Slaughter of first-borns could save £50bn in Child Benefit, pledges Cameron

[alchresearch]

You can't be suggesting that a lot of immigrants are coming here to earn £50-70k, can you? I would suggest that is exceptional.

 

It depends on the immigrant and the work. You can either imagine the Poles doing manual labour on a low wage, or skilled migrants like doctors, engineers and so on.

[L00b]

You can't be suggesting that a lot of immigrants are coming here to earn £50-70k, can you? I would suggest that is exceptional.

£50-70k is approaching exceptional, as wage levels go relative to the entire working population - especially at this moment in time.

 

I would suggest that there are plenty of immigrants with relevant skills coming here and working for pay in that bracket, just the same as there are still more immigrants (than highly-skilled ones) coming here and working for MinWage.

 

It all boils down to a question of skills, domestic demand for those skills, and domestic supply (constituted of natives and immigrants already here). So, nothing new or surprising there. It's no secret at all that the UK health sector is the biggest 'importer' of foreign skilled personnel, from surgeons and consultants all the way down to cleaners, and that numbers in the tens of thousands.

 

Demand is still high in highly-skilled sectors (health, finance, law, trades) and still under-supplied. E.g. we've employed two highly-skilled immigrants in the past 18 months or so (legal sector), as we got less UK applicants for the positions than immigrants, and the UK applicants were of a lesser caliber or with unrealistic aspirations for their remuneration.

 

All irrelevant anyway: when did all this immigrants/pay stuff get into a thread about proposed curtailing of child benefits, and what has it got to do with it? Regardless of whether a worker is an immigrant, and regardless of their pay level, they all pay income tax contributing to such benefits

[I1L2T3]

£50-70k is approaching exceptional, as wage levels go relative to the entire working population - especially at this moment in time.

 

I would suggest that there are plenty of immigrants with relevant skills coming here and working for pay in that bracket, just the same as there are still more immigrants (than highly-skilled ones) coming here and working for MinWage.

 

It all boils down to a question of skills, domestic demand for those skills, and domestic supply (constituted of natives and immigrants already here). Nothing new or surprising there. It's no secret at all that the UK health sector is the biggest 'importer' of foreign skilled personnel, from surgeons and consultants all the way down to cleaners, and that numbers in the tens of thousands.

 

When did all this immigrants/pay stuff get into a thread about proposed curtailing of child benefits, and what has it got to do with it? Regardless of whether a worker is an immigrant, and regardless of their pay level, they all pay income tax contributing to such benefits

 

Not all immigrants pay income tax, some are exempt for 12 months. Certain classes of immigrants can be paid the bulk of their wages in allowances helping them and their company avoid taxes.

 

But, yes I agree this isn't a thread about immigration so probably best toget back on topic.

[rabitter]

to live within your means takes a degree of intelligence,a percentage of the unemployed doesnt have this as you can see by their kids running wild out till all hours of the early morning

these people will never work or stop breeding if they have no money they will just thieve more.families of kids who dont go to school should not receive child benefit they are no use to society at all

[Rupert_Baehr]

You can't be suggesting that a lot of immigrants are coming here to earn £50-70k, can you? I would suggest that is exceptional.

 

As for the £7.25/hour there would be plenty of people willing to work for that. You have to question what is wrong with the working conditions Mr Abel's firm is offering.

 

Also, the right can't seem to make up their mind whether the immigrants are coming here for high paid work or to get paid benefits.

 

When I came to the UK (in 1968) I didn't come there intending to work for minimum wage. I worked for pennies at first, but later on I was paid rather more.

 

There may well be immigrants who are quite happy to work for slave wages - but I've yet to meet one.

 

All of the immigrants I know (and I do know a few) got up off of their arses to come to the UK and - although they may not have arrived with much - were not short of ambition or a willingness to work.

 

If I was hiring - and I'm not - and I had 2 equally-qualified candidates, one of whom thought 'Well, I need a job and the world owes me a living, so I applied for this job' and the other had the motivation to get up and travel some hundreds or thousands of miles to find a job, I know which one I would hire.

 

If you're looking for a job and you have little or no experience, then motivation counts.

[L00b]

All of the immigrants I know (and I do know a few) got up off of their arses to come to the UK and - although they may not have arrived with much - were not short of ambition or a willingness to work.

Same experience here. It's the story of the world (migrant labour force), truth be told.

If I was hiring - and I'm not - and I had 2 equally-qualified candidates, one of whom thought 'Well, I need a job and the world owes me a living, so I applied for this job' and the other had the motivation to get up and travel some hundreds or thousands of miles to find a job, I know which one I would hire.

Just to say, with ref. to my preceding post, that when I say UK applicants had unrealistic aspirations, they really did so, expecting associate level pay at the London rate for part-qualified (so, about 'normal rate' + 30% and perks).

 

It was absolutely not a case of getting the immigrants 'cheaper': they are paid the going UK 'Northern' rate according to their qualifications, which is surveyed and benchmarked by the profession nationally twice a year.

[handypandy]

I was glad to see Milliband promise to tackle the gangmasters. I have seen Polish workers, arriving here expecting the gold paved streets, working on the booming building sites here a few short years ago, for a tenner a day and sleeping in the places they were building, with little prospect of affording the fare home.

 

More recently, immigrant workers were discovered on the building site of a public sector hospital in the midlands, working for the princely sum of £8.80 a week. Hands up who wants people to get up off their ass and compete with that.

[Badlittlepup]

Yes as per usual polls mean nothing.

 

Basically as always what it actually means is 15% more people who could be arsed to respond to some bod with a clipboard would support labour more than the cons.

 

Maybe there are more labour supporters out and about in the daytime eh?

 

Maybe there are more labour supporters who are the type of people who actually stop and speak to bods with a clipboard eh?

 

Either it shows nothing relevant.

 

Not necessarily, I always lean towards voting Conservative and will certainly not be after this conference.

 

George Osborne's speech was dreadful, if Labour could have written a speech for him with the aim of sending people flocking back to vote Labour I doubt they would have done anything different.

 

The gist of the speech seemed to be - we are going to do everything we can to help those at the top and screw those at the bottom. There was no dressing it up, no attempt at hiding it.

 

I was extremely in favour of the benefits system being reformed as quite frankly it was being taken for a ride by people taking the ****. But the Tories are going way to far and cutting benefits for those who are genuinely in need too. And refusing to expect the higher end to make any contribution to help us get out of this is just ridiculous, we need a balance of reform of the benefits system at the bottom and a higher contribution from those at the top.

 

It would have to be pretty drastic for me to vote Labour but I probably will now despite big concerns about their ability to manage immigration.

 

I believe the polls, I really do think that the Tories are making, big, big mistakes. The top 10% aren't big enough to win them an election and I think they are turning off many of the majority with their desperation to line the top 10%s pockets.

[WeX]

Well the polls show that people are starting to warm to Ed, also that Labour now have an approximate 15% lead on the Cons!

 

The latest poll puts Labour 14% ahead but the average is 10% which is approx the same as the lead the conservatives had over Labour before the last election and that didn't translate into votes.

 

Its silly to start puffing your chest out 2 and a half years before the next election as midterm opinion polls bare no relation to what will happen on election night.

 

Milliband's approval rating is now something like -26% compared to Camerons -29% which is pretty poor for a leader who does not have the negative factor of being in government at the moment. But its pointless to use judge these right now as its conference season and they will change wildly over the coming weeks. Its especially silly to judge one vs the other when one has had his conference while the other is yet to take the stage.

 

I still think that Labour under Ed and Ed is going to lose the next election. Labour has no drive, no charisma and no passion. They are bland and boring like the cons where back in the 90's. Labour needs a real leader who will stand up to for the working class and this is their ticket to government.

[wednesday1]

The latest poll puts Labour 14% ahead but the average is 10% which is approx the same as the lead the conservatives had over Labour before the last election and that didn't translate into votes.

 

Its silly to start puffing your chest out 2 and a half years before the next election as midterm opinion polls bare no relation to what will happen on election night.

 

Milliband's approval rating is now something like -26% compared to Camerons -29% which is pretty poor for a leader who does not have the negative factor of being in government at the moment. But its pointless to use judge these right now as its conference season and they will change wildly over the coming weeks. Its especially silly to judge one vs the other when one has had his conference while the other is yet to take the stage.

 

I still think that Labour under Ed and Ed is going to lose the next election. Labour has no drive, no charisma and no passion. They are bland and boring like the cons where back in the 90's. Labour needs a real leader who will stand up to for the working class and this is their ticket to government.

 

 

You've been arguing for the ConDems for months so presuably are not too concerned by the plight of the 'working class', yet now all of a sudden you now seem to be concerned! Just seems a bit odd to me.