"The CFO said "[...] I view my job as always [to create] max flexibility, max optionality for the company, because then we can make more strategic decisions.""
== She has no idea what Dirty Sam's next move will be.
Wouldn't predators have worked out how to fake-announce themselves, from a different solar system to ones they occupy, and then destroy anyone who approached it and revealed their home systems ?
AFAICT, the problem in the UK is with too many people being allowed to stay for spurious reasons, not with people not being removed when they (legally) should be ?
Honestly neither of these things is a remotely important problem in the UK. The whole conversation about immigration in the UK is just a dogwhistle to try to attract racist voters now that since brexit they can’t use conversation about the EU for that.
As everywhere, immigration is not an issue for people who do not have to live in social/cheap rented housing in ghettos and have jobs that require a good education.
For the other half of societies, the half you did not meet in college, it is a problem and they are voting for racist parties because the other parties have not reduced immigration it and they think the racist parties will.
Immigration is actually one of the main issues in the UK and it's not about racism.
Productivity, population growth (and impact on housing and services), population aging (and impact on social care and NHS), societal and cultural changes and conflicts, national identity, etc are all linked to immigration.
The issue is compounded by the fact that successive governments say they want to be tough on immigration, but actually do the opposite. This is what pushes voters to Reform UK and away from the Tories, among other things. Labour is now doing the same (relatively tough talk but no actual effective action).
> The issue is compounded by the fact that successive governments say they want to be tough on immigration, but actually do the opposite.
There’s a simple explanation for this. Being “tough” on immigration would be bad for the economy, bad for the NHS, and bad for the country as a whole. So once a party is actually in government, they don’t want to do it, whatever they said in order to gain votes during the election campaign.
Or, maybe massively restricting immigration is actually a great idea and the establishment is conspiring to prevent it. Just like with Brexit, right?
High immigration is the cheaper short term solution at the "cost" of other, deeper issues. Restricting immigration is only be "bad" for the economy because systemic issues are not tackled.
The NHS relies on foreign workers. Why? Because salaries and conditions are shit so locals either do not train for those jobs or give up and moce to Australia at some point. It is cheaper to keep it that way.
12% of 25-34 years old are "economically inactive", which means deep systemic issues.
Generally immigration also keep salaries lower and also productivity lower (and that's why the left is actually historically not too keen).
This is difficult to debate seriously because there is always someone to cry "racist".
If you actually put the fixes for those “systemic issues” on the table, it’s obvious that no-one is going to vote for them, so they’re total non-starters. E.g. it would be great to pay nurses more, but no-one is going to vote for the tax hike required to fund it.
If any of this is difficult to debate seriously, that’s because opponents of current immigration policy consistently appeal to the lowest common denominator (people’s prejudices) rather than framing a proper argument. Even in this thread, you can see someone trying (absurdly) to redirect the discussion towards some Nigerian nurses with fake qualifications.
There’s a simple explanation for this. Being “tough” on immigration would be bad for the economy, bad for the NHS, and bad for the country as a whole. So once a party is actually in government, they don’t want to do it, whatever they said in order to gain votes during the election campaign.
You missed one important point: A rational party, or at least one with a rational leader. If you're dumb enough you will go through with it no matter how much it hurts your economy, your health system, and your country as a whole. I'm not in the UK but maybe someone from there could provide an estimate, on a scale of 0 to Trump, where does Farage rate?
But on the other hand, claiming that, as mentioned, any alternatives to high immigration is bad for the country has to be BS because it does not pass the "smell test". I never understood this stance that countries must have high immigration, that high immigration is good (TM) and that anything else is bigoted and racist. Best theory is that anti-racism has mutated into a monster mixed with business interests only interested in an ever growing labour and consumers pool.
So you want me to convince myself that immigration is an issue?
You blame immigrants moving into the country causing what problem exactly? Too many NHS workers from foreign countries now, or too much competition for you when applying for roles?
This isn’t a serious contribution to the discussion. The overall level of NHS services would clearly be far lower (non-existent in some cases) without the contribution of immigrants.
Do you believe that foreigners should be allowed to practice as nurses with fake qualifications? Because the NHS does. As they were ACTIVELY working while the NHS knew about the forgery.
Do you have evidence that there is a widespread, institutional fake qualifications problem with native NHS nurses? Please provide evidence. This is what would show that foreign workers in the NHS do not drag down standards on average.
We’re not going to figure out a practical way to improve the NHS with this level of debate. We get that you don’t like foreign nurses, but I’m not going to respond to your rhetorical questions.
You put words in my mouth, that's a dishonest way of arguing :)
I never once said all foreign nurses or bad, nor did I say I dislike them. I pointed out widespread, institutional level fraud that puts patients at risk, exclusively by foreign NHS staff.
It's worrying you can't respond to the argument without strawmans. Is patient safety a concern for you or does politics trump it?
You know that the NHS crucially depends on immigrant doctors and nurses and that their contribution is overwhelmingly positive. Your original comment was a completely transparent attempt to derail the discussion with a single cherry picked example.
Foreign NHS workers can be 'overwhelmingly' competent AND still drag down standards on average due to widespread fraud. You seem to be avoiding any questioning of specific groups engaging in institutional fraud.
Is fraud a problem or not? Should we have standards at all? Does patient safety matter or should we let fake nurses put patients at risk KNOWINGLY?
There aren't anywhere near enough British nurses for the NHS to use only British nurses. Can you point to a credible long term plan to change that situation? That's what you'd do if you had a goal beyond just stirring up unjustified mistrust of foreigners.
reply