youreavinalaff

You don't eat as the same places I do. You get what you pay for, I guess.

Maybe the majority of people who have no idea how the economy works. Anyone with even a fundamental knowledge of how it works will not vote Reform.

It's not racist. I've not mentioned anything about race.

Your humour bypass appears to have been successful.

There isn't a "Nationality Test". There is a life in UK test, needed for ILR since 2007. There are also English language tests, the subject of this thread. I agree with your suggestion with regards to British born taking the language test. It would be fun. 😅😅 The Life in UK test us already infamous for British nationals not knowing many of the answers.

If they did, those on settlement visas would be among the best speakers in UK, including born and bred citizens. 🤣🤣🤣

You don't need to speak passable Thai to get a work permit. The article is about working in UK .

No. 5th December was his birthday.

The conversations I'm having here are about legal immigration. Illegal immigrants don't get jobs as doctors. They work under the radar mostly doing jobs no one else wants to do. You said overseas doctors are being employed ahead of British trained doctors. Now you say they are not recruiting. Contradiction. Legal migration is anything but a burden. Visa fees are through the roof, currently £3500+ for FLR and £3000+ for ILR. Hardly a burden. Like I said in my first comment. People need to understand the differences in immigration status.

Not only a few. Quite a lot. Still not as bad as 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s but it's there and, due to so much misinformation on social media, it's growing.

I agree. Measures are being taken. Students can no longer bring family. I believe Teir2 visa holders too. I think Reform's policies can be used but need to be watered down. I don't believe it's right to cancel ILR, particularly for those that already have it. It would be simpler to have a timescale as to if and when those on ILR can claim benefits. That in itself is possibly controversial and is likely to have it's opponents. I'm sure some will suggest it's unfair and/or discriminatory. Something like " ILR holders have been in UK for at least 5.5 years. If they've been working they should be entitled to claim benefits. What about the British citizens who have never worked in their life but can claim?". Others will simply say "no benefits unless British citizen". Another can of worms there too as the next question is define "British Citizen". I've seen posts on social media ranging from "Born in UK and White" to "Anyone with a British Passport". There are so many difficult situations here. What's the answer? I think the government need to treat issues more on an individual basis. It's not fair for those that work hard, have family, have never been in trouble, never have and never intend to claim benefits, to need to worry everytime a visa application is due. Should, as an example, someone who is working and living in UK, paying tax and NI, and has been married to a British citizen for 25 years have an easier route to citizenship than someone whose single, been in UK 5.5 years and has just received ILR? Oh, and overhaul the Life in UK test. I'm all for integration and immigrants needing to understand British culture but do they really need to know about Oliver Cromwell, Guy Fawkes and the number of jurors in a Scottish court? (As examples). 😁😁

Cheap labour cannot occur with legal migration. There are salary requirements within the application process. Job vacancies in UK currently out number the unemployed. NHS are screaming for staff at all levels. I can't say I've ever seen a company that only employes their own race, orher than historical "whites only" places. Historically, immigrants have stuck together. Basically because they had to through fear. Cities were segregated in the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s because ethnic minorities stuck with their own backgrounds for safety. Look at areas of London as examples. Streatham, Brixton, Golders Green. The minorities didn't segregate themselves by choice. That appears to have continued.

That isn't what you said.

Immigration to UK is mostly legal. They are net contributors to the UK economy, not burdens. Legal immigrants come in 3 categories. Workers, Students and family members. All of those categories have to pay the IHS surcharge to use NHS. That's currently £1025 a year. Those that come to work need a sponsor (employer), offering a job and accommodation. Not a burden on housing as the properties they live in are empty when they arrive. No evictions no one else wishing to live there. Employers also tend to house employees in properties similar to HMOs, 4 or 5 to a property. They will be paying NI and tax on top of the IHS supplement. Those that come as family members need a sponsor with an address. If they decide to work too, they will pay NI and Tax on top of the IHS payment. Bearing in mind, many of those in the above groups work in Healthcare and Social Care, they are much more an asset to NHS rather than a burden. Students need an invitation from an education establishment, with accommodation. Increase in crime? Do you really think legal migrants are committing crimes? My point? People need to understand the difference between illegal migrants, asylum seekers and legal migrants.

What you really mean is Celt, Norman, Viking, Roman and Anglo-Saxon.

Things don't add up here. You say the 2025 version of the bike is now 350 000b. That's obviously a higher price that he paid. Bank interest rates in Thailand are generally around 5%. The bike is now, in your estimation, worth 150 000. Likely around 2 years old or older. The loan is as old as the bike so let's say 2 years. By my calculations the original loan plus 2 years interest is in the region of the current amount owed. That means he's not paid any installments on the loan in over 2 years. Six months is generally the most a loan would be allowed to be defaulted on. There could be more to this loan than meets the eye.

I've not said it doesn't happen. I just pointed a comment was a generalisation.

I know so. You don't know the outcome of every loan in Thailand so you can't claim your opinion to be true. I know loans that have not been considered a gift, so can prove your opinion to be a generalisation. It's that simple.

No. It's a generalisation.

That's a bit of a generalisation.

Me neither. Oh well. Never mind. 😅😅😅

Only to those without an ability to think.

It would depend where he got the loan from. It doesn't sound like he got it from a reputable place, with the now difference between money owed and value of the bike.

Just think, we could have a President instead. Just like USA. 🤣🤣🤣

No. Just pointing something out.