Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

Just asking a few questions which puzzles me.

Is somebody, who is normal lives in the UK, buys a property abroad, or sets up, or invests in a business, imports their “earnings” to this country, or takes prolonged holidays in the countries of “earnings” and utilises the “income” on “house improvement” “cheating” those foreign countries out of their “wealth”?

Or, like some UK overseas workers who send money home to support their families, are they cheating those nasty “foreign countries”?
What would be the cost of pulling up the drawbridge?

Or is it right to denude those nasty countries of the “health and best workers” to “prop” up our system, leaving those countries less able to look after the “weaker members” of the own countries?

Cyners remember yesterday when I said I had sold MKS..........clucking H

I won be listening to them winkers on advn anymore.

SUGAR.

gf no w if they arrive here they should have funds to support them selves that is the problem .

sticks - didn't see that i must confess, not least because i wouldn't have bought mks in the first place ..... are you sure it wasn't suggested that you sell CEY yesterday? :-)

FRED im all for people WHO have paid into a system (historicaly) to get benefits.

For example Im certainly against this governments proposals of taking away the winter fuel allowance from wealthy people. (labours idea aswel)

If you have paid into a scheme I say you get the benefits of that scheme no matter what your wealth, you have paid for it.

But if someone comes to this country and gets it without paying into the system or paying a premium for it, it should be withdrawn immediately.

But the powers that be don't want to restrict benefits.

taking away winter fuel allowance from wealthy people

i understand your logic, but disagree
would you or i even notice if we didn't get it?
should those who have chosen to live abroad get it?

i'm not even convinced that those of pensionable age but quite well off should get free prescriptions

however, would withdrawing the above two benefits make any significant difference to the exchequer?

TANKER - 05 Nov 2014 11:04 - 49309 of 49311

gf no w if they arrive here they should have funds to support them selves that is the problem .................................ends

Yep you have a good point there, but remember some well most are coming from poor countries, maybe they havent the deposit for a house. Got to remember TANKER them that want to really contribute here maybe very poor.

Do you think my proposal s are a lot better than what is going on at the moment.?

dangerous ground if you don't want to accept open-door
how will you draw the line?

GF>

The "welfare benefits system is a mine field".

However, consider a young physicist researcher who has a "bright" and seemingly "feasible" idea for developing "quickly" a highly productive process for producing clean "energy" comes for to this country after applying for and getting a job, has an accident, necessitating spinal operation and a long convalescence of 3-6 months before he can return to "productive" work.

Do we refuse him the operation, chuck him out on the street, packaging him a black bag and send him home.

-----------

Consider in a similar way, a young waitress who has worked in London for 6 months develops symptoms of TB (because of catching it in the living conditions in London) and because of low wages has no savings, do we send her back to the country of origin, or do we support her until she is fit again?

======

We live in a connected world and have connected responsibilities. (Ebola)

Yep its very difficult Cyners, certainly not black and white issue debate.

See my post 49300.

minimum wage in usa
unless i am much mistaken, the minimum wage in usa is $7.75 (~£4.85) with all sorts of exemptions from that

no further comment required!

fred - i'm not sure if you are advocating an open-door policy, for sometimes it looks that you do and other times not!

anyway, if we have some sort of quota system - eg a point system as in oz - then once a person has been accepted under same, then of course he should also benefit from the the benefits ......

i would still allow said immigrant to be booted out in the event that he commits serious or habitual crime

FRED your above post, give me time to think it over. And Im not giving you the answer that is best suited. I will give you the truth on what I think......cheers.

PMqs just coming on might be a bit late getting back.

Not that you are un important but I think this is best prog these days on TV sadly.

Call me a sad B, her indoors does when I watch the politics.........she hasnt a clue.

Manuel.

American politics.

Some of the things which are needed in the UK is a method to limit the amount of money which can be used for canvassing at general and local elections.

Also, donations, financial and money raising by all parties should be in the public domain.

Also, the amount of cash used in lobbying should be transparent.

Also, complete and open examination of MPs accounts 5 years prior and after their election.

If this is not done UK government will follow the American route.

We have already started on a similar pathway.
=========

that the american candidates seem to have a plethora of ways of circumventing so-called financial limitations is only a very small part of the what i think is the disaster of the american political system

Manuel,

I am instinctively against an "immigration policy" as prescribed by the right wing of the tories and the UKIP yobs.

I have objection to intentional abuse of the "Welfare System" by any group of individuals indigenous or not.

I find it strange that it is allowed that "child benefit" can be paid to those outside the country,

As it is strange to me that a person or family earning £100000 a year can draw "benefits" (change the figures)

The concept of "welfare and health services" were as much to to protect the "fallen" person as the public from the "fallen".

======

But, the real route for me is to change the circumstances from which the immigrants are fleeing from, not make it as bad here, as where they have fled from.

What irritates me more than anything is that Immigration is being played and a party political ball, by what would have be considered as the lowest ot the low.

UKIP and the likes and playing an emotional game and some of the public are falling for it.

Manuel,

I was told a long time ago, "When you think something smells funny, follow the money!".

Immigrants from the 10 countries which joined the EU in 2004 contributed more to the UK than they took out in benefits, according to a new study.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29910497

Its the word 'benefits' that makes me cringe, why we have to pay benefits to immigrant EU citizens in the first place is beyond me.. Now if the law were simply changed so that we could re-bill those benefits back to which ever country the claiming immigrant is from this whole headline would be more palatable.

it's still unclear whether or not you are favouring an open-door policy
i rather think you are, but perhaps you'ld care to clarify

as so often with my nice simple questions, a nice simple yes or no answer will suffice for now :-)