Evil.
How? We are allowed to dictate the terms on which people stay in the UK
15 years of precarity is evil. I wouldn’t expect a monarchist and Prince Andrew fan to understand the difference between right and wrong though.
You could just not come here if you don’t agree to those terms, then? A nation controlling it’s borders in a way that respects human rights isn’t evil or immoral.
Also, I am not a fan of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor*
Ministers – including the housing secretary, Angela Rayner – had raised concerns about the effect the rules would have on care workers already in the UK who would be likely to face a 15-year wait for settlement, also known as indefinite leave to remain (ILR).
The government’s response to the consultation on the reforms, which will be put before MPs on Monday, is expected give some exemption to care workers already in the UK, though most other professions will face the lengthy waits for settlement.
In June, Rayner described making care workers already in Britain wait up to 15 years for permanent residence as “un-British”. In September, the energy secretary, Miatta Fahnbulleh, said the plans would have been “tough” for her family, who came to Britain as refugees.
Signatories argue that changing the rules for people who have planned their lives around existing settlement requirements would be unfair and could encourage essential workers to leave the country.
I don’t think it should apply to people already in the UK retroactively, it’s a bit unfair. I believe they walked it back though to the point that’s the case?
What can I tell you man, karma is a bitch and works on long timescales.
British government and European governments in general didn’t respect the wishes of other countries on planet when they were looting & colonizing them.
This is just an instance of “what goes around comes around”.
If your claims about sovereignty didn’t apply to other countries in the past, they also wouldn’t apply to UK now.
I have heard theories that God is experting His judgement on the western world for apostasy. So it’s possibly divine.
Yeah, the UK colonised Afghanistan and Eritrea.
This is such a dumb take. Maybe we should invade these countries again and make recolonise them.
Yeah, the UK colonised Afghanistan and Eritrea.
Pretty sure you’re missing some more countries on that list 🙂.
Maybe we should invade these countries again and make recolonise them.
You can try for sure, but as I said, karma is a bitch.
Learn from the mistakes of your ancestors.
The UK didn’t colonise those two. They’re chosen as examples as those are the top two sources of illegal migrants entering the UK. That’s why I said it’s a dumb take.
We are desperately dependent on immigrants to keep our nation functioning. Then leaving them living in uncertainty for almost half their lives potentially seems like scumbag behaviour.
If we actually wanted to reduce immigration all we need to do is give migrants more rights, require generous pay and suddenly there wouldn’t be so much demand for them because they wouldn’t be worth the price, but we won’t do that because we need them too badly to fill the hole in our economy, all the bad jobs that there aren’t enough uk nationals to fill. Treating them as equals who can earn their right to live here simply by doing the work we cannot do ourselves anymore feels like the least we can do, a minimum of the respect they are due. Dragging it out as long as possible is the action of a dodgy boss, not a nation worthy of respect.
No we’re not. This level of immigration is for wage supreasion. It’s big business using these people, and it’s sad.We don’t need more people when there aren’t enough jobs to go around, especially for going people.
You’re not wrong that it suppresses wages. And if we “just” wanted to fix that we could (by increasing the minimum wage for immigrants perhaps). Interesting that all our anti-immigration policies are less about doing that and more about bullying people.
But on the flip side, we do need immigration. Wage suppression is only a part of it, at some point wages can’t go up because the money doesn’t exist (especially for the kind of roles we need, the kind of person who needs a carer doesn’t have unlimited funds), and we’ll need it more and more as time goes on too. We genuinely need a growing pool of workers whilst we have an aging population. We’re not making enough young workers ourselves to care for our aging population. And turns out the amount of money you need to offer people to make them comfortable to have more kids is rediculously high, so immigration is filling the gap at a much cheaper price.
Eventually the world will shift and immigration will dry up because everyone else will be in the same boat as we are now, then we’ll have no choice but to throw money at the birth rate. Probably at a cost so high we’ll have to concider some pretty terrible things to pay for it, but for now immigration is saving us from that fate.
So… You agree, we don’t need so much immigration, we should fix, or try harder to fix, the issues at hand before throwing exploitative cheap labour at the economy. You’re just too scared to say you agree.
I do support policies that make immigration less exploiitative, but I don’t support curtailing immigration much, the alternatives suck.
I do accept other options exist (eg encouraging more people to have kids), but they are much more expensive, like multiple percentage points of gdp more expensive. Like we’d have to curtail pensions to afford them, or set a tax increase larger than any in living memory.
We could solve this without immigration eventually if we had the willingness to spend that much money. It’d take 20 years to start working (people take a long time to grow up) and in the meantime we’d need a lot of political will (nobody would enjoy the kind of tax rises we’re talking about), but yeah it could be done.
We’ll have to do it one day, we can’t benefit from immigration indefinitely, but doing it early does mean spending vast amounts more money. It’s not like this gets cheaper over time, we’ll have to keep spending every year. So rushing into it before we need to gives few benefits that I can see. Especially since we’re competing with other countries that aren’t doing it, and therefore can spend their money in ways that encourage investment (ie outcompete the uk for investment) instead. Once immigration settles down (as it inevitably will, unless there’s enough destabilising wars to undo all the progress around the world, hopefully not), all the countries currently depending on immigration will be forced to solve the birth rate problem at once, then at least we’re competing on a level playing field and might not suffer so badly for adjusting our spending.
So no, I don’t agree with doing it now, because there’s a cheaper option and cheaper means we can afford to spend the money on other things. We’re struggling already, think how much harder it would be if we were throwing all our welfare spending into convincing people to have kids instead of into pensions or the nhs. Some issues get worse when you kick the can down the road, but this one just sits and waits for us to confront it, so delaying that as long as possible is the optimal choice.
You should work in government with that logic. Cheaper now, kick the can down the road.
Reap what you sow.
If someone doesn’t work for 20 years? No, we don’t rely on them.
Unpopular opinion here… but that’s a leech. I’m not from here either but I got to work for it. People native here? Also got to work to get unemployment money.
We don’t live in dystopia. Lemmy has some insane takes and this is top of the list. People expect to get stuff for free with literally zero contribution on claim.
If someone doesn’t work for 20 years? Other than any Brits who go to university, I don’t think it’s particularly relevant here.
This is discussing people who do work, and how long they need to work before we trust them enough to treat them like citizens.
If someone comes here at 18 and works for 5 years… this may shock you, but they’ve been a net benefit to the country to the tune of 5 man-years of work (minus their salary, which presumably is less than the labour, or nobody would be throwing money at them). They are already better for the economy than an equivalent Brit since they didn’t spent 18 years being a drag on the economy (instead they were a drag of whatever poor country wasted the resources prepping them for us!).
Hypothetically the absolutely most untrusting and stingy position we could take would be to require someone to work long enough to pay off the cost of caring for them for the rest of their life. That would mean assuming they immediately stop working the moment they earn leave to remain. But that would be like a life insurance company saying “we’ll insure you for £100000 but you need to pay us £100000 to cover the risk”.
Thankfully we can very easily predict how people behave in aggregate. We could pick a number where we’re near guaranteed to come out ahead, I bet it’d be embarrassingly short (most people work to just before pension age). But that’s not what’s driving this policy. This policy exists to look “tough on immigration”, but not too tough because we are actually dependent on immigration. Enough to ruin lives without you know… accidentally having any real effect on immigration numbers, since they would be a disaster.
So it’s just political manoeuvring designed to have no real effect on the thing people want to change (because they thing can’t change, we need it too much) but will still do massive damage.
Might as well “solve” small boats by regularly nuking the English Channel, its equivalent levels of bullshit.
It may be a bad policy, but is it actually morally evil? And if so, how?
It could be beneficial to keep people here for less than 15 years, then replace their positions when there is a UK national to fill the job. There are people who would be happy to work abroad to send money back home, I knew a professional who followed the money and had been to several countries before.
Albeit, you are possibly right. I think the points based idea is a good one
I never said evil, but I do think immoral, as I outlined in my previous comment, we’re talking about benefitting from people dedicating a significant amount of their working lives to this country doing jobs we are failing to do ourselves. Leaving those people in limbo for so long isn’t fair to them. This is just statistics to us, but it’s their lives getting uprooted.
If people are bouncing between different countries and jobs, good for them, and this policy won’t change things for them one bit, because they already wouldn’t be eligible, and if they’re bouncing around they really wouldn’t be interested either.
Eh fair tbh
I often wonder if the EU and the UK are facing the same immigrant hate, for the same reasons, I see in America. I’d value UK opinions!
People scream “Racism!” at every mention of immigrant hate, but I find there’s more to unpack. Consider what a citizen, young or old, is experiencing. Seems like every metric across the board is getting worse, has been for nearly 20-years. If you’re not watching the numbers, at the very least you can feel this downturn, experience it.
If you’re old, you remember very different demographics; most people looked and talked like you and your cohort. They had pronounceable names like Cholmondeley and Featherstonehaugh! If you’re young, you have a clear sense that this ain’t right, dad and grandpappy and great-grandpappy had it better. They could at the least get fair wages and any man who wanted to work or own a home could do so. What has happened to my country?!
You look around and what do you see? Loads more brown people with funny accents and names is what. Your mass media (Fox News in the US) and social media (mostly a curated FB feed) are telling you brown immigrants are the problem. Compound that with flat-out lies, “Illegals get government benefits!” and “They’re uncommonly criminal!” and you can see how easy this is to believe, even if you didn’t start out from a racist standpoint.
Anyway, I find racism a facile answer to a complicated issue. Scream all ya like, and you’ll fall largely on target, but not for the reasons you think and “Racism!” doesn’t address the demographic, social and political changes and who is taking the heat for those changes. (Note: All of this is a large part of Trump’s election and reelection.)
Brits got opinions? Hit me!
It’s very simple. The wealth hoarders are pointing in the other direction. “Look over there! It’s brown people’s fault!” And the media parrot it and too many people fall for it.
Agreed! I’m merely pointing out the reasons that finger pointing is working so well. And even if the wealthy weren’t trying to distract us, I’m guessing there would be some “organic” hate for the reasons I outlined.
Economic opportunities are clearly worsening, there’s clearly more brown people, and the dots get connected without further thought.
The wealth hoarders are the ones driving rampant legal migration. How can’t you see that?
I have no idea what you mean. ?
I wasn’t talking to you… Read through the context of this thread and who I was replying to.
Opinion on what? Immigration?
As to why immigrants as so hated. Did British demographics face similar changes over the past few decades? Did opportunity crash out as in America?
Right. You wrote multiple paragraphs without actually asking what you wanted our opinion on. Immigrants aren’t hated. They’re doing what anyone in their position would try to do: to better their lives. It’s the governments of the past decades that are hated. The British public never voted for huge levels of migration, quote the opposite. The government serves itself and not the people. Companies and billionaires also benefit from high levels of immigration.
You could check census data for demographic change as you’d want factual data not anecdotal.
No idea what a crash out is.
Ah! I got the impression from across the Pond that Brits were resisting immigrants. So it’s the fact of it and the not actual people?
I have looked at census data for America, definitely more brown people. I’m also going from personal observations. When I moved to Florida 20 years ago, I was kinda freaked out by the lack of Hispanics. Now they’re as common as most anywhere. I’m asking if immigration has also increased in Britain.
BBC News: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cmkgq0zgkd19t
Meanwhile, people arriving by small boat will have to wait 20 years for settlement, with a further 10 years for those who have not entered work or study
They should be permanently disqualified, if not deported
Could they deport you instead? For whatever reason you have in mind.
I am a citizen of this nation, I abide and respect the law, even those I disagree with. I do not think we should let people who we don’t know in undocumented who are trying their hand at paying criminal gangs. If you can’t respect something as simple as the border, you should have zero right to be here.
No you don’t. Nobody does. There’s so many laws, many of them contradictory, that it’s literally impossible to abide by the law.
Over the course of the last decade, each year has seen an average of 2,685 new laws - the equivalent of almost seven and a half a day or one every three-and-a-quarter hours
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2007/jun/04/houseofcommons.uk
That was in 2007. There have been thousands of laws since.
My allegiance is to His Majesty the King, his Heirs and Successors, according to law.
God save the King. I respect that. Same reason when I visited China I respected their laws, like checking in with a police station whenever I went somewhere even though the locals said I didn’t really have to bother as it’s unenforced. But I was in their country, I respect their laws.
People born here to people settled got to stay here 10 years begore they apply through form T. How many kids don’t get anything without having to drop 1300 and live here for 10 years since birth?
Idk my brain is fried this week, I mean I think I get your point with kids being raised here tbh. Maybe 15 is a bit much from that perspective
Mahmood, the home secretary, has proposed that the settlement wait could be reduced if legal migrants showed they had contributed to their local communities via a “points based system” or if they were earning higher incomes.
A good idea tbh (presuming that healthcare workers will already get those automatically from their job)
