MrMusician18 wrote: » The policy goal appears to be to kill off the low wage/skill portion of the economy, particularly that that relies on immigrant labour.
Peregrinus wrote: » There are better solutions, involving slightly less humiliating, slightly more mutual, climbdowns. The UK is steamed up about, e.g., subjecting itself to ECJ jurisdiction, but I think they can understand why the EU is steamed up about the possiblity of dumping, undermining of standards, etc that the EU faces. So they need to find agreement on some mechanism for ensuring that can't happen which isn't direct submission to ECJ jurisdiction. Which we know is possible, because it has been done in other cases, e.g. for EFTA countries. This would still require quite a lot of climbing down by the UK, albeit with a bit of face-saving as well, and a certain amount of blustering denial - all of which is fine, from an EU point of view. We know the UK is capable of that because, if they weren't, there would never have been a Withdrawal Agreement.
Leroy42 wrote: » I think you will find that any benefits will be tied to work. With unskilled immigration gone, there will be plenty of low level, low paid jobs looking for people and my guess is that the Tories will say that you must work or lose your benefits. So companies get their workforce, unemployment falls. Everyone wins. Except of course wages won't rise since the employer effectively has a tied in workforce.
Xertz wrote: » The other problem is if they have more or less stated that they can’t and won’t be bound by any agreement as is impinges upon their sovereignty. How do you even negotiate anything with someone who says that? It’s like the “Freemen of the Land” type logic and they’re blatantly negotiating in bad faith. Their basic premise is that the UK state should not have the authority to sign treaties, as no future government should be bound by them. That’s basically saying that international agreements are impossible.
Leroy42 wrote: » I knew I was right, didn't think it would be so quick for them to state it. Immigration: firms will need to train more UK workers, says Priti Patelhttps://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/feb/19/immigration-firms-will-need-to-train-more-uk-workers-says-priti-patel?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Translate
johnnyskeleton wrote: » But strangely have no problem with the World Trade Organisation (which is a body of unelected bureaucrats who impose their most favoured nations rules in the most anti democratic way possible, backed up by a Court which the UK electorate cannot directly elect), which Trump seems to have a problem with. Or the UN, which the UK has an ill deserved veto over and which is the body that created the Global Compact on Migration which many Brexiteers seem to think is a plan by the EU to force the UK to take more migrants and whose general assembly has recently voted in favour of the UK giving up Sovereignty over the Chagos Islands. Or NATO, which could oblige, in the event of an invasion, UK troops to fight in a foreign war.
MrMusician18 wrote: » There are a lot of moving parts in the labour market but if this policy causes a labour shortage, you'd expect wages to rise. Although not announced today, you see chatter in the right wing press about a more relaxed temporary worker visa too to also become available. This could ease pressure on fruit picking and the like - but then does it matter if said industry survives when it's worth almost nothing to the overall economy?
Leroy42 wrote: » It's not designed to create a shortage, it is designed, as Patel has alluded to, or getting all those currently economically inactive to do the jobs. And you do that by forcing them to take the jobs, regardless of suitability or ability. People focus on fruit pickers but it will include cleaners, delivery people, home help, public works. A captive work force. Take this job at the rate we decide or lose your child benefit. And you can bet these will be zero hours contracts and the likes. But this is the natural progression of the no immigration policy that so many seemed excited by.
MrMusician18 wrote: » The UK had published it's new immigration regime this morning, effectively closing the door to low skill migration. This points based system is to take effect from January and there doesn't appear to be any transition period envisaged. The policy goal appears to be to kill off the low wage/skill portion of the economy, particularly that that relies on immigrant labour. It's a rather radical shake up that will see many UK companies become uncompetitive, particularly those difficult to automate. As these jobs aren't currently filled by Brits, the UK government doesn't seem to think they're important. Looks like they're forgetting that these roles largely serve the British economy.
ancapailldorcha wrote: » Exactly. As Alex Andreou once said, you either breed a workforce or you import it. What's quite perverse here is that a lot of younger people feel like their future has been stolen by the older generations. It's more pronounced here than elsewhere I think because of how much the country's economy is concentrated in the southeast while the rest has been left to rot. The implication is that along with the wealth that younger people feel, justifiably or not has been denied to them by their elders, said elders may now be demanding their last resource, time. We have an ageing population and a social care system which is bursting at the seams so if this goes ahead then working as a care worker for benefits seems probable.
Leroy42 wrote: » You have to consider the views of the likes of Raab and Patel, who wrote in a book that the UK worker was unproductive and lazy. On top of that, it is taken that many in the UK don't want the type of jobs that unskilled immigrant were prepared to do. Taken together, I don't think it is a stretch that they will demand that UK workers fill any void left behind. "you wanted to get rid of immigrants, well we did and now we need you to pick the fruit, man the pubs etc". And if you don't you will lose your benefits.
Leroy42 wrote: » It's not designed to create a shortage, it is designed, as Patel has alluded to, or getting all those currently economically inactive to do the jobs. And you do that by forcing them to take the jobs, regardless of suitability or ability. People focus on fruit pickers but it will include cleaners, delivery people, home help, public works. A captive work force. Take this job at the rate we decide or lose your child benefit.
ancapailldorcha wrote: » We have an ageing population and a social care system which is bursting at the seams so if this goes ahead then working as a care worker for benefits seems probable.
ancapailldorcha wrote: » (...) I think the only way forward is for the UK to drink from the poisoned chalice. Facts haven't cut it for a while and until the luxury of being free from the consequences of believing insipid nonsense is stripped away either in the form of close alignment with Brussels or shortages and queues at Dover then the English and the Welsh can't progress as societies.
Leroy42 wrote: » ... you do that by forcing them to take the jobs, regardless of suitability or ability. People focus on fruit pickers but it will include cleaners, delivery people, home help, public works. A captive work force. Take this job at the rate we decide or lose your child benefit. And you can bet these will be zero hours contracts and the likes.
This suggests that some large companies seem happier to treat the levy simply like an extra tax and say goodbye to the money involved, rather than take advantage of it to improve the skills of younger workers.
ambro25 wrote: » 'took you a while, glad you got there (IIRC) For all of today's furore, one has to remember that this policy is a draft, so it may well get diluted yet, if not terminally shelved. Methinks today's is part and parcel of the same politico-moral boundaries-testing, as all the other kites flown by Johnson's government since the General Election.
Christy42 wrote: » Are the traitors people with different political opinions than themselves? That seems pretty terrifying that they want to lock people up for having a different political opinion
Leroy42 wrote: » You have to consider the views of the likes of Raab and Patel, who wrote in a book that the UK worker was unproductive and lazy. On top of that, it is taken that many in the UK don't want the type of jobs that unskilled immigrant were prepared to do. Taken together, I don't think it is a stretch that they will demand that UK workers fill any void left behind. "you wanted to get rid of immigrants, well we did and now we need you to pick the fruit, man the pubs etc". And if you don't you will lose your benefits. What it won't do is increase costs to business as they will effectively have access to a captive work force. The person can up and quit as they would leave with nothing, and get no support.
The Home Office estimates 70% of EU workers currently in the UK would not meet the requirements if applying under the new system.
Lemming wrote: » Listening to BBC4 radio on the way home from work and it would appear that a lot of business interests - who lamentably stayed silent through Wrexsh1t - are now, finding their voices in alarm however much too late it may be being not just a cent short but the full euro to boot. Patel's numbers of 8 million Britons are also being absolutely derided as absolutely delusional thinking by said same business groups, not least of all the CBI. There were some interviews [in the context of perceived immigration concerns] with folk in a town - I think it was somewhere in Derbyshire - and if folk are still trying to give millions of people the benefit of the doubt, I'll tell you that listening to some of those interviews would dissuade you from any sense of compassion or generosity. Staggering in the ignorance and absolute lack of self awareness on display. Everything from the woman complaining that local services were all just "too busy" to the man talking about seeing his son & his friends unable to get minimum wage jobs and yet foreigners were "cheap labour" without so much as a pause for thought of what he was saying, or trying to lay it on about his son "having to go to university and taking on that debt" instead of staying local in a dead-end job on minimum wage. Hmmmmm, let me think about that one for a se ... nope.
Gintonious wrote: » https://twitter.com/CorbynistaTeen/status/1230202817442439168 The people of the U.K are in for a lot of fun with this government.
MrMusician18 wrote: » There will be new fast-track NHS Visa for certain medical professionals with NHS job offers, reducing their visa fees and providing support to come to the UK with their families. Applicants will need to have a job offer from the NHS, be trained to a recognised standard and have good working English language skills. The NHS will still have access to foreign labour, directly employed labour at least. It's other low skill areas like contract cleaners that they might have trouble filling the positions.
An Ciarraioch wrote: » The departing Lib Dem MEPs leave a food hamper for FF's incoming Barry Andrews:https://twitter.com/Andrews4Europe/status/1230104830930300930
Strazdas wrote: » Let's call a spade a spade here. Most Leave voters voted Leave to stop immigrants moving to the UK (they will deny this furiously of course.....at the same time as claiming how immigrants are a huge burden to Britain).
An Ciarraioch wrote: » Google has declared that UK account users will no longer be protected by GDPR, but subject to US data regulations:https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN20D2M3?__twitter_impression=true
