‘Another month, the 5th in a row, of increased productivity, we’ll, who’d a thunk it.’
Sounds like the ONS have gone into overdrive with stats at the moment - obviously a Tory sales pitch I believe 
The growth in food banks is amazing - I wonder when the shares will be available?
Vote UKIP!
Rhythm Thief:
turbot:
Typical Libdumb rubbishIf immigration made us richer we would be on the way up not down. The Bliar government let 3 million in during its term, we had 3 million unemployed at the time. My maths is poor can anyone work it out for me?
Drivers, and any paid profession are much worse off with a constant supply of people from abroad who will work for peanuts. You only have to look at wages over the last ten years.
Houses are expensive for several reasons, main one being supply and demand.The one thing that seems to be missed is what happens to the countries where the immigrants came from, how are they better off with all their young people abroad?
Don’t debate it with us … take it up with those who carried out the original research.
cream-migration.org/publ_upl … _22_13.pdf
Have a read, let us know where they’ve gone wrong and why, backed up by your own data.
“We also show that, if the marginal cost of providing fixed public goods to immigrants is (close
to) zero, then immigration, by sharing their provision costs among a larger pool of people”
Rubbish,how can the cost of providing something be zero?
“We have no direct source of information on immigrants’ consumption patterns”
Rubbish
“Because we have no detailed information”
yawn
“when we assume that the marginal cost of providing “pure” public
goods to immigrants is zero, we attribute these expenditures entirely to natives.”
indeed!
“Our primary data source, the British Labour Force Survey (LFS), is a quarterly representative
survey of about 60,000 households in the UK, or about 0.2% of the UK population”
Well that is a rather small data source
“have a read” ok I have, it’s so poor I don’t need my own data to prove it’s crap.
It does it all on its own.
fredthered:
‘Another month, the 5th in a row, of increased productivity, we’ll, who’d a thunk it.’Sounds like the ONS have gone into overdrive with stats at the moment - obviously a Tory sales pitch I believe
The growth in food banks is amazing - I wonder when the shares will be available?
Vote UKIP!
yes food banks are in huge demand thanks to how well this country is doing at the moment.
there will be no driver shortage lol just ask all the firms who have to use polish drivers as they can not get any English ones and that’s even before the sept 14 deadline.
drivers need training and they shouldnt be allowed to drive hgv trucks as passing a test means nothing nor does any experience gained not without having a card that says you sat in a class for 35 hours ■■?
erm there must be some sense in all this somewhere ■■? or am i mistaken ?
Sounds like the ONS have gone into overdrive with stats at the moment
I blame the economic slowdown on the ONS In an old job/company I used to get constantly hassled to give them data, and it was mandatory to complete their stupid forms sometimes taking a couple of days which could have been spent generating income … giving people jobs… improving the local economy… keeping the journalists at the daily mail happy… reducing government paranoia…preventing the ONS to be called on to invent fake data proving how well the gov’t are doing etc…
fredthered:
‘Another month, the 5th in a row, of increased productivity, we’ll, who’d a thunk it.’Sounds like the ONS have gone into overdrive with stats at the moment - obviously a Tory sales pitch I believe
The growth in food banks is amazing - I wonder when the shares will be available?
Vote UKIP!
If you offer the lazy people something for nothing then yes, food banks will continue to grow. Try getting them to do a little graft to earn their food & see how many turn up.
turbot:
Rhythm Thief:
turbot:
Typical Libdumb rubbishIf immigration made us richer we would be on the way up not down. The Bliar government let 3 million in during its term, we had 3 million unemployed at the time. My maths is poor can anyone work it out for me?
Drivers, and any paid profession are much worse off with a constant supply of people from abroad who will work for peanuts. You only have to look at wages over the last ten years.
Houses are expensive for several reasons, main one being supply and demand.The one thing that seems to be missed is what happens to the countries where the immigrants came from, how are they better off with all their young people abroad?
Don’t debate it with us … take it up with those who carried out the original research.
cream-migration.org/publ_upl … _22_13.pdf
Have a read, let us know where they’ve gone wrong and why, backed up by your own data.
“We also show that, if the marginal cost of providing fixed public goods to immigrants is (close
to) zero, then immigration, by sharing their provision costs among a larger pool of people”
Rubbish,how can the cost of providing something be zero?
“We have no direct source of information on immigrants’ consumption patterns”
Rubbish
“Because we have no detailed information”
yawn
“when we assume that the marginal cost of providing “pure” public
goods to immigrants is zero, we attribute these expenditures entirely to natives.”
indeed!
“Our primary data source, the British Labour Force Survey (LFS), is a quarterly representative
survey of about 60,000 households in the UK, or about 0.2% of the UK population”
Well that is a rather small data source“have a read” ok I have, it’s so poor I don’t need my own data to prove it’s crap.
It does it all on its own.
Like I say, provide us with your own data, if you get a chance between working out how the “quote” function works. It’s not enough just to say “this is rubbish”: to argue properly you have to refute the findings of the other side of the debate. Like it or not, this properly carried out academic study puts the ball in your court now. So go on, let’s see your data and the conclusions you’ve drawn from them.
BillyHunt:
If you offer the lazy people something for nothing then yes, food banks will continue to grow. Try getting them to do a little graft to earn their food & see how many turn up.
Are you saying that everyone who relies on food banks to feed themselves is a shiftless wastrel? I’m pretty sure that isn’t true. It’s at least statistically improbable. I suspect most people would grab the chance to “do a little graft to earn their food”, just as you and I do.
BillyHunt:
If you offer the lazy people something for nothing then yes, food banks will continue to grow. Try getting them to do a little graft to earn their food & see how many turn up.
For me, that marks the point where you lost what little credibility you had.
Rhythm Thief:
BillyHunt:
If you offer the lazy people something for nothing then yes, food banks will continue to grow. Try getting them to do a little graft to earn their food & see how many turn up.Are you saying that everyone who relies on food banks to feed themselves is a shiftless wastrel? I’m pretty sure that isn’t true. It’s at least statistically improbable. I suspect most people would grab the chance to “do a little graft to earn their food”, just as you and I do.
He’s a troll, just don’t feed him.
BillyHunt:
The names Billy, do try to get yourself out of the playground. Why would you think I wouldn’t be back? Do you think I’d be beaten by your repeated mantra of get us out of Europe. What an odd person you are, you’re not bothered by racism but have family that were German Jews, you say you’re a right wing Tory but will vote ukip, presumably until they show themselves to be what they are, then it’s back on the Tory bandwagon, you don’t like people that pretend to be something they’re not, yet you’re English but want to be known as Canadian! Man you are all over the place.
Now, let’s make a massive leap & give power to ukip. Ok we’re out of Europe, now what?, I know you don’t care about their policies but we are stuck here so we have to be. Do you really trust these people to get this country back on track, I know I don’t.
What’s that? Another month, the 5th in a row, of increased productivity, we’ll, who’d a thunk it.
I really doubt your name is Billy. Mike seemed so much more suitable. I thought you wouldn’t be back because you weren’t getting anywhere trying to convince us that UKIP were not worthy of our votes. Do you think you have converted anybody so far?
Most people are odd if you take all their thoughts into account. We are not a homogenised set of stereotypes.
Personally I am happy to be known as English, but proud to be a Canadian too. I have the option to live and work in either country. At the moment, and since 1967, I choose to live and make my living in England. My sons, who were born here, have chosen to live and work in Canada, as they think it offers them a better place to raise their families. I may retire in Canada but for the moment I’m better off financially staying in England.
Being realistic, UKIP won’t get power at this or the next election so don’t actually need any policies beyond leaving the EU and regaining control of our own destiny. The value of UKIP lies in the risk they pose to the mainstream parties of stealing some of their voters. Which brings us back to you, Billy.
You know and I know that the Conservatives and Labour have everything to lose and UKIP just have to get enough votes to unseat some of your members.
Hence the smear tactics, the race card play and the desperation to find any little niggles to exploit.
Vote UKIP to reclaim our country. Only UKIP are promising to take back control from the EU.
Rhythm Thief:
turbot:
Rhythm Thief:
turbot:
Typical Libdumb rubbishIf immigration made us richer we would be on the way up not down. The Bliar government let 3 million in during its term, we had 3 million unemployed at the time. My maths is poor can anyone work it out for me?
Drivers, and any paid profession are much worse off with a constant supply of people from abroad who will work for peanuts. You only have to look at wages over the last ten years.
Houses are expensive for several reasons, main one being supply and demand.The one thing that seems to be missed is what happens to the countries where the immigrants came from, how are they better off with all their young people abroad?
Don’t debate it with us … take it up with those who carried out the original research.
cream-migration.org/publ_upl … _22_13.pdf
Have a read, let us know where they’ve gone wrong and why, backed up by your own data.
“We also show that, if the marginal cost of providing fixed public goods to immigrants is (close
to) zero, then immigration, by sharing their provision costs among a larger pool of people”
Rubbish,how can the cost of providing something be zero?
“We have no direct source of information on immigrants’ consumption patterns”
Rubbish
“Because we have no detailed information”
yawn
“when we assume that the marginal cost of providing “pure” public
goods to immigrants is zero, we attribute these expenditures entirely to natives.”
indeed!
“Our primary data source, the British Labour Force Survey (LFS), is a quarterly representative
survey of about 60,000 households in the UK, or about 0.2% of the UK population”
Well that is a rather small data source“have a read” ok I have, it’s so poor I don’t need my own data to prove it’s crap.
It does it all on its own.Like I say, provide us with your own data, if you get a chance between working out how the “quote” function works. It’s not enough just to say “this is rubbish”: to argue properly you have to refute the findings of the other side of the debate. Like it or not, this properly carried out academic study puts the ball in your court now. So go on, let’s see your data and the conclusions you’ve drawn from them.
Why would I need to provide data to disprove yours. It already shows how poor it is by the quotes I have given from it.
Batted back to you with your own bat. 
Rhythm Thief:
BillyHunt:
If you offer the lazy people something for nothing then yes, food banks will continue to grow. Try getting them to do a little graft to earn their food & see how many turn up.Are you saying that everyone who relies on food banks to feed themselves is a shiftless wastrel? I’m pretty sure that isn’t true. It’s at least statistically improbable. I suspect most people would grab the chance to “do a little graft to earn their food”, just as you and I do.
No, it does say lazy people. Take an example. My sister works in a school that had a breakfast club, they charged £5 a week & got around 25 pupils attending. Then the school decided to make it free to all kids, 87 kids+ parents turned up, with the parents helping themselves to the food aswell btw. Greedy? You decide. Chances are that if they said they had to help the school some way then there would have been a lot less.
They cannot refute you’re earlier post as they have no clue, it’s easier to say “it’s rubbish” while frantically searching the internet for information to discredit the findings. A bit pathetic really.
Ah the old troll card, applied to anyone you don’t agree with. Why am I a troll because I don’t see ukip as a viable option for this country?
Sorry but the name is Billy, but if the name change gives you a giggle then crack on.
I’m not trying to convert anyone, or convince anyone not to vote ukip, people will vote, or not, for whoever they please, that’s not always who they say it is on here btw. Just putting my views across as I see them. My point about ukip is that they are not worth my vote as they have only one policy. I just don’t see the point of sending them to the European Parliament where they don’t bother voting as they don’t like Europe, makes you wonder why they go there. If they were true to their stated aim they would boycott the euro elections & make a bigger effort to win seats in our parliament, that’s where they need to be to get us out surely. Of course they wouldn’t be pocketing anywhere near the same cash so maybe that’s got something to do with it, who knows.
turbot:
“We also show that, if the marginal cost of providing fixed public goods to immigrants is (close
to) zero, then immigration, by sharing their provision costs among a larger pool of people”
Rubbish,how can the cost of providing something be zero?
“We have no direct source of information on immigrants’ consumption patterns”
Rubbish
“Because we have no detailed information”
yawn
“when we assume that the marginal cost of providing “pure” public
goods to immigrants is zero, we attribute these expenditures entirely to natives.”
indeed!
“Our primary data source, the British Labour Force Survey (LFS), is a quarterly representative
survey of about 60,000 households in the UK, or about 0.2% of the UK population”
Well that is a rather small data source
“have a read”
ok I have, it’s so poor I don’t need my own data to prove it’s crap.
It does it all on its own.
Rhythm Thief:
Like I say, provide us with your own data, if you get a chance between working out how the “quote” function works. It’s not enough just to say “this is rubbish”: to argue properly you have to refute the findings of the other side of the debate. Like it or not, this properly carried out academic study puts the ball in your court now. So go on, let’s see your data and the conclusions you’ve drawn from them.
Turbot:
Why would I need to provide data to disprove yours. It already shows how poor it is by the quotes I have given from it.
Batted back to you with your own bat.
In the first place, it’s not my report and they’re not my data. In the second place, your sole constructive criticism which may - although I doubt it - have some scientific validity is your observation that the sample size is rather small. The rest of your critique consists of your opinions that the report is “rubbish”. That doesn’t disprove anything, in fact it simply shows how little you understand of the way these studies are carried out. In the end, I imagine you haven’t actually read the report at all, preferring instead to rely on your preconceived opinions and mindlessly dismissing any actual research which appears to contradict them as “rubbish”. Provide me with some verifiable figures and conclusions drawn from them and we can talk about this further.
Harry Monk:
BillyHunt:
What’s that? Another month, the 5th in a row, of increased productivity, we’ll, who’d a thunk it.If you know anything at all about economics, then you’ll understand this graph.
You don’t, so I’ll explain it to you. There is no growth, just financial manipulation designed to create a feel-good factor ahead of the General Election.
You’re correct, I don’t know anything about economics, that’s why I drive a lorry. I can see by your graph, very nice btw, that all the lines are heading upwards, what does that mean? If it is designed to make me feel good before the next election then what can I say, it works for me.
Rhythm Thief:
turbot:
“We also show that, if the marginal cost of providing fixed public goods to immigrants is (close
to) zero, then immigration, by sharing their provision costs among a larger pool of people”
Rubbish,how can the cost of providing something be zero?
“We have no direct source of information on immigrants’ consumption patterns”
Rubbish
“Because we have no detailed information”
yawn
“when we assume that the marginal cost of providing “pure” public
goods to immigrants is zero, we attribute these expenditures entirely to natives.”
indeed!
“Our primary data source, the British Labour Force Survey (LFS), is a quarterly representative
survey of about 60,000 households in the UK, or about 0.2% of the UK population”
Well that is a rather small data source
“have a read”
ok I have, it’s so poor I don’t need my own data to prove it’s crap.
It does it all on its own.Rhythm Thief:
Like I say, provide us with your own data, if you get a chance between working out how the “quote” function works. It’s not enough just to say “this is rubbish”: to argue properly you have to refute the findings of the other side of the debate. Like it or not, this properly carried out academic study puts the ball in your court now. So go on, let’s see your data and the conclusions you’ve drawn from them.Turbot:
Why would I need to provide data to disprove yours. It already shows how poor it is by the quotes I have given from it.
Batted back to you with your own bat.In the first place, it’s not my report and they’re not my data. In the second place, your sole constructive criticism which may - although I doubt it - have some scientific validity is your observation that the sample size is rather small. The rest of your critique consists of your opinions that the report is “rubbish”. That doesn’t disprove anything, in fact it simply shows how little you understand of the way these studies are carried out. In the end, I imagine you haven’t actually read the report at all, preferring instead to rely on your preconceived opinions and mindlessly dismissing any actual research which appears to contradict them as “rubbish”. Provide me with some verifiable figures and conclusions drawn from them and we can talk about this further.
del949:
‘…happy keith, perhaps it would be fairer of you to quote the original quote rather than using my quote which makes me look a plank…!’
Hey, Del, total respect for that - although I’m not making any personal judgement over a sentiment that I’m certain is shared by millions.
Rational debate is the key to understanding - and here’s to continued polite discussion re my take on how the European Onion does sweet knack-all to enhance either our transport industry or the UK in any constructive or long-term positive way 
HK - a frequent plank
Perhaps this entire debate should be looked at from an outside point of view, in terms of “What’s NOT being done that could be done right now”
(1) Cameron is currently Prime Minister. He promises a referendum in 2017 - but only with a majority Conservative government. He could have one right now, and steal UKIP’s fire forever, but he fears the result, so won’t do it. The promise for 2017 also need not be honoured once the Tories either find themselves out on their ears next year, or in a coalition - be that one with Cleggy again (should Ukip support not materialise) or with Farage if it does. An outright majority can only happen if LABOUR voters transfer their vote to Tory in droves… The only way I can see that achieved is if the Labour high command “suddenly gets investigated by operation yewtree” - a move I wouldn’t put past our gutter press, another institution that operates against the British public interest and is heavily biased towards government that leaves them alone…
(2) Cleggy made promises before the last election that he never thought he’d have to keep. Fast forward to becoming deputy prime minister - and suddenly those promises are gone back on.
It’s easy to make promises when support is low, but not so easy to keep them once that support is actually in place. Don’t make promises you can’t keep - for ANY reason.
I don’t imagine for a minute that Farage would compromise any coalition agreement he might make next year with “Ok, we’ll drop the 'must have a euro referendum right away” bit. As a “one trick pony” you don’t discard the only popular policy you have at the start!
(3) We’ve been told that “Our position in Europe will be re-negotiated” - Ok then, how come not right now, so the results of such re-negotiation saves the day in time for next year’s election?
Doh! If these things “take time”< then that’s even more reason to get on with it right away - and not make it "yet another condition based on If IF IF the Conservatives win a majority next year…
(4) The so-called “facts” and stats listed in that long spiel above have all the bearings of the standard “lies mixed with the truth” - because not all sources being commented upon there can be verified by non-government and therefore non-biased sources. I find myself agreeing with some “facts”, and totally refuting others. I suspect many other members of the public will find themselves feeling the same, and therefore no nearer to making an informed decision.
(5) No one seems to be putting any pressure on the incumbents to get all the above sorted! - There’s only a year left FFS - Even if we, the British public loved Cameron to bits - we must despair how he isn’t even reacting to daily events, rather than just blundering around which is how it seems at present…
BillyHunt:
Harry Monk:
BillyHunt:
What’s that? Another month, the 5th in a row, of increased productivity, we’ll, who’d a thunk it.If you know anything at all about economics, then you’ll understand this graph.
You don’t, so I’ll explain it to you. There is no growth, just financial manipulation designed to create a feel-good factor ahead of the General Election.
You’re correct, I don’t know anything about economics, that’s why I drive a lorry. I can see by your graph, very nice btw, that all the lines are heading upwards, what does that mean? If it is designed to make me feel good before the next election then what can I say, it works for me.
The lines might as well represent “how close different bods working in different sectors are to dying” - Feelgood factor is a very personal thing that is different to everyone experiencing it.
The last time I experienced any such “feelgood factor” for example, was 1998-2000 when my wages improved sharply (because I’d become senior enough to get a plum duty) and I qualified for extra holidays (once again, because of seniority) coupled with various moves by then-chancellor Gordon Brown to make my spare time life a bit cheaper as well. We had low fuel prices, betting duty abolished, interest topping out, and falling, and finally in 2000 after years of “not being able to qualify for a mortgage”, I was able to get a mortgage on the house I live at now. My “feelgood era” reached it’s peak in the summer of 1999, and didn’t start to drain away until the end of 2001, when the events following 9/11 allowed western government policies to chuck it all away. 
From 2002 onwards, my pay/outgoings ratio started to fall in real terms year on year, and has done ever since. Even interest rates falling (helping with mortgage payments) didn’t make up for the drop in overtime rates, and the increasing difficulty and costs in taking foreign holidays. My last time on a plane was coming home from the middle east (Egypt) on the morning of 9/11 itself. Not much chance of me getting back out there for my holidays any time soon, as the world has changed a lot for the worse since then alas.
Got to agree with Winseers 3rd paragraph above.
if the Tories had any genuine intention of re-negotiating the terms of the EU, why hasn’t the ball started rolling already?
Cameron was aware of the Nations feelings in the immediate aftermath of the last election and yet chose to do nothing.
I simply do not believe he has ANY intention of doing anything about it.
like the old joke “how do you tell if a politician is lying?” ------- “his mouth is moving!”
Quoting Winseer “Feelgood factor is a very personal thing that is different to everyone experiencing it.
From 2002 onwards, my pay/outgoings ratio started to fall in real terms year on year, and has done ever since.”
Couldn’t agree more, if we carry on doing the same things that got us where we are, we will continue to get less pay for more work.
