Tired of Waiting

Thanks, saved me time. I was going to quote that too, and even the professor admits it, here: Morons, all of them. .

Excellent.

IF Wikipedia can be believed here, IMPO the name change was a sensible move: "Chislehurst West was previously known as 'Prickend' ". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chislehurst

Good point.

So the councillors were not pressed by the local NIMBY voters?? I think a company planning to build a 150-bed hotel may have done a little feasibility study about it, no?? Besides, they are investing their own money to build it. Is this the "monstrous carbuncle dominating the town centre" ?? Just a question: Do you already have a house? .

Exactly... Not sure the councillors care much either way really. I think they just want to be re-elected, and for that, they listen to the current NIMBY voters, without any ethical considerations, like the younger generation, national interest, etc.

Horrible. And it happens all over the country, all the time. And it's been happening for many many years... It's just unbelievable. Exactly.

Sure, I know. Easy for you to say though, as you already have a house.

Sure but don't forget Brown and Mervyn. IIRC before 2007 London was leading New York on a "de-regulation" race to the bottom, and debt bubble blowing.

I do hope so. These local NIMBYs b@stards deserve to pay for their sickening heinous behaviour. Really disgusting, and very depressing.

I agree with you on that. Actually I've always thought that that forecast was quite astonishingly stupid. But you are assuming that all or most of these immigrants will stay in Britain. In reality a good share of our annual "emigrants" are actually foreigners going back home - around a quarter IIRC?. BTW, a similar share of "immigrants" are actually Brits moving permanent residence back here. You are assuming that the economy would afford wages high enough to entice the natives out of benefits, including housing benefits. I don't think that would be feasible. Yes, the benefits system came first, and that is why we had over a million vacancies in 2004 - which attracted the immigrants.

Good point. I think it's even broader than that. A welfare state that pays more than our economy can afford is incompatible with ... reality! Without immigration we would just have more vacancies, and still millions would be better off on the dole and on housing benefits. We need cheaper housing, better education and a welfare state that doesn't pervert behaviour. Immigration is a consequence of these problems, not a cause.

I heard on Radio 4 that when adjusted by age group immigrants don't have a higher rate of imprisonment than natives. But I don't remember if they've quoted the original source though. And in your example the "catchment" area is probably playing a role as well.

Interesting. Link? You've missed the sentence just above that one. The full quote was:

As I've posted before elsewhere, some data from the Department of Economics at University College London, about the immigration from the A8 accession countries pos 2004: "in 2008-09 they totalled 0.91% of the population, and accounted for 0.96% of total government revenues." "Immigrants accounted for a smaller share in government spending than their share of the population (for example 0.6% in 2008-09, which is far below their share in the overall population of 0.91%). Therefore, overall A8 immigrants made a net contribution to public finances." The researchers think that the main cause is that these immigrants... "have a higher labour market attachment than natives with a labour market participation rate of 95% for men (83% among natives) and 80% for women (75% among natives)." And they think that the deeper reason is that this immigrant population has higher average education than the native population: "We assign to the category "low education" all individuals who left full time education at 16 or earlier, the category "intermediate education" to all individuals who left full time education between the age of 17 and 20, and finally "high education" to all individuals who left full time education aged 21 or over. According to this classification, 32% of A8 men and 40% of A8 women are highly educated, while only 18% of native men and 16% of native women fall in this category. Conversely, the share of A8 migrants with a low education is around five times smaller than that of natives." http://www.cream-migration.org/publ_uploads/CDP_18_09.pdf Another interesting point is that all these numbers are actually quite small, around 1% or less. To much ado about very little really. Immigration is much more a red herring and/or scapegoat than a real problem. .

Because the natives would not be "better off" taking that job, considering our benefits system, including housing benefits. BTW, that is also why we had so many vacancies back in May 2004 - when the Eastern Europeans were allowed to come. BTW 2: It's our benefits system and high housing costs that create job vacancies that attract immigrants, and not the other way round.

Did you buy in London or in the SW?

Against their own Council Planners' recommendations, Bournemouth Councillors have rejected a redevelopment project (for a 150-bed hotel, more than 100 apartments, restaurants and leisure space), planned for a brown-field city-centre site (currently a temporary car par and a derelict crazy golf course, a 6 acre site), "following concern from people living nearby about noise, and the development not fitting in with the area". http://www.heart.co.uk/dorset/news/local/redevelopment-plans-winter-gardens/ http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-dorset-22932946 Former hotel site Part of the former crazy golf site: Current car park: http://www.bournemouthdevelopmentcompany.com/development/the-winter-gardens/ .

500 new homes will be built. This is a good thing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lump_of_labour_fallacy

Excellent.

+ 1

Numerically the benefits issue is by far the main problem. I doubt foreigners are buying tens of billions of £ / year? Not sure though. But this illustrates the benefits issue well: The saddest thing is that this report is by IDS' foundation. So he knows the problem, but is incapable of solving it due to political block by the media and majority of voters. It reminds me of an interview with the new Minister for Planning, Nick Boles, also fully aware of the planning blockage problem, but also incapable of solving it due to political block by the media and majority of voters. .

Please, nobody argues that a democracy generates freedom from reality. Please stop wasting y/our time with that silly argument. What is important is how to develop countries and reduce poverty, increasing their choices/options/freedom and quality of life. There are loads of data charting world development. If you are genuinely interested in helping, please start by doing some research. Just a quick example: There are loads more on the net. Please be intellectually honest and do invest a day or two researching the issue. The United Nations and the World Bank also have lots of data, not only on economics but on quality of life as well. .

Absolute freedom? Nobody says that. That's a straw-man. I suggest we concentrate on what matters: to improve the human condition. Agree? So, for that, we need development, and liberal democracies is the best system. Don't you agree? Or would you argue for any other system? If so, which one? .