Modern Britain.

That is a clueless and naive statement. Are you incapable of distinguishing between the benefits of long term 'group migration' - which I do not deny in cidentally- as you call it, whereby numbers of people enter a country legally, with relevant documentation in controlled numbers with either necessary skills and language skills to get work, or the means to suppot themselves whilst they do so, as opposed to 10,000's landing on the shores every week, many with no documentation, no ability to speak the language, and most importantly only the clothes they are wearing, with little or no prospect of obtaining work in a country that has 50% youth unemployment. That is the situation in Southern and Central Italy.
As for the nonsense of averaging out immigrant distribution as many campaigners argue i.e. "oh that is only x per town so that easy to manage" in reality it does not work like that as they tend to be placed in targetted areas often those with already high unemployment or little industry.

You are allowing your common sense to be clouded by your Socialist leanings. Are you seriously saying that the type of mass migration the world is seeing at the present time is no different from freedom of movement envisaged when the EU drew up its rules and is not detrimental to the stability of societal cohesion?

Finally I have NEVER argued against migration per se. In all the posts I have ever made re Brexit etc I have never argued against freedom of movement so long as there is some control and not the free-for-all we have now. Only the rabid Left Wing handful on here misintepret what I have said as their judgement is clouded and they read into other people posts only what they want to.

 

Sad that every discussion about a politics has to be dragged back into the migration gutter.

The establishment has done a great job of deflection since the financial crisis they created. Instead of putting the bankers in the dock people are conned into blaming migrants it was ever thus.

This has nothing to do with employers not paying a proper living wage. For once o agree with Tekkytyke if you employ people and pay them a wage that has to be propped up by the state perhaps you shouldn't employ them.

The bill for pensioners is getting out of control and I see no argument for not means testing them. My father in law gets a 6 figure pension from his private pension and winter fuel allowance and a bus pass. That's daft.

 

Isn't having control over something the opposite of it being free? If the EU decide to exercise 'control' post-Brexit (and they probably will) then I can wave goodbye to any dream I might have had of a bucolic retirement in the hills of Italy.

In general, people migrate for a better life. Whether it's retirement somewhere sunny, a job where the wages are higher, or an escape to somewhere you're not in fear of your life, people want to get on and improve things for themselves. Where you draw the line between these things is completely arbitrary. That's why I have in the past called you out for hypocrisy - your arbitrary line happens to stop somewhere slightly further on than yourself.

I wrote a very long series of paragraphs about my views on immigration, but deleted them because it wasn't really relevant. But I'm essentially a pragmatist. Large numbers of foreign nationals will need to be introduced into European society at some point (I suspect upcoming climate disasters might make your 10,000 a week look insignificant), so we need to start thinking about how best that can be done now, because pulling up the drawbridge is doomed to failure. On society, I will admit that I'm almost certainly less precious than you are about it, and would probably have a markedly different definition. As I see it, society is inherently unstable, changing as it does based on the people that make it up. This has been the case throughout history - the world's most powerful country only rose to that position because of migration. I'm sure plenty of people were put out by that at the time, but they had to move on and accept it. I consider movement of people to fundamentally be a good thing, allowing all of us to experience new things and meet a range of different people. But then I'm talking to somebody lucky enough to have experienced life in a different country. Nice, isn't it?

Incidentally, I probably wouldn't describe myself as a socialist. But then again I've never come across somebody who both uses the 'snowflake' zinger and is capable of a nuanced understanding of political positions beyond 'loony liberal left' and 'common sense right'!

 

I think you are wrong with the above. The EU does not determine member states immigration rules. Individual member states do that. Also, My arbitrary line as you call it is is nowhere near "slightly more" than myself.

We applied for permission to stay here, and had to prove we had an adequate household income to support ourselves. We used life savings to restore a derelict property providing work for local builders suppliers etc and also taxes to the govt (12% on purchase and renovation costs) and pay personal taxes here on private pension, dividends, and NI contributions as well as 22% IVA (VAT) on all purchase. we will also pay tax on the UK state pension when it kicks in. Expats also have to pay taxes on any overseas assets, property, bank balances, investments etc.

Italy is, frankly, glad of the money that ex-pats bring in. The only difference between now and post Brexit is that we would have been, as citizens of an EU member state, entitled to claim benefits etc. something we have never done.

I therefore see no reason why you would wave goodbye to your dream unless you intended to arrive penniless and expect the state to house, clothe and feed you indefinitely. The Govt have said as much many times since the referendum. I repeat it is NOT the EU parliament or commission that determines member states rules for non-EU migrants. Many people for outside the EU retire here American, New Zealand, Australians and Italy is unlikely to refuse entry or residency to people who contribute in whatever form to the Italian economy. In any case refusing entry to Brits whilst accepting Americans, Australians etc would probably be seen has discriminatory. All this mass deportation nonsense is juts that - nonsense
Can you REALLY not see the huge gulf between that and 000s of dependant illegal migrants arriving and imposing a huge administrative and financial burden on the state? We migrated for a better life sure, but we had the means to do so. If we could not have afforded it we wouldn't have attempted to do it. Whether you think that is fair or not is your prerogative but, whilst I acknowledge we are very lucky, especially where we were born i.e. into a modern prosperous country, to some extent we also made our own luck through personal choices, damned hard work and making it happen. (There are genuine refugees from war torn countries but there are also many who are economic migrants and lack the skills and education to be able to make a contribution to the country in the short to medium term).

 

My daughter is a single mum and has been trying to get a business off the ground doing finger nails etc. She's finally decided to call it a day and has found herself a job which ties in with my grand daughter's school hours. She just found out today that her benefits have been stopped and will be reassessed when she's been working for a couple of months. In the meantime she'll have to survive on about £500 a month tax credits which is less than she pays in rent. It makes no sense to me, how does that encourage people to get jobs?