Where is the UK headed?

[Tel 911S]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...0-billion.html

This headline is not that difficult to understand . And even the BBC is saying the same thing , but deliberately making it a bit more obscure so as not to annoy its Labour party bosses .
But as I said , the left wing will totally ignore anything they don,t want to hear .

[donKey jote]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...0-billion.html

This headline is not that difficult to understand . And even the BBC is saying the same thing , but deliberately making it a bit more obscure so as not to annoy its Labour party bosses .
But as I said , the left wing will totally ignore anything they don,t want to hear .

the second paragraph reads "The major academic study also found, however, that recent immigration from Europe – driven by the surge in arrivals from eastern European – gave the economy a £4.4 billion boost over the same period."...
Now carry on whinging about loony left media, EU immigration, miscalculation of the amount of poles, and totally ignoring what you don't want to hear

[Lousada]

Meanwhile....

Pepsi, IKEA, FedEx and 340 other international companies have secured secret deals from Luxembourg, allowing many of them to slash their global tax bills while maintaining little presence in the tiny European duchy, leaked documents show.

These companies appear to have channeled hundreds of billions of dollars through Luxembourg and saved billions of dollars in taxes, according to a review of nearly 28,000 pages of confidential documents conducted by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists and a team of more than 80 journalists from 26 countries.

Source: http://www.icij.org/project/luxembou...als-luxembourg

Yet its the immigrants that rob our countries, right...

[Brown, Jon Brow]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...0-billion.html

This headline is not that difficult to understand . And even the BBC is saying the same thing , but deliberately making it a bit more obscure so as not to annoy its Labour party bosses .
But as I said , the left wing will totally ignore anything they don,t want to hear .

So the Torygraph is more balanced??

What the Torygraph has done is taken the set of figures in the study from 1995-2011. This addresses the contributions of all immigrants, no matter when they arrived in the UK. And per head they cost about the same as 'native' Britons. For example, an immigrant who arrived in the 1960s could have contributed for 35 years, but from 1995 they might have made a negative contribution as they have now retired.

They could have had a headline that shouted British cost Britain £600bn. But no, they focus on picking on the easier target so they can cause outrage amongst the usual reactionary Tory/UKIP voter.

The other figures are from 2001-2011 and they only look at the contributions of new immigrants that have arrived in the UK during that period. The report shows that new immigrants during this period have made a contribution.

[Tel 911S]

A recent public opinion poll on " IS IMMIGRATION GOOD FOR BRITAIN " had an overwhelming [ 95% ] no vote .
And with prominent left wingers now admitting it has been a disaster it is not surprising that the Labour party,s propaganda activists are desperately putting out all sorts of lies to try to regain some public confidence .
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz3IDZB9rUq
Watch how quick the left wing lot claim this cannot be true because it was in the MAIL.
The EU has even been paying for internet trolls to go onto social media sites to try to boost its socialist agenda [ they paid for the UCL paper ] .

So I would say to everybody , " Don,t believe what these trolls & the biased parts of the mainstream media try to tell you , but find out the real truth from some unbiased sources ."

[Tel 911S]

So the Torygraph is more balanced??

What the Torygraph has done is taken the set of figures in the study from 1995-2011. This addresses the contributions of all immigrants, no matter when they arrived in the UK. And per head they cost about the same as 'native' Britons. For example, an immigrant who arrived in the 1960s could have contributed for 35 years, but from 1995 they might have made a negative contribution as they have now retired.

They could have had a headline that shouted British cost Britain £600bn. But no, they focus on picking on the easier target so they can cause outrage amongst the usual reactionary Tory/UKIP voter.

The other figures are from 2001-2011 and they only look at the contributions of new immigrants that have arrived in the UK during that period. The report shows that new immigrants during this period have made a contribution.

It is very noticeable that you could not bring yourself to mention the part of the BBC report that says that ALL immigrants since 1995 have cost the country £118 Billion .

[Brown, Jon Brow]

It is very noticeable that you could not bring yourself to mention the part of the BBC report that says that ALL immigrants since 1995 have cost the country £118 Billion .

I deliberately didn't say that because it was already said in the headline of the article you posted. My point was that 'native' Britons have cost just as much per head as immigrants over the same period, so the fact immigrants have cost £118bn is irrelevant to the argument, i.e., it doesn't matter if you are 'native' or an immigrant you've probably made a net negative contribution.

If you had an agenda against facial hair the data would also probably show that people with moustaches have cost £xxbn over the same period......

[janvanvurpa]

What a surprise that those expressing right-wing opinions in this thread should either be (a) inarticulate or (b) American.

It is striking how spectacularly ignorant Americans are whenever they come to (try to) discuss matters relating to a country that's not their own, whereas others' opinions of America are generally far more informed.

Imagine the same trying to discuss their own country.. In America men talking is all about "winning the debate" and that means never ever ever admitting you don't know everything...as we see is the norm here...

There is no reason to believe that they are somehow crisp, clear, detaild and careful thinkers on one thing and appallingly ignorant on another..

Sloppy is as sloppy does. Or sumpin.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

So Cameron has come back from Brussels with a 'deal' that will give the UK a special status in Europe. Most senior Tories seem set on leaving the EU so Boris has decided he wants to leave as well.

Leaving the EU is a real prospect now. And it is likely that we will leave because the public thinks immigration is too high, rather than an informed choice based on the economic arguments.

In a years time the UK could be outside the EU with Boris as PM and Trump could be running America

[Rollo]

In a years time the UK could be outside the EU with Boris as PM and Trump could be running America

A year ago, it was still technically possible for Boris to run for President of the US as well.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...-passport.html
Boris Johnson is to renounce his US citizenship, removing a potential obstacle to becoming Prime Minister.
The London mayor has dual nationality as he was born in New York - but has now revealed he wants to hand back his American passport.
- The Telegraph, 14th Feb 2015