Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Mass changes to UK immigration requirements


Recommended Posts

 

India is so corrupt its like breathing the air.

Indias score and rank reflect that.

Imagine if the foreign aid budget was tied to high TI scores.

 

2/3rds of Britons support cuts to foreign aid budget.

92% of Conservative voters! ^_^

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2020/11/25/two-thirds-britons-support-cutting-foreign-aid-bud

In 2015, then-Prime Minister David Cameron enshrined in law the UK’s commitment to spending 0.7% of GDP on foreign aid. The figure had been adopted as a target in principle as early as 1974, although it wasn’t until 2013 that it was met for the first time.

In light of the damage caused to the public finances by the coronavirus crisis, Chancellor Rishi Sunak announced today that foreign aid spending will be reduced to 0.5% of GDP – a reduction of £5bn.

Such a move is controversial in political circles. Baroness Sugg, a Foreign Office minister whose brief included overseas development, resigned in protest at the news, describing it as “fundamentally wrong”. David Cameron and fellow former Prime Minister Tony Blair have both described the move as a “strategic mistake”, while former international development secretary Andrew Mitchell has said the cuts will cause "100,000 preventable deaths, mainly among children".

One group among whom the cut is not controversial, however, is the British public. New YouGov research conducted in the run-up to the announcement shows that two thirds (66%) say that reducing the amount spent on overseas aid is the right decision. Only 18% think it is the wrong call.

The move is near-universally popular among Conservative voters, 92% of whom are in support. Support is lower among Labour and Lib Dem voters, but the move is still more popular than not: Labour voters back it by 44% to 37% and Lib Dem voters do so by 49% to 35%.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

2/3rds of Britons support cuts to foreign aid budget.

92% of Conservative voters! ^_^

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2020/11/25/two-thirds-britons-support-cutting-foreign-aid-bud

In 2015, then-Prime Minister David Cameron enshrined in law the UK’s commitment to spending 0.7% of GDP on foreign aid. The figure had been adopted as a target in principle as early as 1974, although it wasn’t until 2013 that it was met for the first time.

In light of the damage caused to the public finances by the coronavirus crisis, Chancellor Rishi Sunak announced today that foreign aid spending will be reduced to 0.5% of GDP – a reduction of £5bn.

Such a move is controversial in political circles. Baroness Sugg, a Foreign Office minister whose brief included overseas development, resigned in protest at the news, describing it as “fundamentally wrong”. David Cameron and fellow former Prime Minister Tony Blair have both described the move as a “strategic mistake”, while former international development secretary Andrew Mitchell has said the cuts will cause "100,000 preventable deaths, mainly among children".

One group among whom the cut is not controversial, however, is the British public. New YouGov research conducted in the run-up to the announcement shows that two thirds (66%) say that reducing the amount spent on overseas aid is the right decision. Only 18% think it is the wrong call.

The move is near-universally popular among Conservative voters, 92% of whom are in support. Support is lower among Labour and Lib Dem voters, but the move is still more popular than not: Labour voters back it by 44% to 37% and Lib Dem voters do so by 49% to 35%.

 

Well the classic Daily Rage response is why should be funding these places when they are launching space rockets etc?

It's obviously sad that the aid budget is being turned down. However it's probably unreasonable to expect people to be happy giving aid when their salaries are being frozen and they are losing their jobs. For many, charity begins at home.

Of course those that feel its important to maintain aid and have the money to do so are not prevented from stepping up their personal contributions if they so wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

The EU seems to care more about the fact that Poland and Hungary don't want Muslim immigrants than corruption - very weird

It is very weird. One of the problems is that people from the kind of cultures with a long standing history of chronyism and nepotism tend to be rather attached to it, those who make the decisions are those that benefited from it, others have exploited FoM to leave. It is rather easier for the EU to sell itself to the masses when it tries to sort out racism than if it were to start a crusade against corruption. The irony of course is that the corruption in established networks in a country is pretty much racism by the back route.

For me it is another of the unexpected consequences of FoM imposed on a culturally diverse, non fiscally united, collection of states. Problems such as corruption in some regions actually gets worse.

Edited by debtlessmanc
Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Well the classic Daily Rage response is why should be funding these places when they are launching space rockets etc?

It's obviously sad that the aid budget is being turned down. However it's probably unreasonable to expect people to be happy giving aid when their salaries are being frozen and they are losing their jobs. For many, charity begins at home.

Of course those that feel its important to maintain aid and have the money to do so are not prevented from stepping up their personal contributions if they so wish.

+1

The other side of the argument is that we are bribing third world countries for our benefit

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

2/3rds of Britons support cuts to foreign aid budget.

92% of Conservative voters! ^_^

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2020/11/25/two-thirds-britons-support-cutting-foreign-aid-bud

In 2015, then-Prime Minister David Cameron enshrined in law the UK’s commitment to spending 0.7% of GDP on foreign aid. The figure had been adopted as a target in principle as early as 1974, although it wasn’t until 2013 that it was met for the first time.

In light of the damage caused to the public finances by the coronavirus crisis, Chancellor Rishi Sunak announced today that foreign aid spending will be reduced to 0.5% of GDP – a reduction of £5bn.

Such a move is controversial in political circles. Baroness Sugg, a Foreign Office minister whose brief included overseas development, resigned in protest at the news, describing it as “fundamentally wrong”. David Cameron and fellow former Prime Minister Tony Blair have both described the move as a “strategic mistake”, while former international development secretary Andrew Mitchell has said the cuts will cause "100,000 preventable deaths, mainly among children".

One group among whom the cut is not controversial, however, is the British public. New YouGov research conducted in the run-up to the announcement shows that two thirds (66%) say that reducing the amount spent on overseas aid is the right decision. Only 18% think it is the wrong call.

The move is near-universally popular among Conservative voters, 92% of whom are in support. Support is lower among Labour and Lib Dem voters, but the move is still more popular than not: Labour voters back it by 44% to 37% and Lib Dem voters do so by 49% to 35%.

 

I think youll find foreign aids cuts very very very popular with ~80% of UKPOP.

If a small clique of metro-based public sector type want to support foreign countries theres nothing stopping them paying over their hard owned.

 

 

You say foreign age, likes its a sure fire, cant fail good thing good thing.

Remember 1985 and Geldof?

https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/ethiopia-population/

3 years later, straight into a the Eritrean separation war

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eritrean–Ethiopian_War

Now lurching to conflict in Trigray

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-55064746

_115632043_gettyimages-1229746817.jpg

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-55058212

 

Or, picking another country.

That gormless Scot and his Millennium debt relief.

Zambia was a vert large beneficiates.

Less than 20 years later

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-54928836

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

+1

The other side of the argument is that we are bribing third world countries for our benefit

The foreign aid budget is the international face of chumocracy.

Favoured regimes and Third World strongmen get a cherry for buying British!

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/06/uk-remains-second-biggest-arms-exporter-with-11bn-of-orders

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

The foreign aid budget is the international face of chumocracy.

Favoured regimes and Third World strongmen get a cherry for buying British!

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/06/uk-remains-second-biggest-arms-exporter-with-11bn-of-orders

Things change, and we tell 2 different narratives, we pay bribes for buying British, weapons, education, services, we tell our people we are really nice and are helping the poor of the world, now that we are on the cusp of poverty we have to stop spending this money, our standing in the world will change.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Well the classic Daily Rage response is why should be funding these places when they are launching space rockets etc?

It's obviously sad that the aid budget is being turned down. However it's probably unreasonable to expect people to be happy giving aid when their salaries are being frozen and they are losing their jobs. For many, charity begins at home.

Of course those that feel its important to maintain aid and have the money to do so are not prevented from stepping up their personal contributions if they so wish.

I proposed the same thing to brexiters, that they should volunteer to pay the costs of brexit if they feel it is important.

There did not seem to be a strong uptake.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Things change, and we tell 2 different narratives, we pay bribes for buying British, weapons, education, services, we tell our people we are really nice and are helping the poor of the world, now that we are on the cusp of poverty we have to stop spending this money, our standing in the world will change.

 Many hidden dark sides to foreign aid, like being subsidised by arms and drug smuggling.  An ex military cargo plane for emergency famine releif would be well over 100k card rate for an intercotinental haulage charter,  but shady organisations doing the same for half, barely the fuel and landing costs. Difficult dilema for the charity.

 Also offloading our surplus crap like slimming pills and fashion footwear to the third world in the guise of charity. Without some of the more irresponsible bank lending and with less exploitative commodity trading they may have less need for charity in the first place. 

 China had made a priority of colonsing parts of Africa, and will exploit any advantages here: exploitative trade will replace exploitative aid,all no questions asked as per normal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

+1

The other side of the argument is that we are bribing third world countries for our benefit

Which is its main purpose, also gives us some bragging rights etc. The altruism is just an accidental benefit. Buying favour around the world can benefit us enormously in the long run, for eg we can stop Ebola in Africa which in turn stops us getting it here.  

The other issue that people dont understand is that every UK ££ that is sent in aid is firstly magic money that is borrowed into existence, not taken directly from your wages or tax,  ie an accounting trick and secondly every ££ sent abroad has to come back to the UK sometime in the future to be spent on UK goods and services.  That's how international currency transactions work. It is an indirect aid to UK businesses, very much like us paying into the EU was. It cost us but our businesses benefited 10x over what we paid out as a tax paying society and that's not something you will read about in the Daily Mail, express, Sun etc or out of the mouths of Boris and his cronies who are purely opportunists looking after their own a-holes and offshore tax free investments.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

The other issue that people dont understand is that every UK ££ that is sent in aid is firstly magic money that is borrowed into existence, not taken directly from your wages or tax,  ie an accounting trick and secondly every ££ sent abroad has to come back to the UK sometime in the future to be spent on UK goods and services.  That's how international currency transactions work. It is an indirect aid to UK businesses, very much like us paying into the EU was. It cost us but our businesses benefited 10x over what we paid out as a tax paying society and that's not something you will read about in the Daily Mail, express, Sun etc or out of the mouths of Boris and his cronies who are purely opportunists looking after their own a-holes and offshore tax free investments.

This is not true, these boxes stamped with UK aid would beg to differ. Funded by the UK taxpayer.

What is UK aid? - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea that the EU is not working against corruption and the issue with Poland and Hungary is related to muslim immigration is laughable. Firstly, the EU Commission works hard against corruption, but it is small and relatively weak so can't stamp it out immediately and needs national governments to work on it. Secondly, the issue with Poland and Hungary is over respect for the rule of law and democracy, not immigration.

 

I have never met an academic in the UK who has a close blood relative who is also an academic.

I know of a smattering (parents and children or siblings), but it's not common as UK academia doesn't pay as well compared to other professions as it does in Italy, so that is also likely to be a factor - i.e. you can have a very good standard of living there as an academic, but in the UK you either need to progress well up the tree or be very passionate about the subject. In the UK it doesn't seem to be at the same institution, though, as kids seem to try to find a university to go to well away from prying parents and stay there. Many of my old professors from my undergraduate degree seemed to have children that were also academics. Less so the younger lecturers, but then their kids weren't old enough.

There are plenty of families of doctors in the UK, though, and entire families of teachers 30 years ago seemed to be pretty common.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

An interesting article making a good point, EU citizens with settled status have more rights to bring family in now than U.K. citizens

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/nov/29/its-impossible-how-brexit-has-left-british-families-unable-to-return-to-the-uk

EU citizens have always had more rights to bring family members here than Brits.  I would have hoped that would have changed with Brexit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

The idea that the EU is not working against corruption and the issue with Poland and Hungary is related to muslim immigration is laughable. Firstly, the EU Commission works hard against corruption, but it is small and relatively weak so can't stamp it out immediately and needs national governments to work on it. Secondly, the issue with Poland and Hungary is over respect for the rule of law and democracy, not immigration.

I know of a smattering (parents and children or siblings), but it's not common as UK academia doesn't pay as well compared to other professions as it does in Italy, so that is also likely to be a factor - i.e. you can have a very good standard of living there as an academic, but in the UK you either need to progress well up the tree or be very passionate about the subject. In the UK it doesn't seem to be at the same institution, though, as kids seem to try to find a university to go to well away from prying parents and stay there. Many of my old professors from my undergraduate degree seemed to have children that were also academics. Less so the younger lecturers, but then their kids weren't old enough.

There are plenty of families of doctors in the UK, though, and entire families of teachers 30 years ago seemed to be pretty common.

 

Academic pay in most southern EU states is abysmal, worse than the UK, the difference is the unemployment rates. In most of the states getting any half decent job is difficult. There is a massive cultural problem though as recently exposed by a British-Italian academic who became something of a local hero

https://www.thelocal.it/20170926/university-teachers-under-house-arrest-over-corruption-after-being-unmasked-by-an-english-academic

i like the quote "When Jezzi protested about the way qualifications were being awarded, he was apparently told: "What will you do, appeal? That way you'll risk your career. Stop doing things the English way and do them the Italian way.""

As to doctors, universities are trying to stop this, it is now a discipinary offence to ask an applicant about his family background at interview.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Academic pay in most southern EU states is abysmal, worse than the UK, the difference is the unemployment rates. In most of the states getting any half decent job is difficult. There is a massive cultural problem though as recently exposed by a British-Italian academic who became something of a local hero

I thought the differential was better in Italy than in the UK? But then if the differential is £some and £none, that is quite a differential...

 

https://www.thelocal.it/20170926/university-teachers-under-house-arrest-over-corruption-after-being-unmasked-by-an-english-academic

i like the quote "When Jezzi protested about the way qualifications were being awarded, he was apparently told: "What will you do, appeal? That way you'll risk your career. Stop doing things the English way and do them the Italian way.""

As to doctors, universities are trying to stop this, it is now a discipinary offence to ask an applicant about his family background at interview.

Oh, I wasn't suggesting there was nepotism, just a presumption and encouragement to continue the 'family trade'.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I thought the differential was better in Italy than in the UK? But then if the differential is £some and £none, that is quite a differential...

Oh, I wasn't suggesting there was nepotism, just a presumption and encouragement to continue the 'family trade'.

Difficult to explain the enormous popularity of UK academic jobs, never short of international applicants for an academic post, well qualified too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Difficult to explain the enormous popularity of UK academic jobs, never short of international applicants for an academic post, well qualified too.

Perhaps the other systems are in an even worse state than ours, concerning entry prospects. In Germany and Italy you have to work for years for free to get a position, doing dogsbody work for a powerful professor. In Spain as a starting lecturer you have to do about 200 hours of contact teaching time a year. etc. But once you are in you are unsackable. The Nordic countries look the best bet to me, I bet you hardly ever see Scandinavian applicants for UK jobs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Perhaps the other systems are in an even worse state than ours, concerning entry prospects. In Germany and Italy you have to work for years for free to get a position, doing dogsbody work for a powerful professor. In Spain as a starting lecturer you have to do about 200 hours of contact teaching time a year. etc. But once you are in you are unsackable. The Nordic countries look the best bet to me, I bet you hardly ever see Scandinavian applicants for UK jobs.

Actually the scadinavian universities recruitment is, if anything,  more diverse than the UKs, we do have some scandinavian staff, but by simple numbers it always going to be small, they have small populations.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Actually the scadinavian universities recruitment is, if anything,  more diverse than the UKs, we do have some scandinavian staff, but by simple numbers it always going to be small, they have small populations.

Fair point. I don't have data, but anecdotally e.g. Portugal has a population about the same size as Sweden's. I've met several Portuguese academics working in UK universities, I have never met a Swede. Or a Dane, or a Finn. Would be interesting to see which countries are under-represented by their population size in UK HEI.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Fair point. I don't have data, but anecdotally e.g. Portugal has a population about the same size as Sweden's. I've met several Portuguese academics working in UK universities, I have never met a Swede. Or a Dane, or a Finn. Would be interesting to see which countries are under-represented by their population size in UK HEI.

I've known several Portuguese working in support roles, but only one academic. I've known a Norweigan and a Danish academic. But these are anecdotally small sample sizes and meaningless!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.