News1 min ago
Mass Immigration Accounts For More Than A Third Of All New Housing Demand In Britain
20 Answers
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/9739590/House-prices-could-be-10pc-lower-without-mass-immigration-Theresa-May-says.html
/// Mass immigration accounts for more than a third of all new housing demand in Britain, pushes house prices up, wages down and forces people onto benefits, Mrs May, the home secretary, said. ///
/// “The lesson from that pilot was clear - abuse was rife, paper-based checks weren’t working, and interviews, conducted by entry clearance officers with the freedom to use their judgement, work”, Mrs May said. ///
Theresa May talks as if she isn't part of the Government, surely in her position as Home Secretary she is in the ideal position to make the necessary changes?
/// Mass immigration accounts for more than a third of all new housing demand in Britain, pushes house prices up, wages down and forces people onto benefits, Mrs May, the home secretary, said. ///
/// “The lesson from that pilot was clear - abuse was rife, paper-based checks weren’t working, and interviews, conducted by entry clearance officers with the freedom to use their judgement, work”, Mrs May said. ///
Theresa May talks as if she isn't part of the Government, surely in her position as Home Secretary she is in the ideal position to make the necessary changes?
Answers
1 to 20 of 20
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Pushes house prices up?
Selfishly, I would say that was a good thing (as that would be good news for my own property), but long term it's a worry because we need people to be able to get onto the housing ladder in the first place.
I'm assuming much of the housing stock in demand is for short term or rental properties?
However, there's a largely unreported flip side to this issue.
I saw a documentary earlier this year about the scandal of the thousands of perfectly good empty properties which aren't being released onto the market which could be used to ease pressure.
There's an estate just outside Liverpool where there are row upon row of terraced houses - all in perfectly good condition and all just sitting empty.
It's madness.
Selfishly, I would say that was a good thing (as that would be good news for my own property), but long term it's a worry because we need people to be able to get onto the housing ladder in the first place.
I'm assuming much of the housing stock in demand is for short term or rental properties?
However, there's a largely unreported flip side to this issue.
I saw a documentary earlier this year about the scandal of the thousands of perfectly good empty properties which aren't being released onto the market which could be used to ease pressure.
There's an estate just outside Liverpool where there are row upon row of terraced houses - all in perfectly good condition and all just sitting empty.
It's madness.
>>>as that would be good news for my own property
Why is it good for your own property?
Every other property is rising in price, so if you ever wanted to sell yours and buy another house you have to pay more for the other house.
Only if you wanted to sell your house and rent might you gain, but rents are high as well.
I am afraid the desire for all of us to have our house price rise is one of those silly thigns that has caused us all to saddle ourselves with huge mortgages, but helps almost nobody.
Why is it good for your own property?
Every other property is rising in price, so if you ever wanted to sell yours and buy another house you have to pay more for the other house.
Only if you wanted to sell your house and rent might you gain, but rents are high as well.
I am afraid the desire for all of us to have our house price rise is one of those silly thigns that has caused us all to saddle ourselves with huge mortgages, but helps almost nobody.
“Uncontrolled, mass immigration displaces British workers, forces people onto benefits, and suppresses wages for the low-paid."
Strange when she was told that her immigration reforms were putting off foreign firms from locating here
A recent report by UK Trade and Investment (UKTI) has found that Britain's tough new immigration controls may be preventing foreign companies from investing in the UK....It warns that the new immigration regime is harming that business environment. The report has not been published but was leaked to The Independent newspaper.
http://
I can't imagine why that report wasn't published can you?
A simple oversight surely!
Strange when she was told that her immigration reforms were putting off foreign firms from locating here
A recent report by UK Trade and Investment (UKTI) has found that Britain's tough new immigration controls may be preventing foreign companies from investing in the UK....It warns that the new immigration regime is harming that business environment. The report has not been published but was leaked to The Independent newspaper.
http://
I can't imagine why that report wasn't published can you?
A simple oversight surely!
em10
It's good for me, because both me and my partner were lucky to buy at the time (late mid 80s), and our next place will be smaller than our current place. Any upward pressure on prices suits us because we'll never need a bigger place.
However, there's still the issue of first time buyers which is troubling. I bought my first place on my own when I was 21, but I know single people who are still living at home into their 30s because prices for first time buyers are now ridiculous.
It's good for me, because both me and my partner were lucky to buy at the time (late mid 80s), and our next place will be smaller than our current place. Any upward pressure on prices suits us because we'll never need a bigger place.
However, there's still the issue of first time buyers which is troubling. I bought my first place on my own when I was 21, but I know single people who are still living at home into their 30s because prices for first time buyers are now ridiculous.
"...surely in her position as Home Secretary she is in the ideal position to make the necessary changes? "
Unfortunately she is not, AOG. So long as the UK remains in the EU neither the Home Secretary nor any other government minister has any say over who enters the country - certainly not over those wishing to settle here from other EU nations.
When the EU expanded eastwards in 2004 the government refused to implement a temporary ban on people from the new nations settling here (which just about every other western nation did impose). It estimated that "only about 13,000" people would seek to settle here. In fact this proved to be an underestimate in the order of about 30-fold and huge numbers flocked here mainly from Poland and the three Baltic States. So at a time when the UK's unemployment figure stood at about 2 million we imported another half million mainly unskilled workers. Very sensible.
The EU sees the free movement of people as second only to the single currency as its crowning achievements. The folly of the first is now plain for all to see. The disaster of the second (at least as far as the UK is concerned) is conveniently glossed over. As you rightly say, aog, all the work currently undertaken by the new arrivals got done before thay came here. A nation which allows itself to be forced to accept hundreds of thousands of largely unskilled immigrants when it has a couple of million unemployed already withing its shores deserves to be looked upon as a laughing stock.
Unfortunately she is not, AOG. So long as the UK remains in the EU neither the Home Secretary nor any other government minister has any say over who enters the country - certainly not over those wishing to settle here from other EU nations.
When the EU expanded eastwards in 2004 the government refused to implement a temporary ban on people from the new nations settling here (which just about every other western nation did impose). It estimated that "only about 13,000" people would seek to settle here. In fact this proved to be an underestimate in the order of about 30-fold and huge numbers flocked here mainly from Poland and the three Baltic States. So at a time when the UK's unemployment figure stood at about 2 million we imported another half million mainly unskilled workers. Very sensible.
The EU sees the free movement of people as second only to the single currency as its crowning achievements. The folly of the first is now plain for all to see. The disaster of the second (at least as far as the UK is concerned) is conveniently glossed over. As you rightly say, aog, all the work currently undertaken by the new arrivals got done before thay came here. A nation which allows itself to be forced to accept hundreds of thousands of largely unskilled immigrants when it has a couple of million unemployed already withing its shores deserves to be looked upon as a laughing stock.
So the home owner should rejoice at higher prices due to mass immigration.
So the worker who loses his job and unable to pay his mortgage should blame mass immigration.
So the demand for more housing on green field sites can be attributed to mass immigration.
We know the problems but what are they doing about it. Even if they bring the net figure for immigration down there will still be in excess of 100,000 every year to cater for. The people emigrating from Britain are usually, white, middle class, highly skilled (must be otherwise the country wouldn't allow them entry). Although we have now tightened our visa restrictions it doesn't account for the millions of plebs already here.
So the worker who loses his job and unable to pay his mortgage should blame mass immigration.
So the demand for more housing on green field sites can be attributed to mass immigration.
We know the problems but what are they doing about it. Even if they bring the net figure for immigration down there will still be in excess of 100,000 every year to cater for. The people emigrating from Britain are usually, white, middle class, highly skilled (must be otherwise the country wouldn't allow them entry). Although we have now tightened our visa restrictions it doesn't account for the millions of plebs already here.
And you raise another important point, pdq - that of "net" immigration figures. I mentioned this in another thread recently and make no excuses for pasting my thoughts again here:
It's strange that immigration figures are always quotes as "net" - that is to say the difference between those entering and those leaving. This hides the fact that the population is being exchanged. That is, those who are valuable, have skills and can contribute leave (because they are fed up with being taken for a ride in the UK) and are replaced with unskilled unemployable foreigners (because they know they will be well looked after here).
It is downright dishonest to quote these net figures. Presumably we could export all our top managers and innovators (and self-sufficient pensioners)and replace them one for one with people incapable of any meaningful work. Net immigration nil. Job Done !! Everybody's happy. (Or that's what the government would hope. I most certainly would not be).
It's strange that immigration figures are always quotes as "net" - that is to say the difference between those entering and those leaving. This hides the fact that the population is being exchanged. That is, those who are valuable, have skills and can contribute leave (because they are fed up with being taken for a ride in the UK) and are replaced with unskilled unemployable foreigners (because they know they will be well looked after here).
It is downright dishonest to quote these net figures. Presumably we could export all our top managers and innovators (and self-sufficient pensioners)and replace them one for one with people incapable of any meaningful work. Net immigration nil. Job Done !! Everybody's happy. (Or that's what the government would hope. I most certainly would not be).
Good answers judge, when I read your words I can see what the politicians (of all parties) general idea behind all this is.
It is to turn this once great country into a second class country, where its citizens expectations in life are vastly reduced, so much so that they will be quite happy to work for 'peanuts', providing that they have some form of employment, a roof over their head and food on the table.
Of course in the meantime the class system will still be apparent, as it is today, they won't be dragged down with us, as can now be seen in these days of job losses, house repossessions, and cuts after cuts.
The numbers of politicians haven't been reduced, or their lifestyle altered in anyway, unless of course one is referring to a slight alteration in their generous expenses.
It is to turn this once great country into a second class country, where its citizens expectations in life are vastly reduced, so much so that they will be quite happy to work for 'peanuts', providing that they have some form of employment, a roof over their head and food on the table.
Of course in the meantime the class system will still be apparent, as it is today, they won't be dragged down with us, as can now be seen in these days of job losses, house repossessions, and cuts after cuts.
The numbers of politicians haven't been reduced, or their lifestyle altered in anyway, unless of course one is referring to a slight alteration in their generous expenses.
1 to 20 of 20
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.