parts of the world that pay them better once they graduate. The desire to maintain the politics of a free market economy is fine when your economy is at the top of the league table, but the cyclical nature of economies mean that longer-term, national protection strategies should be a foundation of the higher education system for the times (like now) when the country is struggling. | |||
"CANZUK freedom of movement needs to happen like years ago." Just watching ‘Ten Pound Poms’ at the moment. Not sure (if the show is a true reflection of what happened in the 1950’s) that the Aussies are such true friends. I experienced abuse from Aussies in the late 1970’s in Sydney and Brisbane and I could relate to some of the stuff in Ten Pound Poms. | |||
"Access to university education for essential workers should be free subject to the students agreeing a minimum service contract (10 years?). It is nonsense that Doctors, Nurses, CPS Lawyers and other key professionals are forced into tens of thousands of pounds worth of debt when they could be educated for free as long as they supported the national economy for a given period of time after graduation." That would be illegal under "modern sl@very" rules. But assuming it wasn't, how would you intend to deal with the 40% of students that fail their course? | |||
"Access to university education for essential workers should be free subject to the students agreeing a minimum service contract (10 years?). It is nonsense that Doctors, Nurses, CPS Lawyers and other key professionals are forced into tens of thousands of pounds worth of debt when they could be educated for free as long as they supported the national economy for a given period of time after graduation. That would be illegal under "modern sl@very" rules. But assuming it wasn't, how would you intend to deal with the 40% of students that fail their course?" It could be possible to have a 'training agreement' whereby, a student starts with say '40k debt' which reduces for each year working for the state. If they leave beforehand it reverts to the current student loan system. | |||
"Access to university education for essential workers should be free subject to the students agreeing a minimum service contract (10 years?). It is nonsense that Doctors, Nurses, CPS Lawyers and other key professionals are forced into tens of thousands of pounds worth of debt when they could be educated for free as long as they supported the national economy for a given period of time after graduation." "That would be illegal under "modern sl@very" rules. But assuming it wasn't, how would you intend to deal with the 40% of students that fail their course?" "It could be possible to have a 'training agreement' whereby, a student starts with say '40k debt' which reduces for each year working for the state. If they leave beforehand it reverts to the current student loan system." That's a possibility, but it might still infringe on "Modern Sl@very". You're still holding the threat of a large debt if they leave, it's just that a poor person wouldn't have to pay that debt. It's not something I'd want to try to get past the ECHR. | |||
"Access to university education for essential workers should be free subject to the students agreeing a minimum service contract (10 years?). It is nonsense that Doctors, Nurses, CPS Lawyers and other key professionals are forced into tens of thousands of pounds worth of debt when they could be educated for free as long as they supported the national economy for a given period of time after graduation. That would be illegal under "modern sl@very" rules. But assuming it wasn't, how would you intend to deal with the 40% of students that fail their course? It could be possible to have a 'training agreement' whereby, a student starts with say '40k debt' which reduces for each year working for the state. If they leave beforehand it reverts to the current student loan system. That's a possibility, but it might still infringe on "Modern Sl@very". You're still holding the threat of a large debt if they leave, it's just that a poor person wouldn't have to pay that debt. It's not something I'd want to try to get past the ECHR." I'm sure there would be a workaround. Right now they leave university with the debt regardless. Under my 'plan', they have the debt paid for them by the state should they work for them. It actually happens in private business everyday. I know I'm short on detail but it's just a thought. | |||
"Access to university education for essential workers should be free subject to the students agreeing a minimum service contract (10 years?). It is nonsense that Doctors, Nurses, CPS Lawyers and other key professionals are forced into tens of thousands of pounds worth of debt when they could be educated for free as long as they supported the national economy for a given period of time after graduation. That would be illegal under "modern sl@very" rules. But assuming it wasn't, how would you intend to deal with the 40% of students that fail their course? It could be possible to have a 'training agreement' whereby, a student starts with say '40k debt' which reduces for each year working for the state. If they leave beforehand it reverts to the current student loan system. That's a possibility, but it might still infringe on "Modern Sl@very". You're still holding the threat of a large debt if they leave, it's just that a poor person wouldn't have to pay that debt. It's not something I'd want to try to get past the ECHR." This type of thing happens now. Some employers will pay for a course that is specific to the business, if a person takes the course and remains with the company for the next x years (insert real time frame) the course fees are cleared, leave before that time and they pay a % back based on time in role post graduation. Clawback terms | |||
"Access to university education for essential workers should be free subject to the students agreeing a minimum service contract (10 years?). It is nonsense that Doctors, Nurses, CPS Lawyers and other key professionals are forced into tens of thousands of pounds worth of debt when they could be educated for free as long as they supported the national economy for a given period of time after graduation. That would be illegal under "modern sl@very" rules. But assuming it wasn't, how would you intend to deal with the 40% of students that fail their course?" I do t think it would. Given that those contracts exist now currently for a fair few professions. | |||
| |||
"Access to university education for essential workers should be free subject to the students agreeing a minimum service contract (10 years?). It is nonsense that Doctors, Nurses, CPS Lawyers and other key professionals are forced into tens of thousands of pounds worth of debt when they could be educated for free as long as they supported the national economy for a given period of time after graduation. That would be illegal under "modern sl@very" rules. But assuming it wasn't, how would you intend to deal with the 40% of students that fail their course? It could be possible to have a 'training agreement' whereby, a student starts with say '40k debt' which reduces for each year working for the state. If they leave beforehand it reverts to the current student loan system. That's a possibility, but it might still infringe on "Modern Sl@very". You're still holding the threat of a large debt if they leave, it's just that a poor person wouldn't have to pay that debt. It's not something I'd want to try to get past the ECHR." I really dont think modern sl@very applies. Reading g about joining the army. The examples you are given seem the be indicating that the armed services is operating in a compeletely illegal manner. Which i highly doubt. As we'd see volumes of court cases against it. | |||
"For example. Soldiers sign up for at least 4 years. You will then have a 12 month notice period before leaving. When training tk be an accountant a firm like my ex employer will pay your exams but you the must stay on for 2 years after becoming qualified. Ornoay back your loan. Given that a student loan is essentially the same. I can't see how given these practices are currently operating you believe that the suggestion is against modern sl@very laws." The armed forces have plenty of exemptions from such rules, for instance they aren't subject to minimum wage laws, and that's been ratified by international courts. For the rest of them, yes these contracts do exist. The question is, are they enforceable? If someone were to make a claim under "Modern Sl@very" rules, would those contacts hold up in court? I don't think they would, which is why you don't see them in contracts for football players any more. | |||
| |||
"For example. Soldiers sign up for at least 4 years. You will then have a 12 month notice period before leaving. When training tk be an accountant a firm like my ex employer will pay your exams but you the must stay on for 2 years after becoming qualified. Ornoay back your loan. Given that a student loan is essentially the same. I can't see how given these practices are currently operating you believe that the suggestion is against modern sl@very laws. The armed forces have plenty of exemptions from such rules, for instance they aren't subject to minimum wage laws, and that's been ratified by international courts. For the rest of them, yes these contracts do exist. The question is, are they enforceable? If someone were to make a claim under "Modern Sl@very" rules, would those contacts hold up in court? I don't think they would, which is why you don't see them in contracts for football players any more." Then that's for a court to decide. Not for you to assert without such a decisuon I am not sure how the army is outside the scope of sl@v laws. Minimum wage and sl@v laws are not the same. When talking about legality and precedent. | |||
"Thinking outside the box, it would be worth looking into why 557,000 people chose to leave in 2022. They can't all have been students going home." People come and go from countries. I imagine many were students. Likely a back log of those who got visas extended in lockdown etc. | |||
"Access to university education for essential workers should be free subject to the students agreeing a minimum service contract (10 years?). It is nonsense that Doctors, Nurses, CPS Lawyers and other key professionals are forced into tens of thousands of pounds worth of debt when they could be educated for free as long as they supported the national economy for a given period of time after graduation. That would be illegal under "modern sl@very" rules. But assuming it wasn't, how would you intend to deal with the 40% of students that fail their course? It could be possible to have a 'training agreement' whereby, a student starts with say '40k debt' which reduces for each year working for the state. If they leave beforehand it reverts to the current student loan system. That's a possibility, but it might still infringe on "Modern Sl@very". You're still holding the threat of a large debt if they leave, it's just that a poor person wouldn't have to pay that debt. It's not something I'd want to try to get past the ECHR. I'm sure there would be a workaround. Right now they leave university with the debt regardless. Under my 'plan', they have the debt paid for them by the state should they work for them. It actually happens in private business everyday. I know I'm short on detail but it's just a thought. " Oo-er I could have sworn that I wrote the post about this. Glad to see that we can agree on some things. | |||
"Access to university education for essential workers should be free subject to the students agreeing a minimum service contract (10 years?). It is nonsense that Doctors, Nurses, CPS Lawyers and other key professionals are forced into tens of thousands of pounds worth of debt when they could be educated for free as long as they supported the national economy for a given period of time after graduation. That would be illegal under "modern sl@very" rules. But assuming it wasn't, how would you intend to deal with the 40% of students that fail their course? It could be possible to have a 'training agreement' whereby, a student starts with say '40k debt' which reduces for each year working for the state. If they leave beforehand it reverts to the current student loan system. That's a possibility, but it might still infringe on "Modern Sl@very". You're still holding the threat of a large debt if they leave, it's just that a poor person wouldn't have to pay that debt. It's not something I'd want to try to get past the ECHR. I'm sure there would be a workaround. Right now they leave university with the debt regardless. Under my 'plan', they have the debt paid for them by the state should they work for them. It actually happens in private business everyday. I know I'm short on detail but it's just a thought. Oo-er I could have sworn that I wrote the post about this. Glad to see that we can agree on some things." as rare as it may be, I'm always happy when opposition can come together for a common goal | |||
| |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started."People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job. | |||
| |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started."Invite for a job but the organisation would have to also pay the same salary as a UK worker. And pay a levey to a government pot for each migrant to help with schools and infrastructure. | |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started.
People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job."So OK I get that but for argument sake how will house the extra 10,000, extra GP space an extra 10,000 cars on roads etc and what happens if there lade off. Or stop working, Say because they have a baby. | |||
"I'd like to see free movement from all countries. " Realllllly so in port cheeper labour | |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started.
People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job.
So OK I get that but for argument sake how will house the extra 10,000, extra GP space an extra 10,000 cars on roads etc and what happens if there lade off. Or stop working, Say because they have a baby."That is a fair point and maybe your idea of their employers contributing a bit more will help, though don't forget these people will be paying their tax to, unless they fall under the threshold. Apart from that though, if the government decide how many are coming in then it makes it easier to plan services as opposed to no control over the amount that come in. To me they should be able to stay as long as the work is available and they are doing it. | |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started.
People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job.
So OK I get that but for argument sake how will house the extra 10,000, extra GP space an extra 10,000 cars on roads etc and what happens if there lade off. Or stop working, Say because they have a baby."We need to accept that we can’t have these ‘green and pleasant lands’ and still function as a high power economy in the 21st century. We need to build, build, build on the vast swathes of land that we have (the U.K is less than 10% urban). More housing, more roads, more hospitals. More schools. More transport links. Create jobs. Create infrastructure. | |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started.
People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job.
So OK I get that but for argument sake how will house the extra 10,000, extra GP space an extra 10,000 cars on roads etc and what happens if there lade off. Or stop working, Say because they have a baby.
We need to accept that we can’t have these ‘green and pleasant lands’ and still function as a high power economy in the 21st century.
We need to build, build, build on the vast swathes of land that we have (the U.K is less than 10% urban).
More housing, more roads, more hospitals. More schools. More transport links. Create jobs. Create infrastructure. "Why not? | |||
| |||
"Just reading about a spiralling crime wave in the UK from Albanian criminals. Who'd have guessed eh?" Not to mention that over 10k have cut that electronic tags off  | |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started.
People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job.
So OK I get that but for argument sake how will house the extra 10,000, extra GP space an extra 10,000 cars on roads etc and what happens if there lade off. Or stop working, Say because they have a baby.
We need to accept that we can’t have these ‘green and pleasant lands’ and still function as a high power economy in the 21st century.
We need to build, build, build on the vast swathes of land that we have (the U.K is less than 10% urban).
More housing, more roads, more hospitals. More schools. More transport links. Create jobs. Create infrastructure.
Why not?"Because we’re staring down the barrel of housing, pension and health crises. | |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started.
People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job.
So OK I get that but for argument sake how will house the extra 10,000, extra GP space an extra 10,000 cars on roads etc and what happens if there lade off. Or stop working, Say because they have a baby.
We need to accept that we can’t have these ‘green and pleasant lands’ and still function as a high power economy in the 21st century.
We need to build, build, build on the vast swathes of land that we have (the U.K is less than 10% urban).
More housing, more roads, more hospitals. More schools. More transport links. Create jobs. Create infrastructure.
Why not?
Because we’re staring down the barrel of housing, pension and health crises."Who is your target audience for the houses, roads, schools, hospitals and where does the money come from to build, build, build? | |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started.
People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job.
So OK I get that but for argument sake how will house the extra 10,000, extra GP space an extra 10,000 cars on roads etc and what happens if there lade off. Or stop working, Say because they have a baby.
We need to accept that we can’t have these ‘green and pleasant lands’ and still function as a high power economy in the 21st century.
We need to build, build, build on the vast swathes of land that we have (the U.K is less than 10% urban).
More housing, more roads, more hospitals. More schools. More transport links. Create jobs. Create infrastructure.
Why not?
Because we’re staring down the barrel of housing, pension and health crises.
Who is your target audience for the houses, roads, schools, hospitals and where does the money come from to build, build, build?
"The money comes from govt. because we need investment and lots of it - but schemes create jobs, and jobs create tax revenue. We need new towns to improve (and indeed create) local economies in the north, wales and south west - away from London and the SE. | |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started.
People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job.
So OK I get that but for argument sake how will house the extra 10,000, extra GP space an extra 10,000 cars on roads etc and what happens if there lade off. Or stop working, Say because they have a baby.
We need to accept that we can’t have these ‘green and pleasant lands’ and still function as a high power economy in the 21st century.
We need to build, build, build on the vast swathes of land that we have (the U.K is less than 10% urban).
More housing, more roads, more hospitals. More schools. More transport links. Create jobs. Create infrastructure.
Why not?
Because we’re staring down the barrel of housing, pension and health crises.
Who is your target audience for the houses, roads, schools, hospitals and where does the money come from to build, build, build?
The money comes from govt. because we need investment and lots of it - but schemes create jobs, and jobs create tax revenue.
We need new towns to improve (and indeed create) local economies in the north, wales and south west - away from London and the SE."I'm not understanding who the houses are being built for and what employment these people are going to fill in the North, Wales etc. | |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started.
People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job.
So OK I get that but for argument sake how will house the extra 10,000, extra GP space an extra 10,000 cars on roads etc and what happens if there lade off. Or stop working, Say because they have a baby.
We need to accept that we can’t have these ‘green and pleasant lands’ and still function as a high power economy in the 21st century.
We need to build, build, build on the vast swathes of land that we have (the U.K is less than 10% urban).
More housing, more roads, more hospitals. More schools. More transport links. Create jobs. Create infrastructure.
Why not?
Because we’re staring down the barrel of housing, pension and health crises.
Who is your target audience for the houses, roads, schools, hospitals and where does the money come from to build, build, build?
The money comes from govt. because we need investment and lots of it - but schemes create jobs, and jobs create tax revenue.
We need new towns to improve (and indeed create) local economies in the north, wales and south west - away from London and the SE.
I'm not understanding who the houses are being built for and what employment these people are going to fill in the North, Wales etc.
"The houses are being built to ease the housing crisis. And the creation of new towns literally creates employment - not just in building, but tertiary industries as well. | |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started.
People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job.
So OK I get that but for argument sake how will house the extra 10,000, extra GP space an extra 10,000 cars on roads etc and what happens if there lade off. Or stop working, Say because they have a baby.
We need to accept that we can’t have these ‘green and pleasant lands’ and still function as a high power economy in the 21st century.
We need to build, build, build on the vast swathes of land that we have (the U.K is less than 10% urban).
More housing, more roads, more hospitals. More schools. More transport links. Create jobs. Create infrastructure.
Why not?
Because we’re staring down the barrel of housing, pension and health crises.
Who is your target audience for the houses, roads, schools, hospitals and where does the money come from to build, build, build?
The money comes from govt. because we need investment and lots of it - but schemes create jobs, and jobs create tax revenue.
We need new towns to improve (and indeed create) local economies in the north, wales and south west - away from London and the SE.
I'm not understanding who the houses are being built for and what employment these people are going to fill in the North, Wales etc.
The houses are being built to ease the housing crisis. And the creation of new towns literally creates employment - not just in building, but tertiary industries as well. "Not sure what any of this has to do with an immigration policy but I'll amuse you... Are the houses being built social housing? | |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started.
People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job.
So OK I get that but for argument sake how will house the extra 10,000, extra GP space an extra 10,000 cars on roads etc and what happens if there lade off. Or stop working, Say because they have a baby.
We need to accept that we can’t have these ‘green and pleasant lands’ and still function as a high power economy in the 21st century.
We need to build, build, build on the vast swathes of land that we have (the U.K is less than 10% urban).
More housing, more roads, more hospitals. More schools. More transport links. Create jobs. Create infrastructure.
Why not?
Because we’re staring down the barrel of housing, pension and health crises.
Who is your target audience for the houses, roads, schools, hospitals and where does the money come from to build, build, build?
The money comes from govt. because we need investment and lots of it - but schemes create jobs, and jobs create tax revenue.
We need new towns to improve (and indeed create) local economies in the north, wales and south west - away from London and the SE.
I'm not understanding who the houses are being built for and what employment these people are going to fill in the North, Wales etc.
The houses are being built to ease the housing crisis. And the creation of new towns literally creates employment - not just in building, but tertiary industries as well.
Not sure what any of this has to do with an immigration policy but I'll amuse you...
Are the houses being built social housing?"Your inability to understand the relationship between the imminent pension and health crises and immigration is not my issue
Ideally yes, we need to build social housing at a rate not seen since post-WW2. | |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started.
People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job.
So OK I get that but for argument sake how will house the extra 10,000, extra GP space an extra 10,000 cars on roads etc and what happens if there lade off. Or stop working, Say because they have a baby.
We need to accept that we can’t have these ‘green and pleasant lands’ and still function as a high power economy in the 21st century.
We need to build, build, build on the vast swathes of land that we have (the U.K is less than 10% urban).
More housing, more roads, more hospitals. More schools. More transport links. Create jobs. Create infrastructure.
Why not?
Because we’re staring down the barrel of housing, pension and health crises.
Who is your target audience for the houses, roads, schools, hospitals and where does the money come from to build, build, build?
The money comes from govt. because we need investment and lots of it - but schemes create jobs, and jobs create tax revenue.
We need new towns to improve (and indeed create) local economies in the north, wales and south west - away from London and the SE.
I'm not understanding who the houses are being built for and what employment these people are going to fill in the North, Wales etc.
The houses are being built to ease the housing crisis. And the creation of new towns literally creates employment - not just in building, but tertiary industries as well.
Not sure what any of this has to do with an immigration policy but I'll amuse you...
Are the houses being built social housing?
Your inability to understand the relationship between the imminent pension and health crises and immigration is not my issue
Ideally yes, we need to build social housing at a rate not seen since post-WW2."Why are you so aggressive? There's really no need for it. I agree if we're building social housing. | |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started.
People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job.
So OK I get that but for argument sake how will house the extra 10,000, extra GP space an extra 10,000 cars on roads etc and what happens if there lade off. Or stop working, Say because they have a baby.
We need to accept that we can’t have these ‘green and pleasant lands’ and still function as a high power economy in the 21st century.
We need to build, build, build on the vast swathes of land that we have (the U.K is less than 10% urban).
More housing, more roads, more hospitals. More schools. More transport links. Create jobs. Create infrastructure.
Why not?
Because we’re staring down the barrel of housing, pension and health crises.
Who is your target audience for the houses, roads, schools, hospitals and where does the money come from to build, build, build?
The money comes from govt. because we need investment and lots of it - but schemes create jobs, and jobs create tax revenue.
We need new towns to improve (and indeed create) local economies in the north, wales and south west - away from London and the SE.
I'm not understanding who the houses are being built for and what employment these people are going to fill in the North, Wales etc.
The houses are being built to ease the housing crisis. And the creation of new towns literally creates employment - not just in building, but tertiary industries as well.
Not sure what any of this has to do with an immigration policy but I'll amuse you...
Are the houses being built social housing?
Your inability to understand the relationship between the imminent pension and health crises and immigration is not my issue
Ideally yes, we need to build social housing at a rate not seen since post-WW2.
Why are you so aggressive? There's really no need for it.
I agree if we're building social housing."That wasn’t aggressive, hence the | |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started.
People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job.
So OK I get that but for argument sake how will house the extra 10,000, extra GP space an extra 10,000 cars on roads etc and what happens if there lade off. Or stop working, Say because they have a baby.
We need to accept that we can’t have these ‘green and pleasant lands’ and still function as a high power economy in the 21st century.
We need to build, build, build on the vast swathes of land that we have (the U.K is less than 10% urban).
More housing, more roads, more hospitals. More schools. More transport links. Create jobs. Create infrastructure.
Why not?
Because we’re staring down the barrel of housing, pension and health crises.
Who is your target audience for the houses, roads, schools, hospitals and where does the money come from to build, build, build?
The money comes from govt. because we need investment and lots of it - but schemes create jobs, and jobs create tax revenue.
We need new towns to improve (and indeed create) local economies in the north, wales and south west - away from London and the SE.
I'm not understanding who the houses are being built for and what employment these people are going to fill in the North, Wales etc.
The houses are being built to ease the housing crisis. And the creation of new towns literally creates employment - not just in building, but tertiary industries as well.
Not sure what any of this has to do with an immigration policy but I'll amuse you...
Are the houses being built social housing?
Your inability to understand the relationship between the imminent pension and health crises and immigration is not my issue
Ideally yes, we need to build social housing at a rate not seen since post-WW2.
Why are you so aggressive? There's really no need for it.
I agree if we're building social housing.
That wasn’t aggressive, hence the "I'm not sure you really understand the use of emoji but cool. What does building new towns have anything to do with your ideal immigration policy? | |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started.
People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job.
So OK I get that but for argument sake how will house the extra 10,000, extra GP space an extra 10,000 cars on roads etc and what happens if there lade off. Or stop working, Say because they have a baby.
We need to accept that we can’t have these ‘green and pleasant lands’ and still function as a high power economy in the 21st century.
We need to build, build, build on the vast swathes of land that we have (the U.K is less than 10% urban).
More housing, more roads, more hospitals. More schools. More transport links. Create jobs. Create infrastructure.
Why not?
Because we’re staring down the barrel of housing, pension and health crises.
Who is your target audience for the houses, roads, schools, hospitals and where does the money come from to build, build, build?
The money comes from govt. because we need investment and lots of it - but schemes create jobs, and jobs create tax revenue.
We need new towns to improve (and indeed create) local economies in the north, wales and south west - away from London and the SE.
I'm not understanding who the houses are being built for and what employment these people are going to fill in the North, Wales etc.
The houses are being built to ease the housing crisis. And the creation of new towns literally creates employment - not just in building, but tertiary industries as well. "Build it and they will come. The jobs created for new towns will be service jobs, retail etc to serve the community. How would a social housing scheme of such magnitude encourage growth in industry and why would industry invest? Do you feel it would be robbing Peter to pay Paul, if for example it was lower wage bills and incentives to move from the London and SE? I understand the high level philosophy, but sustainability and growth is not jumping off the page. | |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started.
People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job.
So OK I get that but for argument sake how will house the extra 10,000, extra GP space an extra 10,000 cars on roads etc and what happens if there lade off. Or stop working, Say because they have a baby.
We need to accept that we can’t have these ‘green and pleasant lands’ and still function as a high power economy in the 21st century.
We need to build, build, build on the vast swathes of land that we have (the U.K is less than 10% urban).
More housing, more roads, more hospitals. More schools. More transport links. Create jobs. Create infrastructure.
Why not?
Because we’re staring down the barrel of housing, pension and health crises.
Who is your target audience for the houses, roads, schools, hospitals and where does the money come from to build, build, build?
The money comes from govt. because we need investment and lots of it - but schemes create jobs, and jobs create tax revenue.
We need new towns to improve (and indeed create) local economies in the north, wales and south west - away from London and the SE.
I'm not understanding who the houses are being built for and what employment these people are going to fill in the North, Wales etc.
The houses are being built to ease the housing crisis. And the creation of new towns literally creates employment - not just in building, but tertiary industries as well.
Not sure what any of this has to do with an immigration policy but I'll amuse you...
Are the houses being built social housing?
Your inability to understand the relationship between the imminent pension and health crises and immigration is not my issue
Ideally yes, we need to build social housing at a rate not seen since post-WW2.
Why are you so aggressive? There's really no need for it.
I agree if we're building social housing.
That wasn’t aggressive, hence the
I'm not sure you really understand the use of emoji but cool.
What does building new towns have anything to do with your ideal immigration policy?"My ideal immigration policy is reciprocal free movement with as many nations as possible. New towns are essential to cope with the limitations and issues we presently face - regardless of any future immigration policy. I mentioned infrastructure in response to a poster asking how we deal with 10,000 additional immigrants (we actually need far more than 10k) | |||
"Just reading about a spiralling crime wave in the UK from Albanian criminals. Who'd have guessed eh?" Is this mainly drug related crime? | |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started.
People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job.
So OK I get that but for argument sake how will house the extra 10,000, extra GP space an extra 10,000 cars on roads etc and what happens if there lade off. Or stop working, Say because they have a baby.
We need to accept that we can’t have these ‘green and pleasant lands’ and still function as a high power economy in the 21st century.
We need to build, build, build on the vast swathes of land that we have (the U.K is less than 10% urban).
More housing, more roads, more hospitals. More schools. More transport links. Create jobs. Create infrastructure.
Why not?
Because we’re staring down the barrel of housing, pension and health crises.
Who is your target audience for the houses, roads, schools, hospitals and where does the money come from to build, build, build?
The money comes from govt. because we need investment and lots of it - but schemes create jobs, and jobs create tax revenue.
We need new towns to improve (and indeed create) local economies in the north, wales and south west - away from London and the SE.
I'm not understanding who the houses are being built for and what employment these people are going to fill in the North, Wales etc.
The houses are being built to ease the housing crisis. And the creation of new towns literally creates employment - not just in building, but tertiary industries as well.
Not sure what any of this has to do with an immigration policy but I'll amuse you...
Are the houses being built social housing?
Your inability to understand the relationship between the imminent pension and health crises and immigration is not my issue
Ideally yes, we need to build social housing at a rate not seen since post-WW2.
Why are you so aggressive? There's really no need for it.
I agree if we're building social housing.
That wasn’t aggressive, hence the
I'm not sure you really understand the use of emoji but cool.
What does building new towns have anything to do with your ideal immigration policy?
My ideal immigration policy is reciprocal free movement with as many nations as possible. New towns are essential to cope with the limitations and issues we presently face - regardless of any future immigration policy.
I mentioned infrastructure in response to a poster asking how we deal with 10,000 additional immigrants (we actually need far more than 10k)"Fair enough, we got somewhere. Open immigration worldwide? I'd actually be in favourof that | |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started.
People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job.
So OK I get that but for argument sake how will house the extra 10,000, extra GP space an extra 10,000 cars on roads etc and what happens if there lade off. Or stop working, Say because they have a baby.
We need to accept that we can’t have these ‘green and pleasant lands’ and still function as a high power economy in the 21st century.
We need to build, build, build on the vast swathes of land that we have (the U.K is less than 10% urban).
More housing, more roads, more hospitals. More schools. More transport links. Create jobs. Create infrastructure.
Why not?
Because we’re staring down the barrel of housing, pension and health crises."But why can't we have green and pleasant lands and function as a high power economy? | |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started.
People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job.
So OK I get that but for argument sake how will house the extra 10,000, extra GP space an extra 10,000 cars on roads etc and what happens if there lade off. Or stop working, Say because they have a baby.
We need to accept that we can’t have these ‘green and pleasant lands’ and still function as a high power economy in the 21st century.
We need to build, build, build on the vast swathes of land that we have (the U.K is less than 10% urban).
More housing, more roads, more hospitals. More schools. More transport links. Create jobs. Create infrastructure.
Why not?
Because we’re staring down the barrel of housing, pension and health crises.
Who is your target audience for the houses, roads, schools, hospitals and where does the money come from to build, build, build?
The money comes from govt. because we need investment and lots of it - but schemes create jobs, and jobs create tax revenue.
We need new towns to improve (and indeed create) local economies in the north, wales and south west - away from London and the SE.
I'm not understanding who the houses are being built for and what employment these people are going to fill in the North, Wales etc.
The houses are being built to ease the housing crisis. And the creation of new towns literally creates employment - not just in building, but tertiary industries as well. "I think China and spain has shown this not to be true. They literally have town and cities built for expansion. Where airports Tower block shops remain unused and unlined in while people stay in the traditional cities and townships | |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started.
People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job.
So OK I get that but for argument sake how will house the extra 10,000, extra GP space an extra 10,000 cars on roads etc and what happens if there lade off. Or stop working, Say because they have a baby.
We need to accept that we can’t have these ‘green and pleasant lands’ and still function as a high power economy in the 21st century.
We need to build, build, build on the vast swathes of land that we have (the U.K is less than 10% urban).
More housing, more roads, more hospitals. More schools. More transport links. Create jobs. Create infrastructure.
Why not?
Because we’re staring down the barrel of housing, pension and health crises.
But why can't we have green and pleasant lands and function as a high power economy?"Because of the failings of the past 40 years of Thatcherite policy, plus the boomers pulling the ladder up behind them, which has left us facing crises that will be insurmountable of not acted upon now. | |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started.
People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job.
So OK I get that but for argument sake how will house the extra 10,000, extra GP space an extra 10,000 cars on roads etc and what happens if there lade off. Or stop working, Say because they have a baby.
We need to accept that we can’t have these ‘green and pleasant lands’ and still function as a high power economy in the 21st century.
We need to build, build, build on the vast swathes of land that we have (the U.K is less than 10% urban).
More housing, more roads, more hospitals. More schools. More transport links. Create jobs. Create infrastructure.
Why not?
Because we’re staring down the barrel of housing, pension and health crises.
Who is your target audience for the houses, roads, schools, hospitals and where does the money come from to build, build, build?
The money comes from govt. because we need investment and lots of it - but schemes create jobs, and jobs create tax revenue.
We need new towns to improve (and indeed create) local economies in the north, wales and south west - away from London and the SE.
I'm not understanding who the houses are being built for and what employment these people are going to fill in the North, Wales etc.
The houses are being built to ease the housing crisis. And the creation of new towns literally creates employment - not just in building, but tertiary industries as well.
Not sure what any of this has to do with an immigration policy but I'll amuse you...
Are the houses being built social housing?
Your inability to understand the relationship between the imminent pension and health crises and immigration is not my issue
Ideally yes, we need to build social housing at a rate not seen since post-WW2.
Why are you so aggressive? There's really no need for it.
I agree if we're building social housing.
That wasn’t aggressive, hence the
I'm not sure you really understand the use of emoji but cool.
What does building new towns have anything to do with your ideal immigration policy?
My ideal immigration policy is reciprocal free movement with as many nations as possible. New towns are essential to cope with the limitations and issues we presently face - regardless of any future immigration policy.
I mentioned infrastructure in response to a poster asking how we deal with 10,000 additional immigrants (we actually need far more than 10k)"I had mentioned 10,000 immigrants in my post but did (hopefully) make it clear that I was using it as an example on immigration policy. The figure could be 100,000 or 500,000 or any number as long as they are being employed in jobs that, for whatever reason, are not filled locally. | |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started.
People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job.
So OK I get that but for argument sake how will house the extra 10,000, extra GP space an extra 10,000 cars on roads etc and what happens if there lade off. Or stop working, Say because they have a baby.
We need to accept that we can’t have these ‘green and pleasant lands’ and still function as a high power economy in the 21st century.
We need to build, build, build on the vast swathes of land that we have (the U.K is less than 10% urban).
More housing, more roads, more hospitals. More schools. More transport links. Create jobs. Create infrastructure.
Why not?
Because we’re staring down the barrel of housing, pension and health crises.
Who is your target audience for the houses, roads, schools, hospitals and where does the money come from to build, build, build?
The money comes from govt. because we need investment and lots of it - but schemes create jobs, and jobs create tax revenue.
We need new towns to improve (and indeed create) local economies in the north, wales and south west - away from London and the SE.
I'm not understanding who the houses are being built for and what employment these people are going to fill in the North, Wales etc.
The houses are being built to ease the housing crisis. And the creation of new towns literally creates employment - not just in building, but tertiary industries as well.
Not sure what any of this has to do with an immigration policy but I'll amuse you...
Are the houses being built social housing?
Your inability to understand the relationship between the imminent pension and health crises and immigration is not my issue
Ideally yes, we need to build social housing at a rate not seen since post-WW2.
Why are you so aggressive? There's really no need for it.
I agree if we're building social housing.
That wasn’t aggressive, hence the
I'm not sure you really understand the use of emoji but cool.
What does building new towns have anything to do with your ideal immigration policy?
My ideal immigration policy is reciprocal free movement with as many nations as possible. New towns are essential to cope with the limitations and issues we presently face - regardless of any future immigration policy.
I mentioned infrastructure in response to a poster asking how we deal with 10,000 additional immigrants (we actually need far more than 10k)
I had mentioned 10,000 immigrants in my post but did (hopefully) make it clear that I was using it as an example on immigration policy. The figure could be 100,000 or 500,000 or any number as long as they are being employed in jobs that, for whatever reason, are not filled locally."And they are paid a proper wage to support themselves, also the right to strike if they are not being payed the minimum wage. | |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started.
People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job.
So OK I get that but for argument sake how will house the extra 10,000, extra GP space an extra 10,000 cars on roads etc and what happens if there lade off. Or stop working, Say because they have a baby.
We need to accept that we can’t have these ‘green and pleasant lands’ and still function as a high power economy in the 21st century.
We need to build, build, build on the vast swathes of land that we have (the U.K is less than 10% urban).
More housing, more roads, more hospitals. More schools. More transport links. Create jobs. Create infrastructure.
Why not?
Because we’re staring down the barrel of housing, pension and health crises.
Who is your target audience for the houses, roads, schools, hospitals and where does the money come from to build, build, build?
The money comes from govt. because we need investment and lots of it - but schemes create jobs, and jobs create tax revenue.
We need new towns to improve (and indeed create) local economies in the north, wales and south west - away from London and the SE.
I'm not understanding who the houses are being built for and what employment these people are going to fill in the North, Wales etc.
The houses are being built to ease the housing crisis. And the creation of new towns literally creates employment - not just in building, but tertiary industries as well.
Not sure what any of this has to do with an immigration policy but I'll amuse you...
Are the houses being built social housing?
Your inability to understand the relationship between the imminent pension and health crises and immigration is not my issue
Ideally yes, we need to build social housing at a rate not seen since post-WW2.
Why are you so aggressive? There's really no need for it.
I agree if we're building social housing.
That wasn’t aggressive, hence the
I'm not sure you really understand the use of emoji but cool.
What does building new towns have anything to do with your ideal immigration policy?
My ideal immigration policy is reciprocal free movement with as many nations as possible. New towns are essential to cope with the limitations and issues we presently face - regardless of any future immigration policy.
I mentioned infrastructure in response to a poster asking how we deal with 10,000 additional immigrants (we actually need far more than 10k)"So 100 years ago the population of the UK was half what it is today there or there abouts. The last new city was I belive Milton Keynes. Witch now has a population of 275k. So your saying we need to build 2 Milton Keynes every year.. How long would it be before you run out of space. The UK as it is dose not have the space ore capacity to feed its self or produce its own energy. Can a country expand for ever? ? | |||
| |||
| |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started.
People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job.
So OK I get that but for argument sake how will house the extra 10,000, extra GP space an extra 10,000 cars on roads etc and what happens if there lade off. Or stop working, Say because they have a baby.
We need to accept that we can’t have these ‘green and pleasant lands’ and still function as a high power economy in the 21st century.
We need to build, build, build on the vast swathes of land that we have (the U.K is less than 10% urban).
More housing, more roads, more hospitals. More schools. More transport links. Create jobs. Create infrastructure.
Why not?
Because we’re staring down the barrel of housing, pension and health crises.
Who is your target audience for the houses, roads, schools, hospitals and where does the money come from to build, build, build?
The money comes from govt. because we need investment and lots of it - but schemes create jobs, and jobs create tax revenue.
We need new towns to improve (and indeed create) local economies in the north, wales and south west - away from London and the SE.
I'm not understanding who the houses are being built for and what employment these people are going to fill in the North, Wales etc.
The houses are being built to ease the housing crisis. And the creation of new towns literally creates employment - not just in building, but tertiary industries as well.
Not sure what any of this has to do with an immigration policy but I'll amuse you...
Are the houses being built social housing?
Your inability to understand the relationship between the imminent pension and health crises and immigration is not my issue
Ideally yes, we need to build social housing at a rate not seen since post-WW2.
Why are you so aggressive? There's really no need for it.
I agree if we're building social housing.
That wasn’t aggressive, hence the
I'm not sure you really understand the use of emoji but cool.
What does building new towns have anything to do with your ideal immigration policy?
My ideal immigration policy is reciprocal free movement with as many nations as possible. New towns are essential to cope with the limitations and issues we presently face - regardless of any future immigration policy.
I mentioned infrastructure in response to a poster asking how we deal with 10,000 additional immigrants (we actually need far more than 10k)
So 100 years ago the population of the UK was half what it is today there or there abouts. The last new city was I belive Milton Keynes. Witch now has a population of 275k. So your saying we need to build 2 Milton Keynes every year..
How long would it be before you run out of space. The UK as it is dose not have the space ore capacity to feed its self or produce its own energy. Can a country expand for ever? ?"The U.K is less than 10% urban. We’ve got plenty of room for expansion for a little while. | |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started.
People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job.
So OK I get that but for argument sake how will house the extra 10,000, extra GP space an extra 10,000 cars on roads etc and what happens if there lade off. Or stop working, Say because they have a baby.
We need to accept that we can’t have these ‘green and pleasant lands’ and still function as a high power economy in the 21st century.
We need to build, build, build on the vast swathes of land that we have (the U.K is less than 10% urban).
More housing, more roads, more hospitals. More schools. More transport links. Create jobs. Create infrastructure.
Why not?
Because we’re staring down the barrel of housing, pension and health crises.
Who is your target audience for the houses, roads, schools, hospitals and where does the money come from to build, build, build?
The money comes from govt. because we need investment and lots of it - but schemes create jobs, and jobs create tax revenue.
We need new towns to improve (and indeed create) local economies in the north, wales and south west - away from London and the SE.
I'm not understanding who the houses are being built for and what employment these people are going to fill in the North, Wales etc.
The houses are being built to ease the housing crisis. And the creation of new towns literally creates employment - not just in building, but tertiary industries as well.
Not sure what any of this has to do with an immigration policy but I'll amuse you...
Are the houses being built social housing?
Your inability to understand the relationship between the imminent pension and health crises and immigration is not my issue
Ideally yes, we need to build social housing at a rate not seen since post-WW2.
Why are you so aggressive? There's really no need for it.
I agree if we're building social housing.
That wasn’t aggressive, hence the
I'm not sure you really understand the use of emoji but cool.
What does building new towns have anything to do with your ideal immigration policy?
My ideal immigration policy is reciprocal free movement with as many nations as possible. New towns are essential to cope with the limitations and issues we presently face - regardless of any future immigration policy.
I mentioned infrastructure in response to a poster asking how we deal with 10,000 additional immigrants (we actually need far more than 10k)
So 100 years ago the population of the UK was half what it is today there or there abouts. The last new city was I belive Milton Keynes. Witch now has a population of 275k. So your saying we need to build 2 Milton Keynes every year..
How long would it be before you run out of space. The UK as it is dose not have the space ore capacity to feed its self or produce its own energy. Can a country expand for ever? ?
The U.K is less than 10% urban. We’ve got plenty of room for expansion for a little while."So more people need more food where would you grow the crops if in 100 years we have got to 130k people. And that is without thinking of water. Fresh and waste. But I do agree new City's is a better way forward then expanding towns and villages.but the thought of 2 x City's the size of Milton Keynes every year is frightening.Well to me it is. | |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started.
People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job.
So OK I get that but for argument sake how will house the extra 10,000, extra GP space an extra 10,000 cars on roads etc and what happens if there lade off. Or stop working, Say because they have a baby.
We need to accept that we can’t have these ‘green and pleasant lands’ and still function as a high power economy in the 21st century.
We need to build, build, build on the vast swathes of land that we have (the U.K is less than 10% urban).
More housing, more roads, more hospitals. More schools. More transport links. Create jobs. Create infrastructure.
Why not?
Because we’re staring down the barrel of housing, pension and health crises.
Who is your target audience for the houses, roads, schools, hospitals and where does the money come from to build, build, build?
The money comes from govt. because we need investment and lots of it - but schemes create jobs, and jobs create tax revenue.
We need new towns to improve (and indeed create) local economies in the north, wales and south west - away from London and the SE.
I'm not understanding who the houses are being built for and what employment these people are going to fill in the North, Wales etc.
The houses are being built to ease the housing crisis. And the creation of new towns literally creates employment - not just in building, but tertiary industries as well.
Not sure what any of this has to do with an immigration policy but I'll amuse you...
Are the houses being built social housing?
Your inability to understand the relationship between the imminent pension and health crises and immigration is not my issue
Ideally yes, we need to build social housing at a rate not seen since post-WW2.
Why are you so aggressive? There's really no need for it.
I agree if we're building social housing.
That wasn’t aggressive, hence the
I'm not sure you really understand the use of emoji but cool.
What does building new towns have anything to do with your ideal immigration policy?
My ideal immigration policy is reciprocal free movement with as many nations as possible. New towns are essential to cope with the limitations and issues we presently face - regardless of any future immigration policy.
I mentioned infrastructure in response to a poster asking how we deal with 10,000 additional immigrants (we actually need far more than 10k)
So 100 years ago the population of the UK was half what it is today there or there abouts. The last new city was I belive Milton Keynes. Witch now has a population of 275k. So your saying we need to build 2 Milton Keynes every year..
How long would it be before you run out of space. The UK as it is dose not have the space ore capacity to feed its self or produce its own energy. Can a country expand for ever? ?
The U.K is less than 10% urban. We’ve got plenty of room for expansion for a little while.
So more people need more food where would you grow the crops if in 100 years we have got to 130k people.
And that is without thinking of water. Fresh and waste.
But I do agree new City's is a better way forward then expanding towns and villages.but the thought of 2 x City's the size of Milton Keynes every year is frightening.Well to me it is. "We’ve not been agriculturally self-sustaining since the 19th century. | |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started.
People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job.
So OK I get that but for argument sake how will house the extra 10,000, extra GP space an extra 10,000 cars on roads etc and what happens if there lade off. Or stop working, Say because they have a baby.
We need to accept that we can’t have these ‘green and pleasant lands’ and still function as a high power economy in the 21st century.
We need to build, build, build on the vast swathes of land that we have (the U.K is less than 10% urban).
More housing, more roads, more hospitals. More schools. More transport links. Create jobs. Create infrastructure.
Why not?
Because we’re staring down the barrel of housing, pension and health crises.
Who is your target audience for the houses, roads, schools, hospitals and where does the money come from to build, build, build?
The money comes from govt. because we need investment and lots of it - but schemes create jobs, and jobs create tax revenue.
We need new towns to improve (and indeed create) local economies in the north, wales and south west - away from London and the SE.
I'm not understanding who the houses are being built for and what employment these people are going to fill in the North, Wales etc.
The houses are being built to ease the housing crisis. And the creation of new towns literally creates employment - not just in building, but tertiary industries as well.
Not sure what any of this has to do with an immigration policy but I'll amuse you...
Are the houses being built social housing?
Your inability to understand the relationship between the imminent pension and health crises and immigration is not my issue
Ideally yes, we need to build social housing at a rate not seen since post-WW2.
Why are you so aggressive? There's really no need for it.
I agree if we're building social housing.
That wasn’t aggressive, hence the
I'm not sure you really understand the use of emoji but cool.
What does building new towns have anything to do with your ideal immigration policy?
My ideal immigration policy is reciprocal free movement with as many nations as possible. New towns are essential to cope with the limitations and issues we presently face - regardless of any future immigration policy.
I mentioned infrastructure in response to a poster asking how we deal with 10,000 additional immigrants (we actually need far more than 10k)
So 100 years ago the population of the UK was half what it is today there or there abouts. The last new city was I belive Milton Keynes. Witch now has a population of 275k. So your saying we need to build 2 Milton Keynes every year..
How long would it be before you run out of space. The UK as it is dose not have the space ore capacity to feed its self or produce its own energy. Can a country expand for ever? ?
The U.K is less than 10% urban. We’ve got plenty of room for expansion for a little while.
So more people need more food where would you grow the crops if in 100 years we have got to 130k people.
And that is without thinking of water. Fresh and waste.
But I do agree new City's is a better way forward then expanding towns and villages.but the thought of 2 x City's the size of Milton Keynes every year is frightening.Well to me it is.
We’ve not been agriculturally self-sustaining since the 19th century. "I'm a little confused... The UK is less than 10% urban yet still isn't self sustaining agriculturally, so your answer is to build? That means having to import more than we already do, creating an even larger deficit in trade. It all sounds great to build but I can guarantee there will be complaints about the trade deficit, usually from people on the left. | |||
| |||
| |||
"I know, you can't move for people on the left moaning about the trade deficit. You could build on lots of places that currently are not used for farms. Or to support the move to a greener wild build on the former dairy and cattle farms as we move away from meat. " We are not moving away from meat
You could build on lots of places, I'm not sure you quite understood though. | |||
| |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started.
People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job.
So OK I get that but for argument sake how will house the extra 10,000, extra GP space an extra 10,000 cars on roads etc and what happens if there lade off. Or stop working, Say because they have a baby.
We need to accept that we can’t have these ‘green and pleasant lands’ and still function as a high power economy in the 21st century.
We need to build, build, build on the vast swathes of land that we have (the U.K is less than 10% urban).
More housing, more roads, more hospitals. More schools. More transport links. Create jobs. Create infrastructure.
Why not?
Because we’re staring down the barrel of housing, pension and health crises.
Who is your target audience for the houses, roads, schools, hospitals and where does the money come from to build, build, build?
The money comes from govt. because we need investment and lots of it - but schemes create jobs, and jobs create tax revenue.
We need new towns to improve (and indeed create) local economies in the north, wales and south west - away from London and the SE.
I'm not understanding who the houses are being built for and what employment these people are going to fill in the North, Wales etc.
The houses are being built to ease the housing crisis. And the creation of new towns literally creates employment - not just in building, but tertiary industries as well.
Not sure what any of this has to do with an immigration policy but I'll amuse you...
Are the houses being built social housing?
Your inability to understand the relationship between the imminent pension and health crises and immigration is not my issue
Ideally yes, we need to build social housing at a rate not seen since post-WW2.
Why are you so aggressive? There's really no need for it.
I agree if we're building social housing.
That wasn’t aggressive, hence the
I'm not sure you really understand the use of emoji but cool.
What does building new towns have anything to do with your ideal immigration policy?
My ideal immigration policy is reciprocal free movement with as many nations as possible. New towns are essential to cope with the limitations and issues we presently face - regardless of any future immigration policy.
I mentioned infrastructure in response to a poster asking how we deal with 10,000 additional immigrants (we actually need far more than 10k)
I had mentioned 10,000 immigrants in my post but did (hopefully) make it clear that I was using it as an example on immigration policy. The figure could be 100,000 or 500,000 or any number as long as they are being employed in jobs that, for whatever reason, are not filled locally.
And they are paid a proper wage to support themselves, also the right to strike if they are not being payed the minimum wage."Of course I'm talking about legitimate jobs, fully above board, taxes paid ect. Paying at least the minimum wage as that is law so no need to strike for it as far as I'm aware | |||
"Let's hear yours... Mine would be to have a points based system that could be adapted quickly dependant on skills shortages, this includes unskilled (that's a myriad within itself). Any incentives offered to foreigners to entice them to convince to the UK should also be offered to UK citizens. BIRLDN, Please don't think I've st*len your idea, we just happen to agree ont this
That should get us started.
People should be allowed to come to the UK in the sector's and quantities that industry needs and have failed to fulfil the vacancy locally. For instance if the farming industry needs 10,000 extra workers and can't get them locally then the government should allow 10,000 to be recruited from abroad of those willing to do the job.
So OK I get that but for argument sake how will house the extra 10,000, extra GP space an extra 10,000 cars on roads etc and what happens if there lade off. Or stop working, Say because they have a baby.
We need to accept that we can’t have these ‘green and pleasant lands’ and still function as a high power economy in the 21st century.
We need to build, build, build on the vast swathes of land that we have (the U.K is less than 10% urban).
More housing, more roads, more hospitals. More schools. More transport links. Create jobs. Create infrastructure.
Why not?
Because we’re staring down the barrel of housing, pension and health crises.
Who is your target audience for the houses, roads, schools, hospitals and where does the money come from to build, build, build?
The money comes from govt. because we need investment and lots of it - but schemes create jobs, and jobs create tax revenue.
We need new towns to improve (and indeed create) local economies in the north, wales and south west - away from London and the SE.
I'm not understanding who the houses are being built for and what employment these people are going to fill in the North, Wales etc.
The houses are being built to ease the housing crisis. And the creation of new towns literally creates employment - not just in building, but tertiary industries as well.
Not sure what any of this has to do with an immigration policy but I'll amuse you...
Are the houses being built social housing?
Your inability to understand the relationship between the imminent pension and health crises and immigration is not my issue
Ideally yes, we need to build social housing at a rate not seen since post-WW2.
Why are you so aggressive? There's really no need for it.
I agree if we're building social housing.
That wasn’t aggressive, hence the
I'm not sure you really understand the use of emoji but cool.
What does building new towns have anything to do with your ideal immigration policy?
My ideal immigration policy is reciprocal free movement with as many nations as possible. New towns are essential to cope with the limitations and issues we presently face - regardless of any future immigration policy.
I mentioned infrastructure in response to a poster asking how we deal with 10,000 additional immigrants (we actually need far more than 10k)
So 100 years ago the population of the UK was half what it is today there or there abouts. The last new city was I belive Milton Keynes. Witch now has a population of 275k. So your saying we need to build 2 Milton Keynes every year..
How long would it be before you run out of space. The UK as it is dose not have the space ore capacity to feed its self or produce its own energy. Can a country expand for ever? ?
The U.K is less than 10% urban. We’ve got plenty of room for expansion for a little while.
So more people need more food where would you grow the crops if in 100 years we have got to 130k people.
And that is without thinking of water. Fresh and waste.
But I do agree new City's is a better way forward then expanding towns and villages.but the thought of 2 x City's the size of Milton Keynes every year is frightening.Well to me it is.
We’ve not been agriculturally self-sustaining since the 19th century.
I'm a little confused...
The UK is less than 10% urban yet still isn't self sustaining agriculturally, so your answer is to build?
That means having to import more than we already do, creating an even larger deficit in trade.
It all sounds great to build but I can guarantee there will be complaints about the trade deficit, usually from people on the left."We’re a services based economy, and have been for decades. That’s not going to change in our lifetimes, or probably several generations. Such is life. | |||
"I know, you can't move for people on the left moaning about the trade deficit. You could build on lots of places that currently are not used for farms. Or to support the move to a greener wild build on the former dairy and cattle farms as we move away from meat. " So where would you build a city the size of Milton Keynes that is not farm land, or forest, only 5% of forest is still in place. | |||
