Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 18/03/15 in all areas

  1. 1 point
    Mrs Pob who isn't English asked me lots of questions about the education system in England. I told her that the fella who made all the university's free for all had this great idea, that the people who went to university and earned a degree paid much more tax than those who did not go. This in turn enabled the university's to be free because those who paid more tax enabled the government to have more money and pay for the education. She asked me why fees are brought in now? I told her it is because of greed and selfishness. So you are all arguing over university fees and other people have mentioned healthcare and housing. I look at other country's for example the Nordic's, where many more people have degree's and they are free or very low cost, where health care is free and housing is affordable. I truly look at the society that most of the world adores so much, and I wonder why it is so broken? I always thought that healthcare was a basic human right. I always thought that education was a basic human right. I always thought that housing and affordable quality food was a basic human right. When these things are there for everybody and not a select few then the world will be a better place to live. When a man or a woman in India or Guatemala or where ever has the same quality of life as everybody else, the same opportunity's as everybody else, then the world will be a richer place. A mans success is not judged by how full his wallet is, but by how he treats his fellow man. How would we fund such a thing as to what I have suggested? It's easy, tax appropriately, that includes big business as well as your fellow man. It wouldn't take much more out of everyone's weekly pay packet to abolish poverty. The world would be a richer place, more educated and less stressed. What about the slackers and the bludgers? They would be educated and not pacified by drugs and alcohol, they would want to work as it would stimulate them, they would care for their society, because their society would care for them. Why should anyone pay for someone else's education? You are not solely paying for someone else's education, you are contributing a couple of cents to make the world a more educated and better place. Why should anyone pay for someone else's health care? Again it is a couple of cents and everyone lives longer and healthier and happier. Why should you pay to build affordable housing for everyone, because again it is a few cents that would improve peoples lives so much. In every society people choose to wield power over those that have less than them. In all of our histories these society's have fallen. I personally weep for our future, but I look forward to it so much!
  2. 1 point
    So you again cannot post a link but instead use a quote by a think tank specifically set up to put the case against migration to the UK as evidence. Hardly rigorous is it? I'll leave the ad hominems out of it, maybe you should follow my lead and discuss the topic at hand? I'll give you a hand with some evidence; "UK studies find that immigration has small impact on average wages but more significant impacts along the wage distribution: low-waged workers lose while medium and high-paid workers gain Empirical research on the labour market effects of immigration in the UK suggests that immigration has relatively small effects on average wages but more significant effects along the wage distribution, i.e. on low, medium and high paid workers. Focusing on the period 1997-2005 when the UK experienced significant labour immigration (see our briefing 'Migrants in the UK Labour Market'), Dustmann, Frattini and Preston (2013) find that an increase in the number of migrants corresponding to 1% of the UK-born working-age population resulted in an increase in average wages of 0.1 to 0.3%. Another study, for the period 2000-2007, found that a 1% increase in the share of migrants in the UK’s working-age population lowers the average wage by 0.3% (Reed and Latorre 2009). These studies, which relate to different time periods, thus reach opposing conclusions but they agree that the effects of immigration on averages wages are relatively small. The effects of immigration on workers within specific wage ranges or in specific occupations are more significant. The greatest wage effects are found for low-waged workers. Dustmann et al (2013) find that each 1% increase in the share of migrants in the UK-born working age population leads to a 0.6% decline in the wages of the 5% lowest paid workers and to an increase in the wages of higher paid workers. Similarly, another study focusing on wage effects at the occupational level during 1992 and 2006, found that, in the unskilled and semi-skilled service sector, a 1% rise in the share of migrants reduced average wages in that occupation by 0.5% (Nickell and Salaheen 2008). The available research further shows that any adverse wage effects of immigration are likely to be greatest for resident workers who are themselves migrants. This is because the skills of new migrants are likely to be closer substitutes for the skills of migrants already employed in the UK than for those of UK-born workers. Manacorda, Manning and Wadsworth (2012) analyse data from 1975-2005 and conclude that the main impact of increased immigration is on the wages of migrants already in the UK." http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/briefings/labour-market-effects-immigration Did you see how easy that was?
This leaderboard is set to London/GMT+01:00