A Student's Opinion On The UK's New Immigration System

[SpiderManFan2002]

Brexit date has passed, we've now entered the transition period, and home secretary Priti Patel has introduced a new points-based immigration system to the UK.

The new immigration system, focuses more on allowing "high-skilled" workers to come to the UK, and it will help cut drastically "low-skilled" workers coming to the UK. The new system will be based on points and in order to enter the UK an immigrant from any country will have to score 70.

To accquire 70 points an immigrant could have any of the following:

A job with an approved sponsor - 20 points

Appropriate skills to match that job - 20 points

The ability to speak English - 10 points

Secure a salary at least £25,600 - 20 points

Secure a job with a labour shortage - 20 points

PhD in a science subject - 20 points

My Opinion On The New Points-Based Immigration System:

On the surface this new points-based immigration system may look like a good idea. For example, right now, we have a shortage in the cyber secruity sector, so with this system we will be able to obtain more cyber secruity workers. But under the old immigration system, we could have done that anyway.

Priti Patel states: "it will mean we will have a global immigration system, that doesn't discriminate between EU and non-EU"

But the thing this, the immigration system we had before didn't discriminate against non-EU immigrants. People from all around the world were still able to immigrate to the UK even whilst we were apart of the EU. Sure, we had "free-movement" meaning that anyone from an EU country could come to the UK without a visa, and anyone from the UK could go to any EU country without a visa.

But overall, this new points-based system is more discriminatory than our old one. Because it's discriminating against the poorer people of other countries that could still contribute to Britian.

We have a shortage of 10,000 fruit pickers, a shortage of 120,000 social care workers, and a shortage of truck drivers. The UK unemployment rate is at 3.8% meaning, most people in the UK are employed. Priti Patel states that there are 8 million economically inactive people in the UK who can fill those places but those 8 million economically inactive people are students, full-time carers, pensioners and disabled people. Can we really expect a student to do those jobs? Students can only work part-time if they work, so that doesn't completely solve the problem. Full-time carers, well the clue is in the name "full-time" they're unemployed because they have to give all their time looking after a disabled person, how can you expect them to do those jobs? Pensioners have served their time in our country, they've retired- should we really expect people to come out of their retirement? And disabled people, can we really expect disabled people to do such physical and stressful work?

Migrants usually did jobs like fruit picking, and social care jobs because nobody else wanted to do them. By doing these jobs they benefitted our economy- now who is going to fill these positions?

Not to mention, Priti Patel is mainly responsible for this points-based system. Well this system would have prevented her own parents from coming to the UK had it been in place when they came. So if this system was always in place, chances are, she wouldn't have been born here and she wouldn't be where she is today. I just find that really ironic.

Conclusion:

To be honest, I'm just thinking about how many of these working-class people who voted Conservative in the general election and are unemployed and/or retired are going to be happy working in fruit picking jobs, or in a social care job.

Anyway I hope you enjoyed this MyTake and...

Thank you for reading :)

[Waffles731]

"Can we really expect a student to do those jobs? Students can only work part-time if they work"

Speaking from personal experience, as for the fruit pickers, if you can get to the job, College and University students are perfect for that kind of work.

Honestly I think in the U. S at least, the shortage of Farm Laborers could be mitigated by employing college students, cause it was perfect for me when I did it.

As for the other things,

Yeah Brexit clearly fucked you guys over hard

[SpiderManFan2002]

True, may be able to- but there's still not enough of us to fufill that whole and every other market at a shortage.

[Waffles731]

Yeah completely true

[AllAmericanGirl99]

A labor shortage can mean higher wages. Take where I live, my parents pay a pittance to some Mexicans as gardeners, housekeeper, nanny etc and they do it because they need the money and there's a que of other Mexicans looking to do the same jobs possibly for less. So I guess if we have stricter immigration controls my parents will have to clean their own toilets lol.
https://youtu.be/1iYp0X3wXdc

[purplepoppy]

Don't worry, all those people who voted brexit because foreigners are taking their jobs are queuing up to pick fruit. Seriously though as a farmer I've met quite a few foreign workers (mostly shearers) they see working abroad more as a bit of adventure more than anything else. Often they're only hired for short periods and paid cash in hand. I doubt brexit will stop them.

[SpiderManFan2002]

"Don't worry, all those people who voted brexit because foreigners are taking their jobs are queuing up to pick fruit."
I know right, then when they see upper-class immigrants being invited into the country who are richer than them, they'll cry about why immigrants are richer than them.

" Seriously though as a farmer I've met quite a few foreign workers (mostly shearers) they see working abroad more as a bit of adventure more than anything else"
Oh you're a farmer? That's pretty cool I didn't know that. So has Brexit really affected you in terms of workers or not?

[purplepoppy]

Not yet, we don't hire large numbers it's more one or two at shearing time and they can come from any where not just eu.

[SpiderManFan2002]

I suppose that isn't bad.

My teacher knew a farmer and he said that Brexit affected the farmer he knew negatively because he employed lots of workers from the EU.

[Levin]

"I know right, then when they see upper-class immigrants being invited into the country who are richer than them, they'll cry about why immigrants are richer than them."

I must admit, I'm not sure why this is appealing for the middle class and the powers that be. More skilled workers equals more competition in their particular job market, and a depression on wages.

It all seems a bit gimmicky and as if it's trying to appease certain people politically, rather than being a sensible well thought out idea. Welcome to the UK government.

[Waffles731]

"they see working abroad more as a bit of adventure more than anything else. Often they're only hired for short periods and paid cash in hand. "

As an American who worked as a farm laborer for a few years, I can understand,

If someone told me I could spend the summer doing the same kind of work I did in the past this summer only I'd be doing it in say Europe or South America or Oceania, I'd sign on for the experience of it

[bunnydrop]

It's not about foreigners taking Jobs i know many Asians work highskilled jobs 110k£. But the real issue is from many parts of Europe people moving to Europe and Taking even low level shit jobs, i see many from Romania and Portugal does that.

[bunnydrop]

Uk**

[NearlyNapping]

Well, I don't want to comment on the specifics of these points and their relative weight. However, the idea behind it is how many many countries do it. You are somehow making a determination about how valuable and needed a particular person is. Look at your commonwealth countries to see similar.

"this new points-based system is more discriminatory than our old one"

That's exactly what it's supposed to be. It's supposed to discriminate between people who fulfill a purpose, and people who don't. That's exactly the same thing that happens in the normal hiring process itself.

"Can we really expect a student to do those jobs? "

You are cherry picking. Students are not the only ones who are not working. Plus, there is nothing wrong with students doing those jobs. It's good for them.

"Migrants usually did jobs... because nobody else wanted to do them"

This is an old argument, but it's like a self-fulfilling prophecy. Migrants do certain unskilled jobs, and they do them cheap since there is an abundance of unskilled labor. That keeps the labor cost down low enough that others might not want the jobs. But if the migrants don't do the work, then the system will adjust until those jobs are filled by others. If that means higher wages and benefits, then that's what happens.

The overall process is self adjusting. The original point system doesn't have to be set in concrete. It's a starting point that can be adjusted as needed. Even as-is, it's partly self adjusting without changing the point system itself.

approved sponsor
skills to match that job
Secure a salary at least £25,600
Secure a job with a labour shortage

The above are all self-adjusting. If there is still a shortage of fruit pickers, then it will fall into one of the above categories.

[SpiderManFan2002]

"That's exactly what it's supposed to be. It's supposed to discriminate between people who fulfill a purpose, and people who don't."
You eat fruit right? If not people you know eat fruit? You're 48 in 30-50 years you may find yourself in an elderly home. Those 'low-skilled' workers picked our fruit, drove our trucks, looked after our elderly.

"You are cherry picking. Students are not the only ones who are not working. Plus, there is nothing wrong with students doing those jobs. It's good for them."

No, you're the one cherry picking because note I said: " Can we really expect a student to do those jobs? Students can only work part-time if they work, so that doesn't completely solve the problem. Full-time carers, well the clue is in the name "full-time" they're unemployed because they have to give all their time looking after a disabled person, how can you expect them to do those jobs? Pensioners have served their time in our country, they've retired- should we really expect people to come out of their retirement? And disabled people, can we really expect disabled people to do such physical and stressful work?"

And I only said this because Priti Patel stated there were 8 million economically inactive people yet the people she was talking about consisted of students, the disabled, pensioners and full-time carers. Migrants can do these jobs much more efficiently than all the demographics of people I listed above.

[SpiderManFan2002]

"But if the migrants don't do the work, then the system will adjust until those jobs are filled by others. If that means higher wages and benefits, then that's what happens."
That may be so but the question is 'how' and will it be as efficient as when the migrants did so? Or will it collaspe or will it thrive? We don't know. You're 48. You've got another 17 years until retirement. Think about it- imagine you're an 80-year-old pensioner, would you really want to be called out to do fruitpicking jobs? Or social care jobs? You will have done your time working in this country And (god forbid) but imagine your health takes a turn for the worst. Would you want to be called out to do fruitpicking or would you rather a young strong able migrant does it?

[NearlyNapping]

You ignored everything I said.

[SpiderManFan2002]

I really didn't given I quoted what you said and responded to it.

[NearlyNapping]

Yes you quoted, but still ignored what I said. It's self adjusting and the system has enough leeway to allow for jobs to be filled. It's basic supply and demand. If there is a demand for jobs, that demand WILL be filled.

Whether people are students or elderly, is completely irrelevant. And I'm sure the UK doesn't have 100% employment for eligible and willing workers. One way or another the jobs will be filled. The system allows for that and provides for it.

That goes for both fruit pickers and care workers. If the demand is there, those jobs will be filled. The system allows for it, and the exact points can be changed as needed. The job market is dynamic. As either supply or demand changes, the rules can change. But the existing rules as you stated already allow for a lot of changes in supply or demand either one. I listed four of them that automatically take into account any changes in supply or demand.

[SpiderManFan2002]

"It's self adjusting and the system has enough leeway to allow for jobs to be filled."
How can you say that for certain?

" If there is a demand for jobs, that demand WILL be filled."
And again, you can say that for certain because?

"Whether people are students or elderly, is completely irrelevant"
I'm sorry but how the fuck can you say that? Students fair enough, but us students can only work part-time because we're studying so that doesn't solve the problem. And the elderly? I don't see why pensioners who have served their time in our country should be sent back out to work. That's the whole point of retirement, you've RETIRED. And anyway who's to say that all of the elderly will be fit enough to work? My grandparents are in their 70s and they're both taking 30 tablets a day perscribed by doctors- and how many more are like them? Would they really be fit enough to work in social care, or stand in a field fruitpicking?

And even then, you're still ignoring the fact that she suggested that the disabled and full-time carers should fill these jobs. It's fucking sick what world does she live in?

"One way or another the jobs will be filled. The system allows for that and provides for it"
You sound so certain. But the whole point why they called the immigrants over is because British people weren't willing to do those jobs. Who says they'll be anymore willing now? And with the immense shortages we have in particular sectors, I don't think the 3.8% unemployment rate will cut it it might, but I believe that's highly unlikely.

[NearlyNapping]

You are seeing what you want to see and either ignoring or not understanding the rest.

We are talking about very basic supply and demand here. You ask how I can be sure. It's because that's how supply and demand works. It's a basic underlying principle. Not just for labor, or even economics. It's an underlying principle of the natural world. It's true of plants and animals. It's true in much of the sciences.

The periodic table of elements has supply of electrons on the left, and demand for electrons on the right. We have water, which is H2O. Hydrogen and oxygen form water because of supply and demand.

If you have a battery, it has a plus and minus terminal. The words plus and minus can be replaced with the words supply and demand, and it means the same thing.

You ask how I can be certain. The answer is, that's just how it works.

If there is an imbalance between supply and demand, then it will self adjust. That's how it works. There are some exceptions, but those are rare.

If there is a shortage of labor, there is an imbalance of supply and demand. It will self correct. It can self correct in several ways. You can have large numbers of immigrants fill those jobs. You can have locals fill those jobs. You do the latter by increasing the pay. Cheap migrant labor holds the prices down. If you decrease the number of migrants, then the price will go up, and makes the jobs more appealing to locals.

Students and seniors are not the only people in the labor pool to fill those jobs. There will be others who can do those jobs. If the price goes up enough, then students and seniors might decide to fill those jobs also. Everything is a choice of one thing vs another thing. A student chooses to be a student because they weigh the options and choose to be a student. If the options change, like labor rates, then some students may stop being students and start doing something else.

[NearlyNapping]

This doesn't necessarily mean they stop being students to be fruit pickers. It has a cascade effect throughout the labor market. As the supply of labor shifts in one industry, it affects other industries. If you have ten thousand fruit pickers that come from the local labor pool, that affects the rest of the labor pool.

"I don't see why pensioners who have served their time in our country should be sent back out to work."

They aren't "sent" back to work. We aren't talking about forced labor. If the price of labor goes up, some seniors will CHOOSE to go back to work. I'm older than my profile says. I'm retired myself. If the labor rates for something I can do are appealing to me, then I'll go back to work. Nobody would "send" me back to work. I'd do it by choice because my available options changed.

You have a local labor pool. Students and seniors are only a part of that pool. If the local labor pool does not meet the demand, then the system allows for immigrant and migrant labor. That's what the entire point system is for. It allows for immigrant labor if certain conditions are met.

The point system doesn't mean there won't be immigrant of migrant labor, it just quantifies what conditions need to be met for that to happen. As I said, it's not set in concrete. It can, and almost certainly will, be fine-tuned as needed. It can even go back and forth between different sets of rules, as the situation changes. It may use one set of rules for ten years, then another for eight years, then back to the first.

" But the whole point why they called the immigrants over is because British people weren't willing to do those jobs. Who says they'll be anymore willing now?"

I've answered this multiple times now. I just answered it again.

[PitbullSlayer9000]

I don't give a shit

[AllThatSweetJazz]

People will step into those low skill jobs. Saying that people won’t do the job because they simply don’t want to is just wrong. Plain wrong. Besides having more jobs than workers is a positive for workers in general.

If they’re unemployed then yes they’re going to be grateful for an opportunity to pick fruit. It sort of reads like you’re being sarcastic, but it don’t know.

You can also reduce the need for social workers by reducing the problems they tend to.

Yes, it does discriminate against poor people of other countries, what’s wrong with that? It’s not like they’re entitled to live in the UK. The point is to limit people coming in, naturally you’re going to look for the better people to bring in. Just because some foreign poor person could contribute doesn’t mean they’re going to get in when there’s an obviously more desirable worker also trying to get in and there’s a limited number of people being let in.

It seems like you’re only describing positives, I don’t see the problem.

[englisc]

Job shortages often happen because people don't want to do the work in the conditons they'd have to work in for the amount of pay they'd receive. The reason certain people want to encourage mass immigration is to import cheap labour, people who are willing to work for peanuts, which drives down wages and ensures that the conditions of the workers are not improved in a way that would incentivise more people to take those jobs. It makes no sense to claim to care about the working class while also arguing for mass immigration of unskilled workers.

[goaded]

It's like an RPG! Are they the only criteria?

It means the groups you highlighted would have to be able to speak English.

A job with an approved sponsor - 20 points
Appropriate skills to match that job - 20 points
The ability to speak English - 10 points
Secure a job with a labour shortage - 20 points

It seems unnecessary for fruit pickers, and truck drivers, at least. I think English should be a requirement for social care workers, anyway (with extra languages a bonus).

Oh, wait, "approved sponsor"? That's code for requiring a middle-man for hiring people, who will take an unearned cut of the immigrant's income, raising costs for small farms and businesses.

[SirRexington]

I have a bigger issue with "higher skilled" immigrants than low ones. Why? Because it's a tighter labor market. Instead of a British or US citizen (depending on the respective country) going to college, graduating and obtaining a job in a higher skilled field we give those positions away to foreigners. I don't approve of that. Its a big issue here in the States.

What's wrong with picking fruit? Its a true to time job that is always needed, it's honest work and it's among nature. For a lot of people that could be good for them. And let's not shame social care positions.

[SpiderManFan2002]

". Instead of a British or US citizen (depending on the respective country) going to college, graduating and obtaining a job in a higher skilled field we give those positions away to foreigners. I don't approve of that. Its a big issue here in the States."

See, a reason why British students are deciding to not go to university is because, university equals a lot of debt. Even me, as somebody who has wanted to go to university for as long as I can remember- right now, I'd rather get an apprenticeship, and many other students are thinking the same. And the problem with apprenticeships is, they're really competitive to get. For one apprenticeship about 30 students are applying and only one student can get the apprenticeship. So what happens to the other 29? Some will go to university and accept being saddled with a debt, and some will just get a job and work their way up.

"What's wrong with picking fruit?"
There's nothing wrong with it. But what I am saying is we have a shortage of fruitpickers, and you cannot expect the economically inactive to do these jobs. I mean realistically the only people who could do these jobs who fit under "economically inactive" is students, but even then, students can only work part-time so that doesn't fully solve the problem.

[SirRexington]

That's why affordable education is important, that's why Bernie is so popular. He has plans to tackle this issue. Do I 100% agree with his education plan? No. But I support it more than anyone elses. Yang had a better plan on affordable education I will say.

And I greatly disagree with the assumption that picking fruit is largely a market for student workers. I have no clue where you got that idea from

[SpiderManFan2002]

"That's why affordable education is important, that's why Bernie is so popular. He has plans to tackle this issue. Do I 100% agree with his education plan? No. But I support it more than anyone elses. Yang had a better plan on affordable education I will say. "

I completely agree with you on that one. I personally do believe student debt should be scrapped altogether, if the first 13 years of school education are free, then what's wrong with making the last four also free? Yes, the taxpayer pays, but I don't see the taxpayer complaining about paying tax to send kids to school for the first 13 years of the education I doubt it would make a huge difference if the taxpayer paid for the whole 16/17 years of their education.

And anyway, it would benefit them, because these kids will grow up to be doctors, nurses, lawyers, etc and help the economy and help even provide them a service once their education is done rather than there being a shortage of certain professions.

[SpiderManFan2002]

"And I greatly disagree with the assumption that picking fruit is largely a market for student workers. I have no clue where you got that idea from."
Again, I never said that. Priti Patel Home Secetary of the UK suggested that the 8 million economically inactive people should fill the jobs with shortages i. e. fruitpicking. But these 8 million economically inactive people consist of students, pensioners, the disabled, and full-time carers.

I wholeheartdly disagree with these people filling those jobs because they're economically inactive for a reason, and what I said was: " I mean realistically the only people who could do these jobs who fit under "economically inactive" is students" Do I think students should do fruitpicking jobs? No.

But what I'm saying is if they're going to look to the economically inactive, the only people who MIGHT be fit enough to do a job like fruitpicking are students- and even then, that wouldn't solve the problem because students can only work part-time and it depends on whether they live near a fruitpicking garden or something because a student wouldn't travel far just to get a fruitpicking job, especially since most students usually take minimum wage jobs.

[tartaarsaus]

True. Regardless how you spin immigration systems (like being very open or more restrictive for lower wage workers), it’s gonna be a negative thing for various groups in the nation, just like with most things (such as trade).

That said, obviously outcome ought to be weighted and some things have a priority over other stuff. Like trade can lead to net gains, which can then be re-distributed to help those hurt by trade.

But yeah, this thing sounds like it could be a problem in some ways. I can recall that the Poles did lots of that work before Brexit such as fruit-picking, which became more problematic since Brexit.

However, the eventual gravity of the situation and actual impact will obviously just be uncovered rather slowly over the coming years (assuming this thing is passed)

[SpiderManFan2002]

True, immigration systems can never be perfect there's always going to be some group affected negatively. But I feel like this one will do more harm than good in some instances.

Yes, lots of Polish people did do work in Britian such as fruitpicking, nursing, truck driving- things which others weren't willing to do, so I don't really see what problem people had with them doing jobs like accusing them of "taking/stealing jobs" but at the same time, the same people accusing them of doing that weren't willing to do the jobs that they were doing. It's just nonesense.

But like you said, we can only see what happens from here.

[tartaarsaus]

Yeah, some people accuse immigrants of stealing jobs whilst jobs done by many immigrants often are jobs they don’t wanna do. It’s pretty stupid

[SpiderManFan2002]

Yeah, so dumb.

[Iamagoodguy]

Fixing a problem doest mean the problem will go away people can still come and work if people here arnt doing the work as that creates a labour shortage Which means 20 points
English speaking country so a lot easier to communicate so that's pretty important 10 points if they learn
There is a job shortage so +20 points

Labour shortage so they can demand a job with more than 25k meaning the average wage in that job if below that before would increase + 20


Just with that you would get in having skills to match the job well why would you come here if you don't even know how to do that job extra 20 points

These don't seem to be difficult it makes sure there coming to really work and they will get a job before coming so less time where they have to rely on the government


Seems like it would mean we would get people filling the empty job markets and making it so they are more likely to have a job when they arrive

[SpiderManFan2002]

"Labour shortage so they can demand a job with more than 25k meaning the average wage in that job if below that before would increase + 20 "

They have to be earning 25K in their own country before they come to the UK. And for a lot of these "low-skilled" jobs those countries simply do not pay much, at all, and it's not as simple as them demanding a job in their own country which pays 25K, because realistically they can demand it all they want but that won't happen. Usually the "low-skilled" workers come from poorer backgrounds in their countries, so it's highly unlikely they'll be earning 25K.

And not all of these people who are considered to be "low-skilled" can speak English. Yes, many can, but not all of them. I've known lots who learn English when they come to the UK. Then not all of these people in these countries will have a job but they'll have the skills.

It's not as simple as you may believe.

[Iamagoodguy]

Secure a salary at least £25,600 - 20 points

I must interprete that differently to you has that makes me think secure a salary in this country of at least £25,600

The English one I agree with what you say because a lot won't know it but I have to ask do they have to be fluent in it or understand it and be able to respond even if they can't do it well

[SpiderManFan2002]

I apologise I got something wrong. It is to secure a salary of £25.6K in this country, thanks for correcting me.

But realistically, they're not going to start putting minimum wage jobs such as fruitpicking at £25,600, even if there is a shortage. If they were going to do that or had any intentions of doing that, they would have said so. But instead what the government has suggested, is getting economically inactive people to fill these jobs, that means getting students, the disabled, the retired pensioners, the fulltime carers to do these jobs which is utterly ridiculous if you ask me.

[Iamagoodguy]

Student are the exact right people for these jobs and by ensuring these jobs are accessible to students means they will get jobs with 0 experience which is almost all students

[SpiderManFan2002]

I disagree with that.

Because yes, some students may be able to do a fruitpicking job, but firstly, students can only work part-time, due to studying, so getting them to work these jobs won't fully solve the problem.

Secondly, how many students live near a fruitpicking place? Any student who lives far from a fruitpicking place isn't likely to travel to it, because chances are it will be expensive for them getting there, and for what? A minimum wage job? Students would rather get a minimum wage job which is close to them, because it won't cost them much in travel.

Thirdly, how many students would be willing to do those jobs? There will still be a percentage of students who would still and will be doing jobs at places like Greggs and McDonalds, and be sales assistants, waiters/waitresses, car washing etc.

Then we've got to question how many students are physically able to do these jobs. Many students are also disabled. Now some who are disabled may be able to do these jobs still, like I'm partially-disabled. Now I could do a fruitpicking job, if I had to, but I'm not going to be as efficient as a fully-abled person. There's people with worse disabilities than me, who won't be able to do these jobs though.

So my point is, not every student will be able to fill these jobs, and it may at first glance seem like somewhat of a good idea, once you start exploring the factors it isn't and it doesn't really solve the problem.

[Iamagoodguy]

a lot of students do also not all students do it full time a lot ddo it part time and work the other amount.

There are also people who see the current working conditions and the pay and won't work there because they value themselves more

Also we live in a world where we can import the rest of the stuff we can import things from other countries so if we don't have enough apple pickers we can always just import the rest of them

And personaly paying slightly more like 10p more per apple and the worker getting payed a decent amount of money is fine for me.

There are also technology that exists and is in development right now to make it so there isn't as many people needed so if we keep getting more and more people to fill thoes spots but say in 5 years they all lose that job well they are low skill workers there arnt many areas you can move to when that sort of thing happens we would just end up with more people without a job

[SpiderManFan2002]

" a lot of students do also not all students do it full time a lot ddo it part time and work the other amount."
A number of students can do those jobs, but it's not enough to fully sustain that industry for reasons I stated in my previous reply and as I said, students can only work part-time due to their studies.

"There are also people who see the current working conditions and the pay and won't work there because they value themselves more "
Yes, that is true.

"Also we live in a world where we can import the rest of the stuff we can import things from other countries so if we don't have enough apple pickers we can always just import the rest of them"

That is true, but wouldn't that just be wasting money? Because we have our own apples, and don't you think we'd be losing out because as you said we can import the apples (for example) but if we can import we can also export. And don't you think we'd be missing out on exporting our goods, to other countries?

"And personaly paying slightly more like 10p more per apple and the worker getting payed a decent amount of money is fine for me."

There are some places that exploit these workers, and I strongly disagree with that. Not every place is like that though, and they pay the legal minimum wage (which I think should be higher by the way, but that's a discussion for another time lol).

[SpiderManFan2002]

"There are also technology that exists and is in development right now to make it so there isn't as many people needed so if we keep getting more and more people to fill thoes spots but say in 5 years they all lose that job well they are low skill workers there arnt many areas you can move to when that sort of thing happens we would just end up with more people without a job "

Technology is developing, but trust me when I say this as a computer science students, it's not ready yet and isn't likely to be ready anytime soon, so for now, we still need humans to do these jobs. Maybe in 20-50 years time, things may be different but right now, in 2020- it's not ready. Humans right now would do a much more efficient job than the technology avaliable right now.

[Iamagoodguy]

2020 yeah not now but your thinking more 1900-2000 terms in rate of development with computers and what we have now it's going to happen way faster than you think we already have made a organism using just a computer

[Iamagoodguy]

https://youtu.be/js6uTRT8KO4

[Iamagoodguy]

That's what I was talking about things like that are already here from what we only had like 20 years ago that's mental and shows how much faster we are advancing than a 50 years before that and it will only get faster

Also we have started to use things that get rid of the need for the low skill work think of things like the Amazon shop where 0 people will be nessasary except possibly people to repair it. That just shows that floor workers and mangers are becoming more useless and can be replaced basically now with just a few improvements

[Iamagoodguy]

Even then it could happen now with very little issues just so many people would lose there jobs. You can also see it at almost any shop in the form of a cashier less payment for your shopping or ordering from like Macdonalds

www.google.com/.../amazon-go-store-chicago-cashier-less
The Amazon shop if you haven't heard of it

[SpiderManFan2002]

Trust me, it's not going to fully replace humans in 2020. We still need humans.

Amazon is different. Firstly they're a multibillion pound/dollar company, they can afford to invest in these robots. And that's only one store. If the technology was so reliable why haven't Amazon implemented it in all of their stores?

For jobs such as fruitpicking, who's going to pay for these robots? They'll require either electricity or battery- firstly, what source of energy are we going to power them? Solar? Tidal? Or will it be finite resources? Or will it be a combination of different energy sources? In Amazon, they're indoors, for fruitpicking they'd be outdoors so most likely they'd be battery powered, but because they're outside do you think they'll be able to sustain our weather conditions?

Yes businesses, are getting more robots in such as self-service machines. But if you look, it's not 100% robot yet in every store in Britain. Stores which are 100% robot right now, are a minority because the technology is still developing- so we can't just say: "Oh we don't need low-skilled workers anymore because we have robots" because the truth is while robots may be able to do certain jobs, it's not at that stage where they can 100% replace humans. Maybe sometime in the future, but not right now, in 2020.

[Iamagoodguy]

I don't think your getting my point there will be a decrease very soon in the amount needed so the worker shortage could dissapear in every aspect

And for the fuel or electricity they already have to pay wages so taking that money they can pay for the power and have money left over

[Iamagoodguy]

Also yes only Amazon can afford it now

But remember the first phone was $4,000 and it wasn't that good but that price is way too high so who would pay that for something that would only last 30mins

Now you can get a phone that's better for like £3

Prices will drop as we develop the tech more it's in the early stages but the price will drop

[SpiderManFan2002]

"will be a decrease very soon in the amount needed so the worker shortage could dissapear in every aspect"

See you can't say that for certain. Because while technology is moving fast, many complications also occur with technology- so we can't certainly say "worker shortage could decrease very soon in every aspect" fruitpicking is one example. Trucking is another. In the UK we do have a truck driver shortage here is an article from the business insider: www.businessinsider.com/autonomous-tech-truck-driver-jobs-2018-12

I'm unsure what legal issues, we may face with it in the UK- but chances are we may face some. But at the part where it says "technology is not yet commercially viable on a large scale" is also very true, and a point I have been trying to make. A lot of technology as well as self-driving trucks, is only in developing stages but it has been stated: "We're not at a place where the technology is proven."

And that's the case for a lot of technology. And today, we have shortages in fruitpicking, social care, truck driving. Today. And we can't just put a bunch of robots into those jobs today and hope they will work, because there is still a huge chance we will face a number of complications.

So right now, the most reliable solution for these industries would be to obtain human workers. Implenting robots, isn't an overnight thing. It takes years of development and testing, and yes, we have some which might be good enough now, and already some taking certain jobs.

But I personally don't believe today on the 1st March 2020 we can simply say: "We don't need humans for social care, fruitpicking, truck driving- let's put robots in." Because if we could do that today, that's what Priti Patel would have suggested instead suggesting to put the pensioners, students, the disabled, the fulltime carers in.

[Catlover1999]

I think it’s way more sensible that the EU’s open border policy. It’s more secure, it delivers on the Tories’ & the leave campaign’s promise to reduce the number of people coming into the country and prevents companies exploiting migrants for cheap labour.

[SpiderManFan2002]

But who will do the jobs that migrants who were considered to be low-skilled workers were doing before?

They paid migrants minimum wage because that's the minimum wage the Tories put in. Had Labour been voted in after the election, they would have been getting £10 an hour, thus, not being exploited.

[Catlover1999]

People who already live here will probably do some of those low-skilled jobs such as students who need a first job. And the Tories have said that living wage will increase to £10.50 but that’s not the same as minimum wage which is currently at £6.15 for 18-20 year olds.

[SpiderManFan2002]

"People who already live here will probably do some of those low-skilled jobs such as students who need a first job"
And which people living here do you think would be willing to do those jobs? That's the whole point why we invited immigrants over because people who already lived here weren't willing to do those jobs.

"And the Tories have said that living wage will increase to £10.50"
Okay firstly, the Tories "said" they haven't done. They've said a lot of shit doesn't mean they're going to implement it. And even then it's a copout because it's there but do you seriously believe that if businesses has the option between using a minimum wage or a living wage they're all going to choose the living wage?

Honey.

[Catlover1999]

So students don’t work as waiters and waitresses, in bars or on farms? And the living wage won’t just increase to £10.50 right now, it’ll increase gradually over the next four years.

[Katerina_Belle]

@Catlover1999 This girl is extremely daft.

“That's the whole point why we invited immigrants over because people who already lived here weren't willing to do those jobs.”

This is the biggest bullsh! t I’ve ever heard.

www.google.co.uk/.../202a60c0-cfd8-11e5-831d-09f7778e7377

Facts. The UK joined the EU for economical strength.

[SpiderManFan2002]

@Katerina_Belle At which point did I say that the UK didn't join the EU for economic strength? I said the whole reason, why European immigrants were called over, was because we had job shortages in certain areas of work- not every job is nice cushy credit controller job you know - and these European immigrants filled those "low-skilled" positions. Would you leave your nice cushy job right now, for a job in social care, fruitpicking, truck driving or construction work?

And Britain joined the EU for many reasons, not just one, yes, economical strength was a benefit, but another benefit was freedom of movement with our neighbouring countries so any Louise, Mark or Nina could go and settle in another country.

[SpiderManFan2002]

@catlover1999 "So students don’t work as waiters and waitresses, in bars or on farms?"
Why are you only looking at the student angle of things? Because yes, some students may be able to work in fruitpicking jobs- but not all. And even then, ones which can, can only work part-time so that fully won't solve the problem. And students can't fill the truck driving jobs, jobs like those require a lot of training.

Priti Patel suggested to get also get the disabled, the pensioners who have retired, and the fulltime carers to do those jobs- do you seriously think they can?

" And the living wage won’t just increase to £10.50 right now, it’ll increase gradually over the next four years."
I never said it would increase right now. What I'm saying is whilst it may be there, will there be any obligations for businesses to implement it or will it still be legal for them to pay the minimum wage? Because if the minimum wage still is legal, do you think the majority of the businesses will pay their workers the living or minimum wage in these areas of work if they can?

[Katerina_Belle]

Alright stalker

[SpiderManFan2002]

@Katerina_Belle What because I responded to you give days later when I saw you're reply? Are you okay? That doesn't make some a stalker, that just means they saw your reply five days later😂😂

[Sevenpointfive]

i think i get what you're saying but have you heard of a temp agency? the workforce is bigger than you think.

i don't think anyone has a problem with immigrants other than this one thing. they take money and send it back to their families. they take money out of our system and it causes problems

[SpiderManFan2002]

"temp agency"
Yes, but how many workers are there to fufill those? In Britain we have a 3.8% unemployment rate. And then you have to question why those people are unemployed and what jobs are they suitable for and will the ones which can work in these industries and are willing to be enough?

"hey take money and send it back to their families."
They put money in. And actually EU migrants put more in than they take out. And if they're earning their money, from whatever job they do, then I don't see a problem with them sending a proportion their money back to their home country to their families- they've earned their money they can do what they like with it.

[Sevenpointfive]

i can only tell you what i know about our system and it's not good

[Trolloween]

Your argument is founded on the false idea that the UK is infinitely large. You're saying 'let in a billon people, some will be doctors and cyber security professionals and others can pick fruit'. Absolutely true, if you let in enough people some will benefit the economy. But we are a small island and we have a massive housing shortage already, so what's your solution? Build more houses? Where? Funded by who? Should we keep destroying the small amount of countryside we have left into ever increasingly larger cities and towns to sustain this growth?

[SpiderManFan2002]

Who said anything about billions of people? Nobody lets in billions of people, the UK's population is not at one billion please get your facts straight.

And like it or not they are going to let these 'high-skilled' immigrants in. They will do jobs like cyber secruity and be Maths teachers considering we've a shortage of both. If you voted the Tories in the general election then you have no business complaining because this is what you voted for. That's how democracy works.

If you read my article properly they're not going to let in fruitpickers, or 'low-skilled' workers, so chances are when you're a pensioner they'll make you go do the fruitpicking and hey, at least it'll be YOUR job :P

We only have a housing shortage, it's not to do with overpopulation it's to do with lack of investment because these same Tories the public voted in for another 5 years are going to continue austerity and continue to not invest in deprived areas whilst giving themselves wage rises and tax cuts.

[Trolloween]

No, they let in millions of people I was clearly being hyperbolic to prove a point that you have to have some kind of limit. I don't have a problem with letting in skilled workers, did I say I did? I also have no problem picking fruit or others doing it instead of working at McDonald's, what's wrong with these jobs? You're making strawman arguments and putting words in my mouth.
OK explain this to me, how can we have a shortage of houses if the population isn't too high? Also to follow on from your investment point, you're saying we should be investing in more houses and my point was where do we build them? When do we stop building them? Do we just keep letting the population expand forever or do we at some point decide our tiny little island has enough? Also how do we pay off the trillions we have in debt if we keep borrowing more to build houses for immigrants to come here and pick some fruit? I don't see any sense in your points.

[SpiderManFan2002]

" You're making strawman arguments and putting words in my mouth."
Okay, if others pick fruit instead of working at McDonalds then who will work at McDonalds?

There is nothing wrong with doing these jobs. But to suggest the disabled, the students, the pensioners and the fulltime carers can and should do these jobs is just ridiculous. Not to mention the majority of the British public don't want to do these jobs, that's the reason why immigrants were called over to do these jobs.

"OK explain this to me, how can we have a shortage of houses if the population isn't too high"
It's other factors, not the population. The primary cause is the lack of new houses being built and as to where we build them well, property investors hold on to land where houses could be built, until the land reaches peak value. That's a problem in itself.

" if we keep borrowing more to build houses for immigrants to come here and pick some fruit? I don't see any sense in your points. "
You know, maybe if you didn't allow the rich to rip off the poor 24/7. They claim we don't have enough money for things we need yet they can bail out Richard Branson £2 billion for failing with the railways, MPs can give themselves payrises, hide their money in tax havens, give their own class tax cuts, give £1 billion to the DUP. They're playing you and so many other working-class Tories like a stupid fucking fiddle. How much are you going to condone them taking off of us?

Don't you see what they're doing? They're using a smokescreen of immigration to make it look like that's the problem immigrants are to blame for the housing crisis sending out constant misinformation- but actually, immigrants put more into the economy than they take out.

[Trolloween]

Firstly, please stop assuming you know my political opinion. I am not a tory for a start.

Your first point is stupid, by McDonald's I mean entry level jobs and there's always people coming of working age who need money during university and so forth. You seem to intentionally take everything absolutely literally which is really a dishonest way to discuss an issue as you must know I am not literally saying every McDonald's worker in the country should pick fruit, so can you please assume I'm not a total moron and stop talking to me like I am one?
When did I say disabled people should do these jobs? That's another bizarre statement and are you actually implying that would be necessary if we didn't have so many immigrants? That's just silly. British people haven't tended to do these jobs because they are underpaid, if you hate rich people so much then why are you arguing they should be able to pay terrible salaries to people? The majority gets paid barely enough to survive whilst they pay themselves multiple millions, buy all the houses and then no one can afford a house. Make employers pay a reasonable liveable wage and spread the wealth out, one way to do this is to stop them exiting cheap foreign workers who end up living 9 people to a one bedroom flat.
If our population wasn't increasing too quickly then we wouldn't need to keep increasing the rate we build houses. Why can't we just maintain our current population and stop destroying our countryside to house more and more people? My point was we have finite space, what number of people do we need before you think we have enough? 100 million? 300 million? Give me a number.
.

[Trolloween]

Your next point is about letting rhe rich rip off the poor... You mean like migrant workers getting paid bugger all for working outside all day picking fruit?
Yes money seems to come from nowhere, so we can use some of it to offset the rise in salaries maybe? People won't like paying 2p more per apple if we paid decent wages so give farmers another tax break and everyone wins.

I am not stupid, I don't blame immigrants for all of our issues. I blame the rich, the selfish billionaires who don't pay taxes and buy all the land and properties. But I don't see how encouraging our population to increase further with people that get paid terrible wages, put a strain on all our resources like the NHS and often benefit system and then need housing is in any way contributing to the redistribution of wealth

[SpiderManFan2002]

"Your first point is stupid, by McDonald's I mean entry level jobs and there's always people coming of working age who need money during university and so forth"
Right, but Priti Patel suggested that students should do the fruitpicking jobs. Now what? You're saying they should do the entry level jobs?

And you know what? If you mean entry level fucking say entry level, don't whine when I interpret what you say a certain way.

"When did I say disabled people should do these jobs?"
Uhhhhhhhhhh did you even read my fucking article or did you just read the first paragraph? YOU didn't say it PRITI PATEL SUGGESTED IT👏👏👏👏👏👏👏

"That's another bizarre statement and are you actually implying that would be necessary if we didn't have so many immigrants? "
Not me genius, Priti Patel. ;) It just goes to show how little you know about this issue.

"if you hate rich people so much then why are you arguing they should be able to pay terrible salaries to people?"
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂Fuck where do I begin with this one?😂😂😂😂😂
I've always been an advocate for scrapping the minimum wage and introducing a national living wage. Secondly, I don't hate rich people I hate what they're doing. And not all rich people agree with this mass inequality so I don't hate those ones. And I don't believe they should be able to pay such small wages, but let's be real- this Tory government isn't going to change anytime soon, is it? We had our chance this general election and like we always do we fucking blew it- so whether we like it or not they're going to continue paying these peanut wages. If I had it my way, NLW £10 an hour.

[SpiderManFan2002]

"If our population wasn't increasing too quickly then we wouldn't need to keep increasing the rate we build houses."
Because so many have been neglected and not looked after for years, they fall apart, hence we need to rebuild. In a few years over half our population will be over 50- population isn't increasing at the rapid rate you believe it is, if it was, we'd have a much younger population which nicely brings me on to another point. We have an aging population soon:
elderly > youth
So we need to keep our country young so that we have people to look after the elderly and the best way to do that is- immigration.

100 million? 300 million?😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂Sorry I'm crying😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂No way are they going to let in 34 million people or 234 million people into the UK? Oh don't tell me that's what you're afraid of😂😂😂😂😂😂Don't be fucking ridiculous😂😂😂

[SpiderManFan2002]

"You mean like migrant workers getting paid bugger all for working outside all day picking fruit?"
Yeah, I mean like those.

[Trolloween]

Fruit picking IS an entry level job, that was the point. It's a non-skilled job anyone can do.

I am not priti Patel I am speaking for myself, I don't know why you're putting another person's views across like they are your own and then giving me attitude for replying as if they are your opinion. Anyone who is physically capable can do the job, I don't see any problem with that.

I haven't spoken to you before, I don't know your views on minimum wage, I don't know why it's hilarious to you that I can't read your mind when you're not arguing for what you apparently believe in.
If the minimum wage was higher then we wouldn't need immigrants to do the lower jobs because British people would be able to. You know, the people who don't want to share a house with multiple other families because they were being paid such a low amount they can't even afford the cheapest accommodation.

[Trolloween]

You are saying that we need more houses because old houses are falling down? That's just moronic, are you just making that up as you write? Where's your source for that?

Youve failed to grasp my point several times now and repeatedly fail to answer. Your solution to an aging population then and for the UK in general is to bring in more people, right? So when does that stop? You're not absolving any problems by doing this you're just prolonging it a little and making the problem increasingly worse but adding more and more people who need more and more houses who then need more and more immigrants to care for them. So my question was, since you've thought this through so well and you're talking to me in a condescending childish tone, what number does the UK population have to reach before you decide that actually we shouldn't keep increasing. I wasn't saying we being in 300 million people, I was asking you to tell me what the UK population had to be before you said it was too high. Would you let it get to 100 million? Or 300 million? Or wouldn't it be better if kept it under control and didn't need to keep adding to the problem?

[SpiderManFan2002]

Fruitpicking is just one job. There's other fields which are being classed as low-skilled by these bastards but actually, they require a lot of skill such as construction work, farming work, truck/lorry/HGV driving, social care work- the problem is because it's not academic they're classing them as low-skilled jobs but I bet you put Patel in the position of a social care worker doing a 12 hour shift, a HGV driver a construction worker, she wouldn't last two fucking minutes.

"You are saying that we need more houses because old houses are falling down?"
That's not the only reason. But that's a factor. Then housing is really unafforable for some people these days too- that's a factor that contributes a huge factor:
www.theguardian.com/.../how-did-the-crisis-in-uk-social-housing-happen

"Your solution to an aging population then and for the UK in general is to bring in more people, right? So when does that stop?"
It's common sense. Older people can't reproduce, so you bring in young people to look after the elderly, and to reproduce because young people can reproduce. Immigration never stops. Immigration will always exist. Just like animals will never stay in one habitat, that's how humans will always move from place to place. It's never going to get to 100 million or 300 million not anytime soon anyway, that's virtually impossible. People are always dying, people are always being born, so it will balance out. For it to get to 100-300 million, they'd have to take large chunks of populations out of other countries- that would be virtually impossible.

I'm not saying don't control it. And actually not all them get paid peanuts. The average salary for a HGV driver is £32,500. The average salary for a social care worker is £22,000.

And fruitpicking may be an entry level job. But HGV driving isn't, social care isn't, being a nurse isn't, construction work isn't. I could go on.

[Trolloween]

You're making a very basic maths error. If the current population is aging that means there are more older people that need care, which means you need more young people than currently exist. These young people either born here or migrated here will then in turn become old, but at greater number than those are replacing since quite obviously there are more of them and people keep living longer. So just keep going and it is absolutely inevitable the population has to keep increasing at an exponential rate to maintain this. Well unless global warming drowns enough people and causes even more migration. My question is why are you deciding to let this problem get worse and keep pushing it off as the future generations problem to deal with when we could deal with it now in a responsible way, before we destroy our country with housing for millions more people. You must realise our current infrastructure is already grossly overstretched, we can't provide health care in a timely manner, we don't have good enough transport systems and we just don't need more people. Our island is fucking tiny, why do people think we can handle endlessly more people when we reached capacity decades ago. Our whole planet is exploding with more and more humans that we cannot possibly provide for with our current technology and as a result the natural world is dying. We are lick g through one of the biggest extinction events in the history of the planet with hundreds of species being lost forever every single day. But the solution is.. More people? It really pisses me off how stupid everyone is.

[Katerina_Belle]

No... Your point doesn’t make much sense.

I think you’ve got the two different things confused.

These job shortages you mention would (hopefully) be taken up by the unemployed (unemployed are officially defined as people actively seeking work)

Economically inactive people are defined as those who are neither employed nor unemployed; they’re not in paid work, but they’re also not looking for a job or available to start work - nothing to do immigration but more so about social care funds.

[SpiderManFan2002]

"These job shortages you mention would (hopefully) be taken up by the unemployed (unemployed are officially defined as people actively seeking work)"
"Hopefully"
That says it all. With migrants coming from Europe we knew they'd fill those jobs now we can only "hope" that our unemployed will do so.

"Economically inactive people are defined as those who are neither employed nor unemployed"
Priti Patel said it, not me. It even states it in this article here:
www.independent.co.uk/.../...ng-work-a9345151.html

And yes it does have A LOT to do with immigration. Because you see, those 10,000 fruit pickers, those 120,000 social care workers- immigrants did a lot of those jobs. Now Priti Patel is suggesting that 8 million people deemed economically inactive can do those jobs despite a large proportion of those people being students, full-time carers, pensioners, and disabled people.

So don't tell me, my points don't make sense when you clearly haven't educated yourself on this matter.

[Katerina_Belle]

Before you call someone uneducated I urge you to open your mind and debate the topic with knowledge and not with stupidity by demeaning the other person.

You do realise that unemployment is an issue in the UK? Although I say “hopefully” it makes more economical sense that British jobs are fulfilled by British people (now before you stupidly jump to conclusions - read why I think so) because unemployed people are fit for work right? So what happens when they can’t get work? They go on benefits (universal credit, income support etc) the taxpayers money then goes to these unemployed people who could work - if jobs are available - meaning it’s a cost to the government’s funds which could actually get resolved.
Non British nationals are not entitled to government funding, so again it makes more sense for these jobs to be taken up UK’s unemployed population.

I’m not saying migrants from Europe are bad for the country or that I’m against them, I actually voted to stay in the EU - but we have to work with what we have. The conservatives will be our government until the next general election so the only thing we can do is see if they fulfill their promises post Brexit.

And your comment “With migrants coming from Europe we knew they'd fill those jobs” don’t be daft! This is simply untrue. No one can be guaranteed unless they have an employment contract. Unemployed non UK nationals is a problem in the UK and some ways this immigration plan has addressed this.

Oh and word of advice, if you’re going to cite sources, use reliable sources and not biased new articles 👍 “Figure 4: The unemployment rate for non-EU nationals has been consistently higher than that for UK and EU nationals”

www.ons.gov.uk/.../august2019

This immigration plan isn’t just about the EU. It’s about the UK, social care funds and immigration as a whole.

[SpiderManFan2002]

Where did I call stupid? Just because someone isn't educated on a certain matter, it doesn't make them stupid it just makes them less knowledgable not stupid.

Our unemployment rate is quite low right now, at 3.8% to be specific so yes, there will be some people to fill those jobs but not all the unemployed are fit to work.

And Priti Patel suggested to get the 8 million economically inactive people to work- as I've said previously, those people consisted of students, full-time carers, the disabled and the pensioners. Students yes maybe, but they can only work part time- so that doesn't really fully solve the problem. And if you ask me, it's RIDICULOUS to think that the disabled, the pensioners, the fulltime carers can fill these positions.

[SpiderManFan2002]

" but we have to work with what we have. The conservatives will be our government until the next general election so the only thing we can do is see if they fulfill their promises post Brexit."

Yes, we should work with what we have. But the whole reason they called for EU migrants was because British people weren't willing to do certain jobs, and immigrants were. If British people weren't willing to do those jobs before, what makes you think they will be now?

I guess we will have to see. And what happens if they don't fufill their promises? What if they screw us over?

"’t be daft! This is simply untrue."
Okay, maybe that was hyperbole. But it was more likely the jobs would have been filled than before.

"“Figure 4: The unemployment rate for non-EU nationals has been consistently higher than that for UK and EU nationals” "
And that has fucking what to do with what I'm talking about? I'm directly focusing on the EU immigrants considering this is who this new immigration system has hit the hardest. If anything you've just further proved my point. Oh and figure 1:
"The number of EU nationals working in the UK has generally increased over the last 20 years"
So EU immigrants actually contribute to our country greatly, given their working rate has increased.
Honey, if I need to look at statistics I'll look at statistics.

"since the mid-2000s, the employment rate for EU nationals has been higher than that for UK nationals"
So actually EU nationals contribute more to society than British born people. Employers always pick the best person for the job. And since the employment rate for EU nationals has been higher, do you think this may negatively affect us, given certain EU nationals who still contribute to our workforce won't score enough "points" to come to the UK?

I look at stats, what politicians say, the laws themselves and news articles, given I've told you what Priti Patel has said, listed what this system is,

[Katerina_Belle]

First of all, you really don’t know what you’re talking about. As a former student that has studied economics, I can confidently say that you really don’t understand the bigger picture.

And FYI I don’t have time to sit and debate this with you when you don’t know what you’re waffling on about. So I will not reply after this.

Now let’s start.

“not all the unemployed are fit to work.” -
1. This is incorrect. I have had already given you the definition of unemployment in my earlier response, please refer to that. - Read it? Good - therefore ALL unemployed people are fit to work.

“Students yes maybe, but they can only work part-time- so that doesn't really fully solve the problem. And if you ask me, it's RIDICULOUS to think that the disabled, the pensioners, the fulltime carers can fill these positions.” -
2. Did you even read the statistical article I attached, or maybe you read it and didn’t understand? There is not a problem in the UK of an abundance of jobs...

[Katerina_Belle]

“Yes, we should work with what we have. But the whole reason they called for EU migrants was because British people weren't willing to do certain jobs, and immigrants were. If British people weren't willing to do those jobs before, what makes you think they will be now?”
3. Uhmmm…. sorry did you really just say that? Who said British people don’t want to work? The UK joined the EU in 1973. You seriously can not say that British people didn’t want to work in the UK that’s why we joined the EU and that’s why we have migrant workers, are you for real? You are so politically incorrect that it’s driving me nuts! Do you have any idea how much the jobs markets have changed since 1973? Jobs back in 1973 definitely were not fancy office jobs working with tech. It was manual work - and a lot of it. Over time things have changed and advanced beyond imagination. Mind you the generation 50 years ago has changed. Maybe the generation back then didn’t want to do certain jobs but also the economical state of people allowed that. Housing, cost of living etc was cheaper. Fast forward 50 years we have people working two jobs to afford what a single salary could afford back then.

I’ll put this down to your lack of economics knowledge.

Also, word of advice, do not write a MyTake about politics or the economy if you haven’t studied the subject because again you don’t know what you’re talking about.

[Katerina_Belle]

“I guess we will have to see. And what happens if they don't fufill their promises? What if they screw us over?” -
4. Screw who over? As a working professional woman in a reputable company and job I can assure you the government will not screw over. The reality is that all these different will only crucially effect either the really rich or the really poor or those dependant on government funding. The one’s in between like myself and most people are not really actually affected.

I know you’re going to dispute this - so here’s an example - Labour leadership is good for students, people on government benefits, pensions, people on low income because their core values are to help such people with more funding. Conservatives wan’t to cut government spending and instead look to drive the economy through austerity. Neither of those actually fundamentally effect me a working class female. I’m not poor enough to be eligible for benefits and I’m not rich enough to enjoy the benefits of austerity.

[Katerina_Belle]

“Okay, maybe that was hyperbole. But it was more likely the jobs would have been filled than before.” -
5. No it is not more likely. Why are you talking as if there is an abundance of jobs in the UK? Where are you getting these ideas from? Honest advice go to a library and read the economics books.

"“Figure 4: The unemployment rate for non-EU nationals has been consistently higher than that for UK and EU nationals” -
“And that has fucking what to do with what I'm talking about? I'm directly focusing on the EU immigrants considering this is who this new immigration system has hit the hardest. If anything you've just further proved my point.“ -
6. If you cannot establish the connection between this immigration plan and unemployment rates you are way more uninformed than I thought. It is simple the economics of this country. People from overseas exploit the UK for it’s free healthcare, free schooling, housing, you name it and there’s a fund out there that people can apply for. Do you have any idea how many people migrate to the UK as a visitor, student, or even for work, and then end up finding a loophole for permanent stay and get on the benefits system, do you? I have two siblings that work in immigration - watch BorderForce UK - that might help your understanding a little. But honestly you’re a lost cause if you can’t figure that out.

Which brings me to this: “If anything you've just further proved my point.“ - You DON’T HAVE A DAMN POINT WITH THIS MYTAKE. You know nothing, zilch, nada, zero about the context of this immigration plan.

[Katerina_Belle]

"The number of EU nationals working in the UK has generally increased over the last 20 years"
So EU immigrants actually contribute to our country greatly, given their working rate has increased.
Honey, if I need to look at statistics I'll look at statistics.”
7. Mate… you didn’t even know this statistics page existed if I didn’t tell you 😂 And child, I didn’t say the EU nationals don’t contribute the UK; please refer to my earlier response again… - Done? Good ✅ - so you will know I voted to stay in EU.

"since the mid-2000s, the employment rate for EU nationals has been higher than that for UK nationals"
So actually EU nationals contribute more to society than British born people. Employers always pick the best person for the job. And since the employment rate for EU nationals has been higher, do you think this may negatively affect us, given certain EU nationals who still contribute to our workforce won't score enough "points" to come to the UK?” -
Re-read “please refer to my earlier response again… - Done? Good ✅ - so you will know I voted to stay in EU.”
Also AGAIN you are CONFUSING this immigration plan as if it is for the EU nationals solely. Read point 5 and you will understand why an immigration plan was becoming necessary for the country. Also it’s a opportunity for the UK’s unemployed population to get somewhere. (Re-read my previous response as to why it is important for economical growth that the UK unemployed population are employed with priority - and if you don’t understand go and gain some real knowledge - p. s. not off internet news articles)

I am now done debating with you. I feel like I have given you an economics lesson for free! Use the points I’ve shared to grow your knowledge around the matter and next time make a more politically correct MyTake.

[SpiderManFan2002]

"you really don’t understand the bigger picture"
Okay- explain to me, what the "bigger picture" is?

"I don’t have time to sit and debate this with you when you don’t know what you’re waffling on about."
More like you, can't answer my facts and you don't like what you hear so you're going to stick your fingers in your ears and pretend you can't hear me.

"This is incorrect."
No it isn't. Because some people with disabilities are unemployed so in certain sectors, they will be unfit to work. The disability unemployment rate is at 300,000. Now you have to look at why they're unemployed. First and foremost, discrimination- though it is against the law, it is still apart of human nature, and as a disabled person I know that certain employers will look at a disabled person and they won't say it but the disability is all they will see, and not even consider them for the job. Secondly, depending on the disability, disabled people will be limited so they may struggle finding a job. I know fully-abled people who have applied for over 50 jobs and not got one response. It's not easy to get a job these days.

"Did you even read the statistical article I attached, or maybe you read it and didn’t understand? There is not a problem in the UK of an abundance of jobs..."
Where did I say the UK had an abundance of jobs? Can you fucking read? I said there is a shortage of jobs and statistics show, there are a shortage of 10,000 fruitpickers, and 120,000 social care workers. I'm saying you can't expect the disabled, the pensioners and the full-time carers to do those jobs like Priti Patel suggested. Priti Patel said it here on this video I suggest you watch:
www.independent.co.uk/.../...johnson-a9349201.html

[Katerina_Belle]

Facts from the independent? Cool story.

www.google.co.uk/.../202a60c0-cfd8-11e5-831d-09f7778e7377

Try academia next time.

[SpiderManFan2002]

"Who said British people don’t want to work?"
🤦🤦🤦🤦🤦🤦🤦When did I exactly say British people don't want to work? How did you get an economics degree when you can't even fucking read? I said British people weren't willing to do certain jobs, and when I said that I meant jobs such as fruitpicking and social care work, you've got an economics degree. Because we have a shortage in social care work, and fruitpicking would you leave your job to go be a fruitpicker? Or a social care worker?

"that’s why we joined the EU and that’s why we have migrant workers, are you for real? You are so politically incorrect that it’s driving me nuts!"
Again, I never said that you're putting words in my mouth. As a Law student I know we joined the EU mainly for trade because that was one of the main objectives of the EU. The fact you can't read to save your life, and continually put words in my mouth makes me question how you even have a degree.

[SpiderManFan2002]

One of the benefits of the EU was free movement. Because we had free movement migrant workers could easily come here and help fill the job shortages we have, job shortages in truck driving, fruitpicking, social care. That's what I'm saying.

"Jobs back in 1973 definitely were not fancy office jobs working with tech. It was manual work - and a lot of it."
I hate to break it to you, but jobs still aren't all fancy office jobs, my mum used to be a social care worker, my dad used to be a shopkeeper and he's studying to be a truck driver now, and my mum is looking for a new job. And people don't sit in an office picking fruit, people don't sit in a fancy office taking care of our elderly, inside the truck people drive to transport our goods isn't a fancy office.

A lot of these jobs are long hours, and minimum wage. My mum used to work 12 hours a day for minimum wage, and at her a lot of her colleagues were EU migrants and the place she worked at still had a shortage of workers. Now would you be willing to go work there? 12 hours a day for minimum wage?

" Screw who over?"
The 90%.

"As a working professional woman in a reputable company and job I can assure you the government will not screw over. "
Firstly, you can't assure me. You don't know what's going to happen in the future. I didn't say they'd screw us over. I said "what if" they screw us over? You're certain they'll not screw us over. Whereas I'm saying they may or may not.

[SpiderManFan2002]

" Labour leadership is good for students, people on government benefits, pensions, people on low income because their core values are to help such people with more funding. Conservatives wan’t to cut government spending and instead look to drive the economy through austerity. Neither of those actually fundamentally effect me a working class female. I’m not poor enough to be eligible for benefits and I’m not rich enough to enjoy the benefits of austerity. "
See that's your problem. You're only looking at you. How it will affect YOU. what about everyone else?

Now you've told me about you, let me tell you about me and some of the people I know and know of. I passed all my GCSEs in a really messed up school. Half the time we had supply teachers, sometimes the supply teachers didn't even show up and we had no teachers, at certain points in my time there we didn't even have a headteacher and the headteachers kept on changing. We got taken over by an academy trust and we still failed as a school, but somehow the academy trust still profited off of us and left. Our school was then left with millions £s debt and it's only rising. I've seen teachers shout at students for picking up monitors just incase they break them because the school doesn't have money to replace them. And a lot of the time teachers would lose our mock exams and work. Anyway I still managed to pass everything so that's something.

[SpiderManFan2002]

I moved to a college studying my A-Levels. For one of my subjects I didn't have a teacher for a whole half-term, then they got replaced and now they're back. Now one of my other teachers have gone, and they've been gone for almost a whole term. Hopefully I'll get AAA if I study hard enough AAB but I need good grades.

I'm not going to uni, because I can't afford the £27,000 debt. It's just not realistic. And that's actually the same situation for a lot of kids I know. Instead I'm going to go down the apprenticeship route because that has a debt I realistically can pay off and I'm certain I'll have a job at the end of it.

Because my council doesn't have enough funding from central government they've had to make cuts to a lot of our public services. Public toilets, parks, mueseums, libraries, community centers etc. And that has a huge strain on students, parents, elderly, children, the youth, etc.

I have a disability yet the government doesn't class me as disabled, even though I have physical limitations doing certain things. For me, that worked out better than I thought, my family were fortunate enough to manage without the extra money, it would but my next question is how many more people are like me? How many more people have genuine disability, and who actually need extra support and money but are struggling because the government refuse to class them as disabled?

ds in poverty, people in poverty. Everyday in my city center I see homeless people. I see addicts. There's kids coming to school hungry, schools not having enough facilities, people with mental health issues, like some teachers for example because actually their job is quite stressful and I could go on. Point is, austerity affects them. Austerity has affected so many people, please know, the whole country isn't like you. You're one of the lucky ones, a lot of people aren't.

[SpiderManFan2002]

"No it is not more likely. Why are you talking as if there is an abundance of jobs in the UK? Where are you getting these ideas from? Honest advice go to a library and read the economics books."

Yes it is. The UK has a JOB SHORTAGE in areas such as truck driving, socialcare work, and fruitpicking. That's a known fact. Allowing more people from Europe to come, is more likely to help fill these jobs because there's more people willing to fill these jobs.

And as for going to a library and borrowing an economics book, I would, but my local library's staff has been cut so chances are it's closed due to being understaffed and because they can't afford more books, chances are, they won't have an economics one but if it opens I can always check :)

[SpiderManFan2002]

Ignore the article, just watch the fucking video to hear what she herself says, rather than being ignorant.

[SpiderManFan2002]

"But honestly you’re a lost cause if you can’t figure that out."
Remember where you come from. You're half Pakistani and if your parents or grandparents didn't meet these requirements chances are, you wouldn't be in Britain, you could have been in Pakistan. Or chances are because you're mixed, you may not have even been born because your parents would have never met.

While it is true, many immigrants from overseas so come to the UK, to exploit the system, a number of them so help and contribute to our system- that's low skilled workers like my grandparents included. It's not fair to discriminate against people those people who could help us, but are considered low-skilled.

[SpiderManFan2002]

"DON’T HAVE A DAMN POINT WITH THIS MYTAKE. You know nothing, zilch, nada, zero about the context of this immigration plan."
Clearly, when I stated the system, what Patel suggested to grill the job shortages.

I have several points.
A) This system discriminates against people labelling them 'low-skilled' because they don't have academic skill. You're an academic. Could you be a construction worker? A truck driver? A social care worker?

B) Stating that economically inactive people can fill these roles even though they're students, the disabled, the pensioners and the full-time carers is absolutely ridiculous, they're economically inactive for a reason.

C) This system in one sense can be good. For example, we have a shortage of cyber security professionals, so getting them from other countries would be wise to help us, however this system is extremely faulted in other instances.

[SpiderManFan2002]

". Mate… you didn’t even know this statistics page existed if I didn’t tell you"
I think you're giving yourself a little too much praise there I volunteer at a law firm and my boss regularly makes me go on Gov. uk to check laws for certain tasks I need to complete. Not to mention, I've linked Gov. UK with articles leading to statistics in previous articles, and also I actually included statistics in this article which you clearly ignored.

[Katerina_Belle]

You’ve just taking sh! t out of context.

I said what I needed to make what you will out of it.

And please do me a favour and don’t you EVER think you’re allowed to speak to anyone in that demeaning tone. How dare you insult me by saying you don’t know how I have a degree? You think it’s easy. Okay go do it then. Go get a degree, go on? I speak from academic knowledge which I’ve demonstrated to you. What do you do? You’re making this personal. Honestly go do one. You’re a teenager you don’t know a thing about the world. I have 8 years on you, remember that the next time you want to demean me.

And who are you to talk about my heritage? You don’t know a thing about how my parents migrated to the country. I’m half Pakistani and what? Why does that mean I could have been born in Pakistan? Oh right it doesn’t.

If you don’t have something meaningful to say then keep your mouth shut especially about things that are personal to me. You are of no status to ever make such comments.

Oh and back to the topic you’re still wrong because nothing you have said is backed up by statistics or even academia. All you have is an opinion and it’s a flawed one.

Goodbye b! tch.

[SpiderManFan2002]

"And child, I didn’t say the EU nationals don’t contribute the UK; please refer to my earlier response again… - Done? Good - so you will know I voted to stay in EU."

I never said you did. What I'm saying is EU nationals immensely contribute to the UK and this new system has made it more difficult for those ✌low-skilled✌ EU nationals who play a vast part in that contribution, and contribute in ways you and I don't.

[SpiderManFan2002]

"Also AGAIN you are CONFUSING this immigration plan as if it is for the EU nationals solely"
Again, I'm not because I never said that. All I'm saying is this makes it harder for those ✌low-skilled✌ EU workers who contributed to our country and who could have potentially contributed.

[SpiderManFan2002]

"Also it’s a opportunity for the UK’s unemployed population to get somewhere"
It is an oppurtunity. But how many of the unemployed are willing to do that? I'll give you an example. Many graduates from university are unemployed grandfathers struggling to find a job. At work my boss tells me, that every law graduate she knows is unemployed. The job to graduate ratio for law graduates is 1:28. So for every one job there's 28 people applying and only one gets the job, leaving 27 unemployed. Now if you've just spent £27,000 on a student debt and have been studying for about 3 years would you really want to go and be a fruitpicker, or social care worker? No. You're going to want to get a job in your degree.

And Priti Patel suggested getting the 8 million economically inactive people to fill these jobs which is just ridiculous.

[SpiderManFan2002]

"and if you don’t understand go and gain some real knowledge - p. s. not off internet news articles)"
You say that but you literally sent me an FT news article from the internet😂😂😂😂😂

And yes, the unemployed are a priority to get employed but at the same time you've got to look at their reason for unemployment. Are they disabled? Do they have a criminal record? Or any kind of limitation which prevents them from working in particular sectors? For example, a criminal with charge of assault or battery is highly unlikely to pass a DBS check in order to work in social care. A person with a physical disability may not be able to work in social care or fruit picking.

[Katerina_Belle]

FYI

“The FT provides authoritative news coverage on global business, finance and politics, helping students understand the international business environment and connect classroom theory with business practice.”

“The Financial Times has been one of the world’s leading business intelligence providers and most trusted news organisations for over 125 years. We hold true to our values of integrity, authority and accuracy, reporting without fear or favour across the globe”

It’s an academic source - encouraged by universities. Something you will never know as you’re not educated enough 🤷🏻‍♀️

[SpiderManFan2002]

"I am now done debating with you. I feel like I have given you an economics lesson for free! Use the points I’ve shared to grow your knowledge around the matter and next time make a more politically correct MyTake."

No, you really haven't. What you've done is put words in my mouth, completely misunderstand what I'm saying shown me you clearly haven't seen the affects of austerity and contradicted yourself.

You're a classic case of: "Well it doesn't affect me so it's okay" - I say that referring to austerity.

But believe me if you've seen what I've seen- the state our schools are in, people struggling to find jobs, public services being cut so much that people have physically cried over it, kids going hungry, people worrying about becoming homeless because they're struggling to pay the bills, people fighting for our public services but then losing the battle because we don't have enough funding from central government, crime rising because the police services have been cut, my boss tells me so many people these days can't even afford lawyers/solicitors when they need to be represented because legal aid has been cut, kids sacrificing their university education because they simply can't afford student debt and I could tell you much much more.

Point is, if you saw this for yourself maybe you'd understand where I'm coming from when I criticise this government and I say it may screw us over.

I'm not in a great position but at the same time my position isn't as unfortunate as other people's positions. But that doesn't mean I'm going to disregard where austerity may not affect me because it's not right regardless about whether it affects me or not. And it can happen to anyone. Remember that.

[SpiderManFan2002]

What you say: "You’ve just taking sh! t out of context"
What you really mean: "I don't know how to answer you now. "

"How dare you insult me by saying you don’t know how I have a degree"
Oh I'm SO SORRY I hurt your feelings. I'll just tell the man who started crying because the library was being shut one day because of strikes due to cuts and he couldn't do his universal credit that day that you implied it doesn't really matter who's in power because you're not rich or poor enough to be effected.

"
knowledge which I’ve demonstrated to you. What do you do? You’re making this personal. Honestly go do one. You’re a teenager you don’t know a thing about the world. I have 8 years on you, remember that the next time you want to demean me. "

Aw yeah, when you can't come at me with any counterpoints, pull the age cry and cry like a 5y/I the minute you can't take what you dish. Oh and I plan to get a degree through an apprenticeship because I can't afford uni!😄You may have 8 years on me, but have you really seen anything I said to do with the schools or austerity I've listed previously?

Age doesn't always parallel wisdom. It's evident we've had different experiences in life, from my experiences being on the receiving end of cuts and austerity and seeing people who are worse off than me and considering myself to be lucky is an experience which has taught me a lit. You wouldn't know anything about being on the receiving end of austerity because you're not poor enough, as you said.

[SpiderManFan2002]

"And who are you to talk about my heritage? You don’t know a thing about how my parents migrated to the country. I’m half Pakistani and what? Why does that mean I could have been born in Pakistan? Oh right it doesn’t."

I dont know how your parents immigrated to the UK, but let's say this immigration system was always in place and for some reason, your parents didn't score 70 points then, you may not have been born in the UK! Because your mother or father wouldn't have come from Pakistan to the UK so your parents may have never met!

And you literally just said something so illogical. You're half Pakistani so yes you could have been born in Pakistan had your parent (s) never come to the UK!

[Katerina_Belle]

How did this debate go from the new immigration laws to your opinion of the current government austerity and your personal situation 🤔

That’s not what this MyTake was about was it?

You’re not capable of upholding a focused discussion.

I mentioned government in some of my point but I never revealed my thoughts or personal feelings. You need to learn to distance your personal feelings and see things objectively.

Just because you don’t like the Tories you are against every single move they make.

You’re not going to win.

You need to be smart and find yourself in it all.

I may sound selfish but in your twenties it’s important to build a life for yourself first and then when you’re in a secure position you can help others.

I’m not going to argue with you. You’re far too bitter about life. You need to let it go and find a purpose for yourself.

I’ve walked away from this discussion with you and you don’t know a thing about my thoughts or feelings. You’ve told me your life story.

That right there is your weakness.

I’m not going to be rude or mean to you. We’re both above that.

But think about what I’ve said. You’ve got a lot of hate in you for a young girl. Find your purpose and enjoy it, get rid of the hate. You’ll much free.

[Katerina_Belle]

And you literally just said something so illogical. You're half Pakistani so yes you could have been born in Pakistan had your parent (s) never come to the UK!

One of my parents is not Pakistani, so genetically, biologically and in every other way impossible. I would never have been in Pakistan, not rocket science is it?

[SpiderManFan2002]

"If you don’t have something meaningful to say then keep your mouth shut especially about things that are personal to me. You are of no status to ever make such comments."

you know, if you can't take it, don't dish it. Austerity is personal to me, it's put some awful fear into me, you mentioned that. I didn't say anything, instead I told you how austerity affects many people in many ways and it's not just about me or you it's about everyone.

"Oh and back to the topic you’re still wrong because nothing you have said is backed up by statistics or even academia. All you have is an opinion and it’s a flawed one."

I have stats in the article I wrote. It's a known fact particular areas of work have job shortages. If you watched or read the news you would know that. Because while academia is one source, it's important you have a diverse range of sources so you can see things from alternative perspectives

[Katerina_Belle]

🙄 academia is wide ranges of sources.

Again you don’t know what you’re talking about.

[SpiderManFan2002]

“The Financial Times has been one of the world’s leading business intelligence providers and most trusted news organisations for over 125 years. We hold true to our values of integrity, authority and accuracy, reporting without fear or favour across the globe”

😂😂While that may have some truth to it, remember it still holds an element of bias because it's written from the FT themselves, and they're not going to write bad things about their own news organisation, if I were you I'd read FT reviews, highly rated ones, poorly rated ones, analyse them all and come to my own conclusion about the strengths and weaknesses of the FT.

"It’s an academic source - encouraged by universities. Something you will never know as you’re not educated enough 🤷‍♀️"
You know whilst university is a source of education, it's not a sole source of education. School, college, personal experiences, articles written by professionals or enthusiasts or students are all forms of education.

And I already told you I can't go to university because I can't afford it, I could but the debt would be a huge weight on my shoulders so ultimately due to my financial situation, university is a last resort.

[SpiderManFan2002]

"How did this debate go from the new immigration laws to your opinion of the current government austerity and your personal situation 🤔"
Because you brought up how you've got an econo! it's degree, and how you're a working class woman with a job, and how you're not poor enough to be affected by austerity. So I told you about me and people I've seen and met.

"That’s not what this MyTake was about was it?

You’re not capable of upholding a focused discussion."

hold on, you were the one who brought up your degree, your job, your class, how austerity affects you- so I did something similar, now you have a problem with it?

"You need to learn to distance your personal feelings and see things objectively."
Honey being affected by austerity isn't a feeling, it's an experience. You can't see everything objectively because some things are subjective. Take who's in government for example, for you, it doesn't really matter because as you said you're not poor enough to be affected by austerity or rich enough to be affected by Labour. But for me it matters, because if Labour got in 100℅ been going to uni, and things would have been better financially for me. So certain things are subjective based on our positions.

And real life anecdotes can help give people who have never experienced something, an idea to see the world through somebody else's eyes.

"I may sound selfish but in your twenties it’s important to build a life for yourself first and then when you’re in a secure position you can help others."
I know and it's a lot easier to do that when like you, you have a strong financial position.

[SpiderManFan2002]

But think about what I’ve said. You’ve got a lot of hate in you for a young girl. Find your purpose and enjoy it, get rid of the hate. You’ll much free."
Things in life cost. Try see people worrying about whether they'll be homeless, try see people crying because of cuts, try see kids crying on results day because they failed their exams and you know they had potential but because of the shortage of teachers they weren't given the full support they needed. It's not hate I've just seen some really upsetting situations in my life. Kids going hungry, too many homeless people and feeling so guilty walking past with nothing to give so now I take extra food in my bag so if I see any regulars, I can give them something and I could go on but you probably don't care.

I already know my purpose. Study as hard as I fucking can, get on an apprenticeship, get my degree, pay off my loan, earn enough so when I'm older I'm financially secure and don't have to go through some of the things my family and friend's family's have been through and then do my best to give back to society and live comfortably.

And I do enjoy life. I'm just not blind to the struggles faced by those who have to deal with the consequences of austerity.

And as for my life story, I may have told you some things about me, but trust me you don't know everything. And hey at least you don't know my name, eh Katerina Belle?😂😂😂

[Katerina_Belle]

Who said my name is Katerina Belle? Does it sound real to you? 🤨😂

Anyway like I said I don’t put my life out there but I’ve worked hard and from the bottom to be where I am.

You’re making huge assumptions about me but you know nothing and it’s because I choose it to be that way.

(You should learn control too)

I would have thought you would be less judgmental having gone through sh! t in life? But nah you’re just negative because you want to be.

You’re saying a whole load of crap to me with what knowledge? None.

[SpiderManFan2002]

😂😂😂No you just put your face out there instead

.😂😂😂A name is a name I've known plenty of people with names that sound unrealistic but are real

Hmm well, I know you've probably got a well paying job, I know you could afford to go to uni considering it was an option for you on one hand you're saying austerity hasn't affected you, but in the other you're saying you worked from the bottom?😂😂That's a contradiction in itself

And nobody knows who I am on here anyway😂

Less judgemental? Oh so it's okay for you to judge people calling them bitches, saying they're hateful, saying they're uneducated but the minute you feel someone throws some judgement at you it's not okay? I'm not judgmental. I don't have an opinion on you.

And I don't judge anyone because of there's one thing I've known in life is you never know what someone's been through.😑

[tartaarsaus]

With all due respect, but the notion that unemployed Brits would just eat up the job vacancies is just a silly fairy tale.

Labour mobility is limited. People usually cannot be bothered to move from Reading to Middlesbrough for a job. Jobs may exist in one place, which by no way means that the unemployed people will actually do that job. And yes, that includes those actively seeking for employment.

It may also merely be the case that with those typical jobs that foreigners do (let’s just pick fruitpicking) the wage is too low for the British nationals to actually do that job. It’s hard work in itself, assuming they would not even need to move, while they could also just get benefits. Again, they could be defined as unemployed because they are looking for jobs that pay higher, but that still does not mean they are gonna grab all possibilities for employment.

Another dimension of the aforementioned is that the purchasing power of £15k is far greater in Poland than in Britain. Basically means increased willingness to do those jobs by foreigners (who can e. g. have seasonal stay, as happens often) and decreased by Brits.

Basically, markets are not perfect. Any economics student would know this, it’s like labour economics 101

[AllAmericanGirl99]

I often think about what my baby boomer grandfather talks about when he was growing up that a person could drift around the country working low skilled jobs and make a decent living, why because a shortage of labor meant that workers had to be paid a fair wage. My grandfather dropped out after highschool and spent a year working to pay for college.
People are happy in any job provided they can pay their Bill's and look after their families.

[yucel_eden]

I’m from the UK

This is what is needed for the people of this country, if it’s racist, which is not then so be it.

this will raise the prices. I go to every shop in London and everyone working in it is European. Enough is enough. Kick them out.

worst that will happen is unemployed people will step into these jobs.

I hate people like you, you are traitors to this country

[SpiderManFan2002]

Okay, will you stand in the shop instead of a European you racist bastard?

[SpiderManFan2002]

"This is what is needed for the people of this country, if it’s racist, which is not then so be it. "
Firstly I never said it's racist, I just think it's stupid. Because who's going to fill all the job shortages, which require low-skilled workers? See, Priti Patel suggested the economically inactive, and quite frankly, that's not okay.

"this will raise the prices. I go to every shop in London and everyone working in it is European. Enough is enough. Kick them out."
See, this is why I call you a racist bastard. Firstly you dumbass, you're European. Britain is in Europe. Secondly, I am sure that's hyperbole. Because yes, a lot of workers are European, but I do still see British born workers too.

And what's wrong with a European doing a job in Britain? If they're in that job, then they must be best qualified because at the end of the day, employers don't really care about colour or ethnicity, they just care about who is best suited to the job to help improve their business and if that is a foreigner then so be it.

[SpiderManFan2002]

"worst that will happen is unemployed people will step into these jobs. "
See, it's not that simple, maybe for fruitpicking it's somewhat that simple but not for the other areas of employment.

See, the question you have to ask is 'who is unemployed?' Firstly a number of the unemployed will have criminal records. And those with criminal records may find it very difficult to get into a truck driving or social care job. A percentage of the unemployed will be disabled, so their disability may limit them from working in particular areas. A percentage of the unemployed will be graduates. Take law students for example, right now the job to law graduate ratio is 1:28. That means for every one job at a law firm there's 28 people applying and only one person will get that job, which leaves 27 graduates without a job. And I don't think someone with a £27,000 debt and who has been through 3 years of university will want to do a job such as social care, or fruitpicking, or truckdriving because that's not what they've qualified in. Some might, but I don't see the majority looking to those jobs.

Then there's training. These places, where there are job shortages require training. For some things like social care, you can train on the job but not for truck driving and especially not HGV driving. There are so many safety regulations in that area, rightly so, because driving a HGV vehicle can be dangerous. And most people, do not pass their HGV driving test for the first time. How many of the unemployed are trained HGV drivers and are fit to study and take the tests?

So really it's not as simple as putting the unemployed in as much as you would like it to be.

[SpiderManFan2002]

"I hate people like you, you are traitors to this country"
Really?

I'm not a traitor, I'm simply thinking practically. If we didn't need "low-skilled" workers then I wouldn't have a problem with this new system, but clearly we do, and it really is not as simple as just putting the unemployed people into these jobs.

And plus, we cannot ignore the fact that if it isn't already, in years to come more than half the population will be over fifty. Who is going to look after the elderly? Some of the youth can, but realistically not all of the youth will- while some may go into social care, the other youths will go into other fields so chances are we will have a colossal shortage of people looking after the elderly. And the fastest way for a country to keep young is to invite immigrants over.

I mean these high-skilled workers won't look after the elderly- they'll be busy in the high-paying jobs.

[yucel_eden]

lol you keep talking honey.

Everyone is happening and there is nothing you can do to stop it.

Doing this is beneficial

[SpiderManFan2002]

"Everyone is happening and there is nothing you can do to stop it. "
Firstly I think you mean, everything lol.

And I know I can't stop it, but I can comment on it, which I am doing. ;)

"Doing this is beneficial"
Well, there's several ways I've stated it isn't, but whatever you keep telling yourself that😂😂🤦🏾‍♀️🤦🏾‍♀️🤣🤣

[Brindale]

Okay Tory

[1828ToastyTimothy]

Part of the problem where low-skilled jobs are concerned: kids in school are discouraged from pursuing the types of jobs where shortages exist. Perhaps, in government schools, the jobs where shortages of qualified workers exist are discouraged because governments want to increase immigration levels. I definitely think immigration levels need to be better managed; that likely means changes to other seemingly unrelated areas.

[SpiderManFan2002]

Well it depends what type of shortage you're talking about. For example, if we're talking about Cyber Secruity it's not that people are discouraged- it's a high paying job, it's that many people aren't qualified to teach it and lots of people don't understand it.

However, if you're talking about something like fruit picking or truck driving, it's not really the schools that discourage it, it's more parents and the fact that those jobs are low-paying and not to mention some people do attach a social stigma to those jobs.

[1828ToastyTimothy]

I don't fully disagree with these comments. That said, I remember being told in school, "You need that piece of paper", in reference to degrees being needed for employment opportunities. I was always directed to degree programs and university. Never really encouraged to pursue skilled trades, where there is currently a shortage in Canada.

[irrationally97]

It's stupid. How are you supposed to get sponsored for a job or secure one if you aren't eligible to work in the UK because you don't have citizenship? Why is knowing English only 10 points behind having a PhD? Why don't Masters students or degree holders in general get any points? How do you determine what skills you need to match a job?

[Gedaria]

Nice take.
But why should the country be open to any body who wants to take advantage of the the country.
The fruit picking use to be by young locals. As a young lad I went out to pick potatoes carrots , peas , even most berries. The more we picked the more money we got.
If my memory fails me a lot of the above was killed off by the EU.
Plus most veg and fruit can be mechanically picked.
My last question is how is it cheaper to import the above than grow it local?

[COMMODOREII]

Yay!!! I new my take!! I loved it!! I was craving it!!! I feel complete. I can die now. 😂😂 i can not have a day without a my take from Spidey. I can feel my mind expanding and my gears turning. Thank you my sweet loving friend. 😭😭

Knowledge is power.

[alance99]

Nice Mytake, pros and cons of this policy will be better known with time

[SpiderManFan2002]

I suppose so, but this is just what I'm questioning and pointing out based on statistics.

[Curmudgeon]

It's a great improvement, and the USA should follow suit. Skills over bogus "family reunification", which just allows chain migration of net takers. Hopefully the new Congress after this November will get on it.

[SpiderManFan2002]

It's really not a "great improvement" sure, it has it's upsides but also a lot of downsides.

For example, the shortages we have right now concerning jobs. We have a 10,000 shortage of fruitpickers and an 120,000 shortage in social care. Immigrants who would be considered low-skilled by this new system, now can't fill these jobs.

And the fact that Priti Patel suggested we get the economically inactive to fill these jobs is simply ridiculous. And as for the argument "get the unemployed to do them"
Firstly, how many of the unemployed will be willing to do these jobs?
Secondly, how many of the unemployed are suitable for these jobs i. e. someone with a certain
criminal record may not pass a DBS check to work in social care or an unemployed disabled person may not be suitable for fruitpicking

There are lots of factors we have to take into consideration. This system may good in some instances, for example, the cyber secruity field where we have a shortage of cyber secruity professionals, but in other fields it does damage like in the farming industry, the social care industry, the fruitpicking, the truck driving industry.

And for certain things like truck driving especially and social care, people need training. That training takes time. For social care, a person who passes a DBS check may be able to train on the job, but no way for truck driving. There are far too many safety precautions and tests to let an unexperienced person train on the job.

So I wouldn't describe this as great, with the problems it brings and questions it raises?

[BasicBad]

Britain is trash. That’s why America whooped your pale white ass 250 years ago.

[SpiderManFan2002]

"Britain is trash."
No actually, our government may be trash but a lot of the people aren't. And your American congress isn't any better, some would argue, it's even worse than ours.

" America whooped your pale white ass 250 years ago"
Literally makes no sense. Firstly I'm not white, I don't understand what being white has got to do with anything or why we have to bring colour into it at all- don't reduce the country to their colour because A) That's racist B) We're a multicultural society.

I really think you need to educate yourself, before you talk shit.

[BasicBad]

Britain is so dumb they let its citizens vote Brexit. Enjoy you fish and chip wanker

[SpiderManFan2002]

This is too stupid for me lol

[Iamagoodguy]

America enjoy you obesity and mental health Crisis