Hope you were appalled about the rise in racist hate crime since the Brexit vote.
On the other hand maybe you weren't.
It's who you want to believe I guess.
Not sure you can really use that argument given the reporting and statistical records have only been kept since April 2012!
“According to the telegraph the previous Home Office figures reported that race and faith-based hate crimes had decreased by 0.4 per cent in 2011/12, before climbing by seven per cent the following year, 16 per cent in 2014 and 17 per cent in 2015 (PRE BREXIT) — making the latest 22 per cent figure an unprecedented annual rise.”
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-brexit-vote-new-figures-reveal-a7829551.html
So a far steadier growth before Brexit and a seven percent rise starting in 2013 before being rising far more in the continued years prior to Brexit. Thus therefore eclipsing the affect that Brexit which seems to be in align with population growth anyways shows that it isn’t really to blame at all and only in correlation of what has preceded before the referendum.
Please denote that these don’t include the incidents of acid attacks committed more recently or Muslim child rape gangs on the whole as these are not apparently deemed race hate despite targeting the white only population. On a side issue Benjamin, you have to be one of my favourites on here. How could someone be so blindingly socialist but so politically unaware/naïve, your inane headline ramblings provide little substance.
With the most recent example now being links to the London Mayor’s cabinet and “Asian” professionals as well as the Guardian. Both articles seemingly based on the economical distortion of the truth, I draw your attention to the wording “Fiscal” in regards to immigration and net impact, denote the telegraph doesn’t actually refer to it unlike your other sources. Fiscal measurement is a known part of Generational Accounting and is relatively non-standard and by that I mean every country adds and omits certain costs from the “fiscal” calculations just like a series of company accounts. For example In the UK we do not account for immigrants claiming housing benefit whereas Australia do. The net fiscal impact of immigration is typically estimated as the difference between the taxes migrants make to public finances and the costs of the public benefits and services they receive.
In fiscal measurement there are usually three types of categories with many of the immigrants coming into the “Working Age” category because of this they have a net negative affect per capita on public expenditure. Now you maybe interested to know but the office of the OECD recently recorded the UK amongst Spain and Portugal having a negative view on immigration and the effects upon fiscal economy when compared to the average of Europe. Because of this “Working Age” it really in the short term should provide a benefit to the country however it doesn’t appear that way given GDP suffers by a 1% and from that we can look at the budgetary department for government and what they had to say to the OECD
For many years as immigration levels excelled, the Labour government claimed that immigration added £6 billion a year to GDP. However, the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee reporting in April 2008, said that what mattered was GDP per head. They concluded that: “We have found no evidence for the argument, made by the government, business and many others, that net immigration generates significant economic benefits for the existing UK population.”
AND THEN………..
In their annual Fiscal Sustainability Report, the Office for Budgetary Responsibility concluded in August 2013: “In our attempt to summarise the vast literature on the impact of immigration on the labour market and productivity we have not found any definitive evidence on the impact of immigrants on productivity and GDP”.
As I stated a few pages back in regards to immigration figures it was 13,000 was it in 1991? Compared to 360k immigrants (2016) you’d expect us to have further growth in GDP (Forgiving the global crisis & Labour tenure etc) so if they come in at working age they are only calculated against their expectancy on the economy as opposed to true cost as no data is really available to measure them after “Working Age” yet. Fiscal Measurement upon immigration includes fertility rates (We know they breed more), national debt levels vs. expectancy of debt repayment per capita, i.e the more immigrants (Head Count) the less debt over time.
So because of all this Benajmin we are being proactive in wanting a complete seizure and stop on immigration with the replacing only of the skills (Emigration) we’ve lost under a labour government (Conservatives have stemmed it refer to my earlier Brexit posts). The long term affects over the disastrous EU and Labour policies will soon come to light and it will be the next generations again left to pick up the tab.
