|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Sept 12, 2024 21:45:58 GMT
Low-paid migrant workers are an immediate drain on the public purse, costing taxpayers more than £150,000 each by the time they hit state pension age, according to the Government’s own tax and spending watchdog. The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) said the average low-earner who came to Britain aged 25 cost the Government more overall than they paid in from the moment they arrived. The cumulative bill rose to an estimated £151,000 by the time they could claim the state pension at 66, the watchdog said. This is because low-paid migrants – who the OBR assumes earn half the average wage – put more demand on public services such as the NHS compared to their relatively low-tax payments. The OBR estimated the cost to the public purse rose to almost £500,000 if they lived to 80, and more than £1m if they lived to 100. By contrast, the average British-born worker boosts the public finances by £280,000 by the time they reach 66, even adjusting for education and health spending before they start work. www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/09/12/low-skilled-migrants-cost-taxpayers-150000-each/This is why living standards in every region of the UK have fallen in line with mass immigration and will fall a further 7% over the next two years. Hard pressed British tax payers including pensioners who have paid tax and national insurance for a lifetime, are paying for mass immigration. |
|
|
|
Post by Totheleft on Sept 12, 2024 22:19:44 GMT
Low-paid migrant workers are an immediate drain on the public purse, costing taxpayers more than £150,000 each by the time they hit state pension age, according to the Government’s own tax and spending watchdog. The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) said the average low-earner who came to Britain aged 25 cost the Government more overall than they paid in from the moment they arrived. The cumulative bill rose to an estimated £151,000 by the time they could claim the state pension at 66, the watchdog said. This is because low-paid migrants – who the OBR assumes earn half the average wage – put more demand on public services such as the NHS compared to their relatively low-tax payments. The OBR estimated the cost to the public purse rose to almost £500,000 if they lived to 80, and more than £1m if they lived to 100. By contrast, the average British-born worker boosts the public finances by £280,000 by the time they reach 66, even adjusting for education and health spending before they start work. www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/09/12/low-skilled-migrants-cost-taxpayers-150000-each/This is why living standards in every region of the UK have fallen in line with mass immigration and will fall a further 7% over the next two years. Hard pressed British tax payers including pensioners who have paid tax and national insurance for a lifetime, are paying for mass immigration. Two points red . One they most likely wont reach old age nevertheless 80-100 Two pensioners who have paid tax and national insurance for a lifetime, Are you sure a lifetime work . |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Sept 12, 2024 22:27:18 GMT
Two points red . One they most likely wont reach old age nevertheless 80-100 Two pensioners who have paid tax and national insurance for a lifetime, Are you sure a lifetime work . Whether an immigrant reaches 80 or 100 is irrelevant, the OBR example was to show that immigrants are a drain, not a benefit. I don't understand your second point. |
|
|
|
Post by Totheleft on Sept 12, 2024 22:32:45 GMT
Two points red . One they most likely wont reach old age nevertheless 80-100 Two pensioners who have paid tax and national insurance for a lifetime, Are you sure a lifetime work . Whether an immigrant reaches 80 or 100 is irrelevant, the OBR example was to show that immigrants are a drain, not a benefit. I don't understand your second point. .. That's the low earning migrate What about the middle earners or high earners The immigrants are overrepresented in all faculty of the workforce |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Sept 12, 2024 22:55:57 GMT
That's the low earning migrate What about the middle earners or high earners The immigrants are overrepresented in all faculty of the workforce Middle and high income earners do not come into the equation because the vast majority of immigrants are not middle to high income earners. The vast majority of immigrants are no skilled/low skilled which ensures there's a huge pool of unskilled labour in the workplace which obviously keeps shop floor pay down. Employment agencies absolutely exploded with the advent of mass immigration, and the British workforce never took a bigger kick in the teeth. Mass immigration is an absolute disaster for the is country. |
|
|
|
Post by Totheleft on Sept 12, 2024 23:04:43 GMT
That's the low earning migrate What about the middle earners or high earners The immigrants are overrepresented in all faculty of the workforce Middle and high income earners do not come into the equation because the vast majority of immigrants are not middle to high income earners. The vast majority of immigrants are no skilled/low skilled which ensures there's a huge pool of unskilled labour in the workplace which obviously keeps shop floor pay down. Employment agencies absolutely exploded with the advent of mass immigration, and the British workforce never took a bigger kick in the teeth. Mass immigration is an absolute disaster for the is country. Of course they come into equation. And tell me in your opinion when did mass immigration begin |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Sept 12, 2024 23:20:45 GMT
Of course they come into equation. And tell me in your opinion when did mass immigration begin No, you're wrong. Middle and high earning immigrants are not a drain on the benefits system or social housing. The problem is the vast majority of immigrants are not middle to high earners. Mass immigration started with president Blair and although he was appointed in 1997 he didn't open the floodgates until early 2000's and it's worth mentioning that in later years Labour grandees such as David Blunkett and Frank Field both apologised for Blairs open door immigration policy. In fact, the damage Blair did to this country deserves it's own thread. |
|
|
|
Post by Totheleft on Sept 12, 2024 23:24:27 GMT
Of course they come into equation. And tell me in your opinion when did mass immigration begin No, you're wrong. Middle and high earning immigrants are not a drain on the benefits system or social housing. The problem is the vast majority of immigrants are not middle to high earners. Mass immigration started with president Blair and although he was appointed in 1997 he didn't open the floodgates until early 2000's and it's worth mentioning that in later years Labour grandees such as David Blunkett and Frank Field both apologised for Blairs open door immigration policy. In fact, the damage Blair did to this country deserves it's own thread. So you didn't mind immigration before so called mass |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Sept 12, 2024 23:29:10 GMT
So you didn't mind immigration before so called mass No, obviously not. FFS we had more immigration in 20 years than in the previous 200 years. Immigration was not a problem, until Blair and the EU invented 'mass' immigration which continues to cause huge problems. |
|
|
|
Post by Totheleft on Sept 12, 2024 23:30:36 GMT
So you didn't mind immigration before so called mass No, obviously not. FFS we had more immigration in 20 years than in the previous 200 years. Immigration was not a problem, until Blair and the EU invented 'mass' immigration which continues to cause huge problems. Ok but some people have always said we have to many immigrants. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Sept 12, 2024 23:37:12 GMT
Ok but some people have always said we have to many immigrants. Hey it's an opinion. I'm glad the days of "No dogs no Irish no blacks" are gone, but are we in a better place today? I think not. I think we're in a decidedly worse place today than we were in 1968 when Enoch Powell correctly predicted the future. |
|
|
|
Post by Totheleft on Sept 12, 2024 23:45:16 GMT
Ok but some people have always said we have to many immigrants. Hey it's an opinion. I'm glad the days of "No dogs no Irish no blacks" are gone, but are we in a better place today? I think not. I think we're in a decidedly worse place today than we were in 1968 when Enoch Powell correctly predicted the future. He certainly not predicted the future Not seen any rivers of blood |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Sept 12, 2024 23:54:45 GMT
He certainly not predicted the future Not seen any rivers of blood You are correct, he certainly did not predict the future would be this bad. Rivers of blood was a quote from the bible. |
|
|
|
Post by Totheleft on Sept 13, 2024 0:01:18 GMT
He certainly not predicted the future Not seen any rivers of blood You are correct, he certainly did not predict the future would be this bad. Rivers of blood was a quote from the bible. Was it really and why are things bad especially in your neighbourhood I find things dandy |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Sept 13, 2024 0:15:02 GMT
You are correct, he certainly did not predict the future would be this bad. Rivers of blood was a quote from the bible. Was it really and why are things bad especially in your neighbourhood I find things dandy LOL interesting. Things in this neighbourhood are pretty good, we have no immigration (and I mean none whatsoever) everyone is white and English, how long that lasts, who knows. Hopefully I'll be long dead before multiculturalism hits this neck of the woods. |
|
