buctootim

Paying the EU for access to the single market, continued immigration and no vote in what the EU does. Still at least we will be free and not all like Norway. no sir.

I posted up some facts. You tried to disprove them because you didnt like what they showed. You were proved wrong on every single example. Instead of having the guts to apologise you try to dissemble and create fog by banging on about why I didnt quote 1991 and 2001. I quoted 1901, 1961 ands 2011 to show a clear trend- as evidenced by the ONS stating there has been a steady decline since 1961. You're a sad little man.

http://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/bulletins/populationandhouseholdestimatesfortheunitedkingdom/2011-03-21#average-household-size

Still dishonest. The debate is about the UK and you try and use England and Wales figures to make the numbers look smaller. Lame. tbh though it doesnt really matter, you're as dull and disingenuous as Wes. I should have followed Charlie's example and ridiculed your pomposity and ignorance instead of trying to convince you with facts.

Cracks me up. Londoners wannabe ganstas and Southampton lads wannabe cockerknees.

Selective use of figures is your game, not mine. Using the year of the highest death rate in 50 years and presenting it as typical is dishonest. Using household size figures for England and Wales because the UK figures prove you wrong is dishonest. Ignoring a trend established over the past 100 years and projected to continue for the next 25 years by focussing instead on one snapshot is dishonest. To ignore the pent up demand and the fact that it is inability to afford or access housing which has slowed the household size reduction rate is dishonest. In the past four years the excess of births over deaths has averaged 206,000 pa. It would have been higher except for the highest death rate for 50 years in 2015 dragged the average down. Therefore to say as I did that the rate is "around 200,000 pa" is correct, conservative even. To say they are overstated is dishonest.

The Giraffe. Most are amazing pictures. A couple appear to have been altered by use of filters and effects though. If its something you cant see in life I'm not sure they should be in a wildlife photograph competition.

1. The debate is about leaving the EU and what benefits there would be by reducing EU immigration. As stated previously leaving the EU will reduce the number of Brits able to emigrate to the EU, much reducing the much touted and misleading nett 'benefit'. Leaving the EU wont reduce the ability of Brits to emigrate to the rest of the world or for them to come here. 2. Average household size has been reducing for at least 100 years and probably longer. It is measured by the census, everything else is an estimate. In 1901 the average was 4.8 people per household, 1961 it was 3.0 and in 2011 its 2.35. ONS projections dated July 2016 show average household size reducing further to 2.21 by 2039. That means a requirement for a further 1.8 million homes to deal with that effect alone without considering UK origin population growth or immigration. Together they total 5.3 million new homes required by 2039. As I said - EU immigration is a minor part of the housing crisis. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/536702/Household_Projections_-_2014_-_2039.pdf http://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/bulletins/populationandhouseholdestimatesfortheunitedkingdom/2011-03-21#average-household-size

Looks like you can't think, can't read and can't make a cogent case. 1. We are talking about the effects of leaving the EU, and how the promised benefits won't materialise. Those people who currently retire to France and Spain wont be going to the 'new world' instead because - surprise surprise - they have tough immigration criteria - much tougher than 'turn up, stay, come and go as you like' with just a passport. Quick geography lesson - France or Spain are much quicker and cheaper to get home from for family visits compared with Canada and Australia and if they had wanted / were able to go there, guess what? they would have in the first place. 2. The census is the source of household size. " the average household size in the UK was 2.3 people per household, compared to 2.4 in 2001". http://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulati...dom/2011-03-21 Over 10 years, assuming no rounding, thats a requirement for an extra 1.15million homes, or as I said originally, around 110,000 pa. Those snakey pants down liars at the stat office eh? You're an utter utter helmet. Congrats.

Echo that with this link. They are the best source of objective info pertaining to immigration in the country. http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Briefing-Characteristics-and-Outcomes-of-Migrants-in-the-UK-Labour-Market.pdf

Black type not easy enough to understand Johnny? Its hard to know with you and Wes how much is epic thickness and how much is dishonesty. Clearly leaving the EU will impact on the number of Brits able to go and live in the EU but it wont change the number of Brtis able to go and live in the rest of the world. Therefore the nett of one will change but not the other. Not so hard really.

1. The British birth rate exceeds the death rate by around 200,000 pa, meaning 200,000 additional Brits need to be housed each year. At an average size of 2.3 people per household that means a requirement for 87,000 new homes pa 2. The size of the average household declines by around 0.4% every year - creating a need for an additional 110,000 homes 3. Immigration from outside the EU is around 190,000 pa, requiring 82,600 additional homes pa 4. Immigration from the EU is around 180,000 pa but around 70,000 Brtis emigrate to the EU each year, so the nett is around 110,000, requiring around 48,000 additional homes So there is a total need for 327,600 new homes pa of which only 48,000 are down to nett EU immigration. As usual your total ignorance of any facts means you've made a **** of yourself. ps where was your house built - on a brownfield site or virgin fields / woodlands?

If the Fat Pipe Park nerves theory was true - that they are secretly a good team who freeze at home - then they would be great away. They aren't. Truth is less prosaic - they've bought too many players who are good on their day but lack consistency. There was a reason those league 1 teams let them go you know Cook. Doh.

Still missing the point. The housing crisis / shortage is down to many things, and migration from the EU is only fifth on the list. Deal first with the big issues - 1. People are living longer; 2. The average size of households is decreasing - there are fewer people per house than there used to be; 3. The UK birth rate is increasing; 4. Immigration from non EU countries. Fix those four first and you might have an excuse for Brexit.

Don't disagree with most of that. Yes the EU is flawed and inflexible and there is too much flow of labour due to differentials in wages between countries. That said what impacts does it really have? Why is the EU getting most of the blame when most of the immigration is coming from outside the EU? Why are EU migrants being accused of dragging down wages when their average income is higher the UK citizens? Why don't people focus on immigration from Bangladesh and Pakistan which is far more reliant on minimum wage jobs and benefits? There are issues with the EU. However the idea that those issues are so big that the solution is to cut yourself off from the single market and passporting when your two biggest industries are international banking / insurance and car exporting is just bizarre.

When are they going to investigate why their team is crap?

Thats really the crux of it. People blame immigration because they cant afford a decent place to live and so feel poor. Lack of house building and the fact that most existing housing stock is poor quality and too small are root problems. Build four million houses, not 50,000, and everyone could afford a good home at half the price and have massively more disposable income.

"Workers' pay growth prospects dreadful", says Institute for Fiscal Studies. The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) said workers would earn less in real wages in 2021 than they did in 2008. Still it will be worth it, what with getting our freedom back n all. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38090977

Both things have an effect. Osborne was incompetent and his forecasts over optimistic so agreed more realistic forecasts will show a comparative decline. You cant dismiss the Brexit effect though. Regardless of whether you think Brexit is good or bad its undeniable that uncertainty about the future puts people off making long term expensive decisions like investment in companies or buying a house.

Another attempt to mislead / failure to keep up . "half baked agenda led source" was in reference to your previous point about 6-8% of companies. Its a fail for you on this one as well. The source is fine, you have simply not understood that the value of the exports is not the only, or indeed biggest contribution to British GDP. The wages and taxes they pay for c18 million employees fuel consumption and pay for employment of public sector employees.

You mislead with selective use of facts and implication. tbf this is probably because you have swallowed it whole from some half baked agenda led source and haven't questioned it. The 12% claim shows another failure to understand / intention to mislead. Thats is the value of the exports not the total contribution to British GDP by these companies. You have left out their main contribution - employment of two thirds of the UK workforce.

Misleading as ever Wes. 95% of British companies employ fewer than 10 people and most of them are one man bands. The "6-8% of companies that export to the EU" account for the large bulk of employment, GDP and exports.

Almost everybody born in the West since WW2 has grown up on the premise that there will be trend growth in wages. Thats probably not true anymore for the richest countries. You can certainly see why Americans are disaffected - GDP has increased but median wages have not - but the rich have got richer.

Salvaging a draw with a late goal against a team who are 21st in the 4th division is a great result for resurgent Portsmouth. No really.