Government to curb migrant workers

[mr contrite 10]

Ok you've either deliberately lied or you've failed to read what i said, fact is I referred to the claimant count which you changed to the numbers of unemployed.

 

Again on the part that deals with the difference between the two, read what i said and you'll find that I indicated that this is generally through the persons choice.

 

So once again the conundrum that tears your argument on migrant workers apart goes unsolved.

 

Moving way from stats how about a real life example for you.

 

A number of weeks ago I had to have a wisdom tooth removed, this was done by a Polish dentist to my satisfaction., so in the world of Contritism where we have no immigrants next Monday morning, who will carry out these operations?

 

 

You are the one lying, or at best deliberately trying to be misleading, the comparison of figures clearly shows that there are more unemployed than immigrant workers, and just because you quote figures for claimants, as opposed for the true unemployment figures, does not mean you are correct, in fact it clearly shows that you are bereft of any reasonable response to my points put to you.

 

As for the Polish dentist, firstly hasnt it been stated that the immigrant workers take all the low paid jobs the British dont want, Dentistry, low paid?

and secondly, if the Polish dentist was no more, use a British one

[Guest sibon]

[quote=mr contrite;4208124, Dentistry, low paid?

and secondly, if the Polish dentist was no more, use a British one

 

Your challenge, tomorrow morning, mr contrite... should you choose to accept it.. quit your dentist and go to register with a new NHS dentist in Sheffield.

 

Let us know how you get on.

[Longcol 597]

It'd be a bit of a treck up from Oxford for him to find a dentist.

 

Whats happened to the local BNP these days?

[happyhippy 11]

So would you like to explain the difference between the 900.000 or whatever the figure is claiming JSA, and the figure of 1.79 million unemployed that we have now? so 900,000 unemployed (govt statistics) are not really unemployed? And what of under 18s living at home NOT in full time education, are they not unemployed, and apparently in certain cases over 55s are also excluded from claiming JSA.

 

You said sweepingly "the under-18's". It's very clear that not all people in that age group are included in the unemployment figures. To be sure, anyone who is on the JSA register will be counted.

 

Nobody is 'excluded' from claiming JSA if getting on; they can expressly choose to claim it.

 

Again, with regard to 'people whose partner's income is too high', why the hell would they be? Would 'Mrs Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells' be counted in these figures because her husband earns £100k pa, yet she's at home? No.

 

The 'jobless' figure probably includes those who are on the voluntary New Deals, which don't require a claim to JSA, such as for Lone Parents and the Disabled, both of which are well supported.

[Titanic99 10]

You are the one lying, or at best deliberately trying to be misleading, the comparison of figures clearly shows that there are more unemployed than immigrant workers, and just because you quote figures for claimants, as opposed for the true unemployment figures, does not mean you are correct, in fact it clearly shows that you are bereft of any reasonable response to my points put to you.

 

As for the Polish dentist, firstly hasnt it been stated that the immigrant workers take all the low paid jobs the British dont want, Dentistry, low paid?

and secondly, if the Polish dentist was no more, use a British one

 

How am I lying, all along I've indicated the claimant count and indicated that those who are unemployed and not claiming it are in the main choosing to do this.

 

Anyway, back to the conundrum you seem unable to solve. Are you now advocating that if migrant workers weren't here then you'd force those choosing not to work and not to cklaim back to work, and can we feel safe in the knowledge that when all the Surgeons, Doctors and Dentists have gone, that or treatment will be undertaken by the "Contrite Youth"those under 18's living at hom with their parents.

 

Truly astounding logic yet again!

[mr contrite 10]

How am I lying, all along I've indicated the claimant count and indicated that those who are unemployed and not claiming it are in the main choosing to do this.

 

Anyway, back to the conundrum you seem unable to solve. Are you now advocating that if migrant workers weren't here then you'd force those choosing not to work and not to cklaim back to work, and can we feel safe in the knowledge that when all the Surgeons, Doctors and Dentists have gone, that or treatment will be undertaken by the "Contrite Youth"those under 18's living at hom with their parents.

 

Truly astounding logic yet again!

 

I dont believe i have ever stated that all immigrants should go home, i have replied in context with your assumption that if all immigrants went home there would be a shortfall in the number of workers, and clearly shown that is not the case, and as the thread is regarding a curb on immigration to all intents and purposes our argument is slightly off topic, but whilst we are on this subject, what would your opinion on immigrant workers be if the estimates of 3 million unemployed by the end of next year, of which a great many would be claiming JSA, and the figures for those seeking work outnumbers immigrant workers?

[mr contrite 10]

Too little too late from the unions who spent too long in promoting the rights of foreign labour, whilst ignoring the British worker, now the recession is here it seems hypocritical of them to protest at foreign labour.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/nottinghamshire/7685894.stm

[Korky 10]

How would you go about dragging the 'lazy sods from the dole quues to a place of work'? And what employer would want to run a business with a load of unwilling employees?

 

You aren't thinking of forced labour, the sort of thing you expect in a totalitarian regime like North Korea, are you?

That'll be a communist regime you mean - just a short step from socialism.

[Wildcat 10]

Too little too late from the unions who spent too long in promoting the rights of foreign labour, whilst ignoring the British worker, now the recession is here it seems hypocritical of them to protest at foreign labour.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/nottinghamshire/7685894.stm

 

You mean like the unions passive involvement in the Irish ferries dispute which was supported in docks internationally and saw 10,000s of protestors mobilised against rebadging and importing cheap labour 3 years ago?

 

If you knew anything much about the trade unions position on such things you would also be aware of the union campaigning against the viking-laval judgements in europe, that are designed to undermine workers acting in solidarity across europe on issues like these. Far from being placid on issues like these, unions have been at the forefront of defending worker's rights against cheap labour wherever it comes from.

 

What unions haven't been doing is making policy positions based on rubbish from the tabloids, they deal with reality.

[Wildcat 10]

That'll be a communist regime you mean - just a short step from socialism.

 

Socialism is a blanket term that includes communism. And Communism itself is about as varied an ideology as you can get. Witness all the "people's popular fronts of judea" on the left as evidence.

[mamanabela 10]

paying for colonialism ah?

hehehehehehheheheheheheheheheh............!

[Br8inend 10]

But who is going to do the menial minimum wage jobs that nobody else want .

 

Who are the greedy boss's going to exploit now? They come here for the benefits not the chance of getting a job.