Current Politics in the United Kingdom

[jacques22]

A reminder why the NHS desperately needs EU immigrants:the NHS simply can't train enough British nurses and doctors to meet the needs of the population.
"The Royal College of Nursing says there are 42,000 vacancies across the NHS in nursing, with the staff recruitment crisis made more acute by low morale and poor staff retention."
The full article here:
https://www.theguardian.com/society/...-brexit-nhs-eu

[seany65]

Originally Posted by jacques22

A reminder why the NHS desperately needs EU immigrants:the NHS simply can't train enough British nurses and doctors to meet the needs of the population.
"The Royal College of Nursing says there are 42,000 vacancies across the NHS in nursing, with the staff recruitment crisis made more acute by low morale and poor staff retention."
The full article here:
https://www.theguardian.com/society/...-brexit-nhs-eu

One of the problems of the NHS is that many people, especially politicians, seem to forget that just for the level of service the NHS gives to remain static, the NHS has to expand at the same rate as the population.

This means an ever increasing number of doctors, nurses, ancillary staff and buildings which means an ever increasing amount of Tax to pay for it all.

That is only keeping up with the natural growth of the indigenous British population and the greater number of indigenous old British people.

Yet many people, especially many of the rich and the celebs try to avoid paying as much tax as they should which means the NHS can end up being starved of money.

Throw in Governments who waste money in the NHS or make big cuts in the NHS budgets to make the problems worse.

Then throw in the increase in population from controlled immigration and the problem gets worse.

Now add in the totally uncontrolled immigration of hundreds of thousands of EU citizens to make the problems of the NHS even worse.

(I know we get more legals from outside the EU, but at least they are 'vetted' to some degree).

All this adds up to a population which is quickly growing beyond the means of the country to House, School, employ and look after when sick.

These every-increasing pressures of greater population and less money means medical staff are under too much pressure to cope, even with their levels of training.

If the population wasn't growing at the rate it is (partly 'cos of immigration) then the NHS would not be under the pressure that it is and we wouldn't need so many foreign doctors and nurses.

It ain't racist to point these things out.

Why does no-one ever question the effect of all these foreign doctors and nurses leaving their own countries has on their country's health services? Surely the health services in their countries must be suffering from loss of medical staff?



It's been said (somewhere or other) that the more immigrants we receive, the quicker our economy grows and the richer the country will become and so all immigration pays for itself.

I'm just wondering why no-one seems to advocate it to African countries who seem to be having a hard time developing, or to any other "third world" countries?

[jacques22]

Originally Posted by seany65

Then throw in the increase in population from controlled immigration and the problem gets worse.

Now add in the totally uncontrolled immigration of hundreds of thousands of EU citizens to make the problems of the NHS even worse.

(...)

If the population wasn't growing at the rate it is (partly 'cos of immigration) then the NHS would not be under the pressure that it is and we wouldn't need so many foreign doctors and nurses.

Immigration is not a problem for the NHS and the UK in general. If you check the stats for EU members, the UK is in the middle with 9 immigrants per 1,000 inhabitants in 2016. There are a dozen EU countries that have to absorb more immigrants: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statist...ion_statistics

In fact, EU immigration has been declining in the UK over the past couple of years, because of May's more aggressive immigration policy as well as because of the EU expats' disillusion with Brexit. Yet, the NHS problems are growing, not diminishing, which completely contradicts the point you are making.

Also, if you look at the profile of EU expats, most of them are young workers who want to save money before returning to their home country to retire. They might get injured (at work or in an accident) and be treated by the NHS, but the costs are more than covered by the taxes and social contributions paid by those EU expats.

On the other hand, if you look at the profile of British expats, that's a different story. A lot of them are retiring in France, Spain, Portugal or Malta and they cost a lot of money to those countries' healthcare system, because by definition older people cost more than young people (i.e. the elderly are more likely to suffer long-term illnesses than young people). Yet, no one is complaining about the cost of British expats for the European healthcare systems.

While Brexiters see immigration as the problem for almost everything, EU members are lucid enough to recognise that uncontrolled immigration is a problem that can destabilise a country's social fabric, but they won't blame immigrants for problems of their own making, whether it's education, housing, health care or employment.

[palo5]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

Who says I'm angry?

You did, otherwise you wouldn't have said "retaliation". I'm interested to know why you want to retaliate, and who you want to retaliate against

[palo5]

Originally Posted by seany65

This means an ever increasing number of doctors, nurses, ancillary staff and buildings which means an ever increasing amount of Tax to pay for it all

Hehehe!

With increasing population you get increased tax revenue, so paying for it should not be a problem, unless you have a plague outbreak or something

The question here is why you can't train local people, and why your "foreign" staff are deserting you so fast

[otokonomidori]

Originally Posted by jacques22

the elderly are more likely to suffer long-term illnesses than young people).

I've read that the current younger generation are the first in our history who may well have shorter life expectancies than their parents - too much tuck, cheap booze, sedentary lifestyles , excessive masturbation etc...

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by palo5

You did, otherwise you wouldn't have said "retaliation". I'm interested to know why you want to retaliate, and who you want to retaliate against

Reciprocity is a normal principle in international relations. I am merely pointing this out. If the EU decides to put Britain on the naughty step over alleged tax evasion, she should do the same for the Netherlands, Ireland and several other nations. That would meet the test of fairness and would mean that Britain is not being singled out for punishment because she has elected to leave. On the other hand, if indeed Britain is singled out for punishment for conduct of which remaining member states are equally guilty, that is victimisation, and Britain should retaliate.

There are options for retaliating which would hurt the EU a great deal and I merely point this out for the benefit of some discussion members who appear to think Britain is defenceless and the EU will be able to shit on Britain with impunity. It is certainly not the outcome I prefer; it is only a point which needs to be clear to all parties, that the punishment Brexit option will punish the EU as well, and severely. I would be ardently in favour of retaliation if Britain is to be punished. But I must also point out that except for the unmissed former President Hollande and the singularly malicious Guy Verhofstadt, we have not yet seen anything unreasonable on the EU side. My observations are for the benefit of those who predict unreasonable EU behaviour and seem to approve of the idea and to want the EU to be unreasonable.

[palo5]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

There are options for retaliating which would hurt the EU a great deal

Hard to imagine what those options would be. Now that Barnier has demonstrated that the EU doesn't need UK more than UK needs the EU, and that canard is off the table, what are those options? Giving more EU data to the Americans?

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by palo5

Hard to imagine what those options would be. Now that Barnier has demonstrated that the EU doesn't need UK more than UK needs the EU, and that canard is off the table, what are those options? Giving more EU data to the Americans?

Palo, old chap, if you aren't clever enough to work out Britain's options, then I don't see why I need to help you out. I keep saying this is not my preferred outcome because (you see) it is not my preferred outcome - so I am not choosing to antagonise people by going into glorious technicolour detail about what Britain might do. But your lack of imagination is not my problem.

[palo5]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

Palo, old chap, if you aren't clever enough to work out Britain's options, then I don't see why I need to help you out. I keep saying this is not my preferred outcome because (you see) it is not my preferred outcome - so I am not choosing to antagonise people by going into glorious technicolour detail about what Britain might do. But your lack of imagination is not my problem.

In other words you have nothing that wouldn't backfire badly, The EU knows that already. Why do you think the negotiations are going so well?