Comment by password54321

Assuming these numbers are relevant and correct, there is a reason why qualified migrants prefer other countries.

If you were a French or a German doctor or an engineer, would you spend 3 months fighting with the Home Office for the questionable privilege of earning £50K per annum in a country where a half decent flat costs £2500 a month?

That chart is almost useless because it doesn't break down by settlement/non-settlement visa types.

Study visas do not have a pathway to settlement. Students paying through the nose for the privilege of staying for a few years to study and then leaving (or getting work visas like everyone else) is hardly a bad thing.

what about nurses and cleaners

Increasing the input labor results in more production.

At the end of the day, you still have to have humans to both carry out certain labor tasks and consume the outputs of that labor. For example, having the ability to manufacture a car with minimal human intervention doesn't mean that you can ship steel to the stamping plant without human intervention, and it doesn't mean that the robot used to weld the car will buy one after it's built. And since "real" Americans/Canadians/Brits/etc. haven't made the babies to do the labor and consumption demanded by capital for almost 60 years now, the labor and consumption must be brought in some other way.

Ultimately you have to balance the incoming immigration with the demands that produces, and that's where a lot of countries fall short. For being as similar as they are, Americans and Canadians have radically different experiences and opinions on immigration from India, for example. Why? Americans mainly think of them as either business owners providing needed services (even if it's just as the stereotypical convenience store owner) or people working in cutting-edge and important industries, because that's who American immigration policy allows in from India. Canadians have far less charitable views, because over the last decade or so, Canadian immigration policy has been far less discriminatory. Whether it should or not, this produces social friction with people who have roots in the society that receives the immigration.

Here are some pointers:

https://niesr.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/JC760-NIESR-O...

maybe it's not working, also maybe it is working but there are other confounding factors.

The former can lead to the latter, 50/50 chance though.

GDP per capita in the UK is still lower than it was in 2008.

Gen Z have never experienced economic growth. They don't know what it means to get richer.

Not true in isolation. It depends on the productivity difference between the existing average and those being added.

I don't disagree

I think this is the most uncharitable reading and understand of Hobbes that exists. The main argument (and context) is that men is evil and can only live in "civilization" by being forced into it by an absolutely powerful state. The fact this state is a monarchy, a dictatroship or a democracy is not the issue. The fact (in which he is right) a state needs absolute power and monopoly of that power. Modern democracies are a good example, they have the absolute power and thus are more stable and peaceful that warlord controlled pseudo-countries in Africa.

You've confused the concept of an absolute sovereign with this which is control over the private lives of the individual and the family.

Exactly. The idea that pornography has to be available to anyone regardless of age/maturity at any time and for any reason is insane. I suspect that a lot of the (mostly judicial) lawmaking in this area did not foresee the internet and its impacts. There is a big difference in the allowing people to go see a pornographic film in a specialized seedy cinema (where age-gating is trivial) and having it available to every child in their pocket.

> It's a valid topic for discussion

not on a thread about vpn useage

> The current situation regarding small boats is not sustainable

the current situation regarding small boats is the inevitable conclusion to a badly implemented brexit policy and a negligent tory party rule over 13 years. Startmer took 5 months in power to talk to France and have them agree to tackle it on their side of the water. Also no brexit, no boats. The anti immigration chest thumpers caused the problem and then scurried like rats. Farage was impossible to be found the year after brexit won, dude aws the face and suddenly wanted to part of the "glory"

ilr == indefinite leave to remain.

> Why should I have bothered.

because you had the privilege to

It's the #1 issue because the Tories spent 15 years running the economy into the ground and are now trying to blame someone else. It's a power grab - don't look at their piss-poor fiscal policy, it was... uh... immigrants! Please elect us again!

It’s a #1 political issue because certain political factions keep leaning on it, constantly, and have done for years.

It's very difficult to build a growing economy when you have mass unskilled immigration combined with free healthcare and a generous welfare system.

Reform appears to be on track for a major win in the next UK election. How will they address the problem of the UK nanny state?

Looking at the USA: the federal policies are currently as anti-immigrant as possible, and in the US states which support those policies the most, age verification has been passed into law.

I fail to see how being anti-immigration, no matter one's opinion on that matter, resolves the basic issue of a nanny state.

which part?

OP implies that increased far-right polling is one element of the country losing all sense.

this response implies that the country has lost ass sense and thus far-right polling has increased as an attempt to get back to sense.