• Oxford Green Energy

    Yellows Forum is DELIGHTED to announce a partnership with Oxford Green Energy, who become our sustainability partner.

    See here for more information, including a YF member discount.

International News Immigration

Accessing the forum via a VPN is an offence?
 
Londox said:
There's nothing false about the dilemma our country is in.

Mass immigration is an experiment never tried before in British history. We haven't even begun to know the consequences yet.
Click to expand...
The false dilemma is your continual pitching things as binary to set up a divise argument. It is false that you have to choose between taxing millionaires or managing immigration appropriately to improve things. They are not linked and are not alternatives.
 
chuckbert said:
The false dilemma is your continual pitching things as binary to set up a divise argument. It is false that you have to choose between taxing millionaires or managing immigration appropriately to improve things. They are not linked and are not alternatives.
Click to expand...
chuckbert said:
The false dilemma is your continual pitching things as binary to set up a divise argument. It is false that you have to choose between taxing millionaires or managing immigration appropriately to improve things. They are not linked and are not alternatives.
Click to expand...
But that's a lie, I have specifically said several times we should try and control migration and tax billionaires.
 
Wealth tax is less likely to work because the very people they wish to target have the resources to mitigate it. 🤷‍♂️

How many global/offshored businesses already mitigate their UK tax burden?
 
chuckbert said:
When? You said something about how wealth tax would be impossible to implement and billionaires would all leave the country.
Click to expand...
Why are you lying? I never said that. Show me where I said what you're claiming I said.

I said a wealth tax is difficult to implement and I'm worried there isn't many examples of it being successfully implemented.

I said this on the Labour party thread literally two days ago:

"Sometimes on this forum I think right wing and left wing posters are lightyears away and sometimes I think we are closer than we realise.

I think instead of centrism, what we need is something that combines left wing and right wing policies.

The choice is between Reform, who I believe would sort immigration but won't fix wealth inequality, or the Greens, who might fix wealth inequality to an extent but you just know the immigration floodgates would open even more than before.

Can we control immigration AND introduce a wealth tax?

I also believe mass migration has made inquality in the UK much worse."

Don't just make up things I said. Quote things I said.

All I'm saying is, wealth tax and taxation of billonaires is not the answer many people think it is. It's part of what needs to happen I'm sure, but mass immigration and cultural issues are a huge part of the picture many people are WILLFULLY ignoring, because it's difficult to talk about.
 
Londox said:
Why are you lying? I never said that. Show me where I said what you're claiming I said.

I said a wealth tax is difficult to implement and I'm worried there isn't many examples of it being successfully implemented.
Click to expand...

Well you said "Is there an example of any country successfully implementing a wealth tax? With billionaire wealth being so transient it's not easy. Taxing assets could be a route but that could also encourage billionaires withdrawing from Britain."
Seemed pretty negative to me 🤷‍♂️

Londox said:
I said this on the Labour party thread literally two days ago:
...
Can we control immigration AND introduce a wealth tax?
...
Click to expand...
Fair enough - I didn't see/recall you posting that. Forgive me for missing it, but that's once. You did say "I have specifically said several times we should try and control migration and tax billionaires." I don't fancy going to try and re-read everything you've ever posted, but I've definitely missed you specifically saying several times that we should try and tax billionaires.
 
chuckbert said:
Well you said "Is there an example of any country successfully implementing a wealth tax? With billionaire wealth being so transient it's not easy. Taxing assets could be a route but that could also encourage billionaires withdrawing from Britain."
Seemed pretty negative to me 🤷‍♂️


Fair enough - I didn't see/recall you posting that. Forgive me for missing it, but that's once. You did say "I have specifically said several times we should try and control migration and tax billionaires." I don't fancy going to try and re-read everything you've ever posted, but I've definitely missed you specifically saying several times that we should try and tax billionaires.
Click to expand...
I think it's perfectly reasonable to worry about the implementation of a wealth tax when Gary Stevenson himself admits it could be poorly implemented and won't be easy to implement. Something being difficult doesn't mean you shouldn't try. I think controlling immigration is difficult but I demand we get and do that.

I have praised Gary Stevenson several times on here. The trading game is the best book I've read in a long time. I have said several times on here wealth inequality IS a problem and if you don't believe me I will find you examples.

By the way billionaires ARE taxed. The question is not whether they are being taxed but whether they are paying their fair share. Your post implies billionaires pay no tax which isn't true.

I just can't fully submit to Gary Stevenson because whenever immigration gets brought up he says he's "not a politician" and he says he acknowledges immigration 'might' negatively affect working class people in some industries. I know he understands wage suppression and I know he understands immigration is a reason GDP per capita is falling but because of his political allies like Zack Polanski he finds it so hard to admit it.

I really don't think I'm the enemy you think I am.
 
Londox said:
I think it's perfectly reasonable to worry about the implementation of a wealth tax when Gary Stevenson himself admits it could be poorly implemented and won't be easy to implement. Something being difficult doesn't mean you shouldn't try. I think controlling immigration is difficult but I demand we get and do that.

I have praised Gary Stevenson several times on here. The trading game is the best book I've read in a long time. I have said several times on here wealth inequality IS a problem and if you don't believe me I will find you examples.

By the way billionaires ARE taxed. The question is not whether they are being taxed but whether they are paying their fair share. Your post implies billionaires pay no tax which isn't true.

I just can't fully submit to Gary Stevenson because whenever immigration gets brought up he says he's "not a politician" and he says he acknowledges immigration 'might' negatively affect working class people in some industries. I know he understands wage suppression and I know he understands immigration is a reason GDP per capita is falling but because of his political allies like Zack Polanski he finds it so hard to admit it.

I really don't think I'm the enemy you think I am.
Click to expand...

Presuming that is the "Gary`s Economics" social media/Youtube chap?

I like him. Sensible and realistic which means he could never be a politician,
 
Londox said:
Why are you lying? I never said that. Show me where I said what you're claiming I said.

I said a wealth tax is difficult to implement and I'm worried there isn't many examples of it being successfully implemented.

I said this on the Labour party thread literally two days ago:

"Sometimes on this forum I think right wing and left wing posters are lightyears away and sometimes I think we are closer than we realise.

I think instead of centrism, what we need is something that combines left wing and right wing policies.

The choice is between Reform, who I believe would sort immigration but won't fix wealth inequality, or the Greens, who might fix wealth inequality to an extent but you just know the immigration floodgates would open even more than before.

Can we control immigration AND introduce a wealth tax?

I also believe mass migration has made inquality in the UK much worse."

Don't just make up things I said. Quote things I said.

All I'm saying is, wealth tax and taxation of billonaires is not the answer many people think it is. It's part of what needs to happen I'm sure, but mass immigration and cultural issues are a huge part of the picture many people are WILLFULLY ignoring, because it's difficult to talk about.
Click to expand...

Londox said:
it's odd people criticise others for blaming everything on immigration whilst similtaneously blaming everything on billionaires. When the 156 billionaires all leave the UK life won't get any better for you.
Click to expand...
 
Essexyellows said:
Presuming that is the "Gary`s Economics" social media/Youtube chap?

I like him. Sensible and realistic which means he could never be a politician,
Click to expand...
Yes. More thoughtful and insightful than almost any politician.

Edit: if you enjoy his content you should also check out Rory Sutherland. A wealth tax supporter from the right.
 
Last edited:
@m that doesn't contradict what I'm saying.

The fact is billionaire wealth IS transient and taxing billionaires absolutely is difficult. As I've said even Gary admits if it's poorly implemented it could make things worse.

Furthermore I stand by the fact taxation of billionaires is only a part of the answer. It's not going to make the several economic, cultural and integration issues caused by immigration to disappear overnight.

Even if a good wealth tax which was workable was introduced the average persons life may well not improve. Not if immigration continues in the hundreds of thousands..
 
Carpy said:
The guy has zero substance behind him, just spouts the same few lines whenever I have seen him. He's found a way to be relevant and remain in the spotlight.
Click to expand...
I agree he can be repetitive and at times I would even say condescending. His habit of saying "listen" before he says almost anything is irritating.

But... Before he became huge I read his book and it was an insight into a world I knew little about. It would make a great film one day.

I also tend to agree with him about some of what he says. Compound interest does eat the middle class alive really. Home ownership is becoming not the norm (at least in the south east of England) unless your parents can give you a substantial financial boost. We are living in what Rory Sutherland has said is "the inheritocracy". The correlation between hard work and home ownership to some extent has been lost.

I also find something of the working class boy done good story of Gary somewhat hard not to fall in love with. If someone from my school went on to be as successful as him even if I didn't agree with everything they've said I'd be proud of them.

However he can fall down for me on a few things.
1) He is a good influencer of debate but when he's asked his solution he basically says "politicians don't want to speak to me" and says even his solution "wouldn't be enough".
2) globalisation is a huge issue. We live in an era millionaires let alone billionaires can easily hide their wealth from taxation.
3) he is so unwilling to engage on the topic of immigration it undermines his credibility to anyone who isn't left of centre.
 
Carpy said:
The guy has zero substance behind him, just spouts the same few lines whenever I have seen him. He's found a way to be relevant and remain in the spotlight.
Click to expand...

Barring working in the arena that generates the spreadsheet numbers and taking a holistic view from his early life experience?

Lads done good and certainly sees things from a different perspective backed up with experience........... he`s certainly "on a spectrum" with his language and presentation style.
 
Essexyellows said:
Barring working in the arena that generates the spreadsheet numbers and taking a holistic view from his early life experience?

Lads done good and certainly sees things from a different perspective backed up with experience........... he`s certainly "on a spectrum" with his language and presentation style.
Click to expand...
His experience being gambling on the stock market, you'll have to send me some material where actually has a debate with someone and doesn't come across as the least intelligent in the room.
 
Essexyellows said:
www.bbc.co.uk

Key takeaways: What are the proposed asylum system reforms?

What we know so far about Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood's proposed reforms.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk

"Under the changes, volunteers and community groups will be able to sponsor individual refugees, echoing the "Homes for Ukraine" scheme where Britons hosted Ukrainians fleeing war."

Its the opportunity @QR @Sheik Djibouti @Scotchegg and the rest have been waiting for!!

:) :)
Click to expand...
Don't forget @lodeyellow and @Blewbury Yellow !

I am certain they will all be signing up 🤣
 
Demonising asylum seekers is not a particularly smart course of action. To use the term "illegal immigrants" is a morally and politically corrupt mechanism for describing those who flee intolerable circumstances, isn't it Interesting that when the Vietnamese boat people arrived in the UK they were welcomed with open arms. The same could be said of both Syrian and Ukrainian refugees. And yet, here we have people from countries so far from the UK that we managedto rationalise their behaviour as some kind of parasitic act. How humane of us. Might it be the case that confronting the reality of global in humanity and suffering, is far harder than scapegoating the victims. Could it possibly be the case, that politicians exploit the fear that such a dilemma creates for their own gain? think Brexit. And for those who cry "but they are bleeding out already limited resources and our own indigenous people are being deprived of their birthrights" please, do your homework.
The fact that successive governments have failed to have a joined up intelligent approach to dealing with the ddisenfranchised people who come to our country, is a woeful and shameful reality. I speak as someone who has worked with asylum seekers,and whilst there may be those who seek to capitalise upon generosity, take a look at where these people come from and look at the context of their leaving their countries of origin.
I cannot abide political rhetoric or those who are unprepared to conveniently ignore the reality of suffering. Yes, allow intelligent temporary stay, and also consider those who are in positions where their return. Would be regarded as simply dangerous. But for goodness sake join the dots and stop playing stupid political games.
 
gofish2 said:
Demonising asylum seekers is not a particularly smart course of action. To use the term "illegal immigrants" is a morally and politically corrupt mechanism for describing those who flee intolerable circumstances, isn't it Interesting that when the Vietnamese boat people arrived in the UK they were welcomed with open arms. The same could be said of both Syrian and Ukrainian refugees. And yet, here we have people from countries so far from the UK that we managedto rationalise their behaviour as some kind of parasitic act. How humane of us. Might it be the case that confronting the reality of global in humanity and suffering, is far harder than scapegoating the victims. Could it possibly be the case, that politicians exploit the fear that such a dilemma creates for their own gain? think Brexit. And for those who cry "but they are bleeding out already limited resources and our own indigenous people are being deprived of their birthrights" please, do your homework.
The fact that successive governments have failed to have a joined up intelligent approach to dealing with the ddisenfranchised people who come to our country, is a woeful and shameful reality. I speak as someone who has worked with asylum seekers,and whilst there may be those who seek to capitalise upon generosity, take a look at where these people come from and look at the context of their leaving their countries of origin.
I cannot abide political rhetoric or those who are unprepared to conveniently ignore the reality of suffering. Yes, allow intelligent temporary stay, and also consider those who are in positions where their return. Would be regarded as simply dangerous. But for goodness sake join the dots and stop playing stupid political games.
Click to expand...
Describing immigrants who arrive here illegally as illegal immigrants.

Crazy stuff indeed.
 
Londox said:
Describing immigrants who arrive here illegally as illegal immigrants.

Crazy stuff indeed.
Click to expand...
Because it is intentionally divisive to use the term illegal immigrants to include asylum seekers. It's like calling you a trespasser if you jump out of the window of your burning house into the neighbour's garden. Strictly you are tresspassing, but it would be thoroughly unreasonable to call you on it.
 
chuckbert said:
Because it is intentionally divisive to use the term illegal immigrants to include asylum seekers. It's like calling you a trespasser if you jump out of the window of your burning house into the neighbour's garden. Strictly you are tresspassing, but it would be thoroughly unreasonable to call you on it.
Click to expand...
What if he climbs out the window of his burning house (leaving his family to burn), then walks past his neighbour's house and up a few streets to the nearest £1m property, climbs through their window, steals a tenner on the side and assaults the owner's daughter.

Is he a trespasser then??
 
Basham Wonderland said:
What if he climbs out the window of his burning house (leaving his family to burn), then walks past his neighbour's house and up a few streets to the nearest £1m property, climbs through their window, steals a tenner on the side and assaults the owner's daughter.

Is he a trespasser then??
Click to expand...
No, an aggravated burglar. It’s not that difficult.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom