rayralph:


How much are you paying currently ?

£90 per month

The way things looks I don’t think I will be voting come 4th July

missjekyll:


Japan just released 3 immigration friendly visas. Did you know that? They ve accepted that to remain on the cutting edge,you need to let in the world.

I wouldn't advise it for any chocolate skinned person though.
I hear the racism is madt.

Japan in trouble

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LklSTNozWuE

AgentXxx:
So many suprises and I would wonder what the future of the Briton Next Generation is (Because he has many friends who are unemployed and would prefer the Universal credit and the twice a week Music Gig they get)😒

I enrolled him in a course that would let him use the Saas platforms we use in the organisation, My guy was asking me “does he have to do it?” 😂

Salaam brother.
What SAAS platform is that, please?
I am seriously considering learning some SAAS administration.
On my radar are:
Salesforce
Hubspot
Ms-Dynamics

Which is the one you speak of? Plus which one can you recommend?

missjekyll:


According to the Young Turks,he's been a disaster as Governor. What's up with the panera bread thing?

In terms of messaging he is the best option, he has the personality, stage presence, young and intelligent.

He doesn’t not need to be a good governor to beat Trump because Trump has no record to run on.

Trump will not debate him, he will factcheck Trump live and he speaks facts.


Biden may still win even with the disappointing debate issue.

Zahra29:


Yes I did call it that. This is the first time a work visa route had been abused on this scale and they completely underestimated the desperation of people to migrate from Africa and South Asia, and also the level of exploitation of the so called care agencies.
I fail to see what the government stood to gain from allowing tens of thousands of people to gain illegal entry (because although the visa was legal on paper, the underlying sponsorship was fraudulent) to the country, and then have no employment and no taxes to pay. And if the government approved of the CoS racketeering, then why have they spent the last few months investigating and revoking sponsorship licenses?

The MAC report stated that the economic benefit from certain sectors was negative when compared to the pressure on public services and that realistically the benefit lay in filling those roles that people do not want to do.

That it's the first time they're having such a high number doesn't mean they can't track the daily, weekly, or monthly accumulation of issued visas if they want to. Even private orgs that have less capacity achieve that effortlessly. So please don't make it look like it's rocket science. The desperation of those accidental immigration agents running visa application racketeering in Asia and Africa has been making the headlines since 2021/2022, yet government did little to nothing to stop the abuse until recently. You might fail to see what government stood to gain from that, but in my own estimation, the govt wanted cheap labour for one of its most critical sectors and made that route as relaxed as possible. Again whether that panned out as envisaged or desired is another conversation entirely.

Lastly, of course it'll be difficult to see the economic benefits of that route or compare it monetary-wise to other skilled worker routes because it pays within the minimum wage bracket. But when you juxtapose it with how much it would have cost the public to properly staff the sector with well paid workforce, say £25 per hour and above, it'll begin to make sense why its highly beneficial to the economy and why govt explored it in the first place. And I won't be surprised to see them reintroduce care dependent visas in the future because it's always convenient to bash immigration at every election cycle but when reality begins to dawn on them govt after govt have resorted to the same immigration as saving grace to rescue different critical sectors, from education to health. Na today?😀

https://www.ilfordrecorder.co.uk/news/24413347.ilford-benefit-fraudsters-claimed-700k-three-years/
Things Dey happen

LionInZion:


That it's the first time they're having such a high number doesn't mean they can't track the daily, weekly, or monthly accumulation of issued visas if they want to. Even private orgs that have less capacity achieve that effortlessly. So please don't make it look like it's rocket science. The desperation of those accidental immigration agents running visa application racketeering in Asia and Africa has been making the headlines since 2021/2022, yet government did little to nothing to stop the abuse until recently. You might fail to see what government stood to gain from that, but in my own estimation, the govt wanted cheap labour for one of its most critical sectors and made that route as relaxed as possible. Again whether that panned out as envisaged or desired is another conversation entirely.

Lastly, of course it'll be difficult to see the economic benefits of that route or compare it monetary-wise to other skilled worker routes because it pays within the minimum wage bracket. But when you juxtapose it with how much it would have cost the public to properly staff the sector with well paid workforce, say £25 per hour and above, it'll begin to make sense why its highly beneficial to the economy and why govt explored it in the first place. And I won't be surprised to see them reintroduce care dependent visas in the future because it's always convenient to bash immigration at every election cycle but when reality begins to dawn on them govt after govt have resorted to the same immigration as saving grace to rescue different critical sectors, from education to health. Na today?😀

The government relaxed the care route, mainly by reducing the income threshold and removing IHS costs, to make it easier for genuine immigrants seeking to work in care. They did not send a memo to all practising and aspiring fraudsters that it was perfectly acceptable to sell thousands of bogus CoS that did not have valid employment attached so that loads of immigrants would come in and have no jobs to do and end up relying on public services like the council and food banks to survive, many becoming illegal immigrants in the process. How does it benefit the government if those given care visas don't have care jobs

The government opened up a generous route which would likely still be open in its original form if it hadn't been so flagrantly abused - it was an own goal by immigrants which has led to tighter restrictions and negative opinion.

The dependants ban will not be reversed any time soon simply because the demand from immigrants for care visas (both within and outside the UK) far exceeds the available care sponsorships (especially with the new checks and CQC regulations). There are enough single immigrants to fill available roles as well as immigrants who do not mind leaving their families for a time to pursue work opportunities abroad. For example in countries like Israel, Lebanon, Qatar and others , it is common practice for immigrants to relocate for work without their families. Many of these countries don't even have a route to settlement or human rights and yet they still attract migrants looking for certain types of work. The UK will be fine.

Zahra29:

Israel, Lebanon, Qatar and others , it is common practice for immigrants to relocate for work without their families. Many of these countries don't even have a route to settlement or human rights and yet they still attract migrants looking for certain types of work. The UK will be fine.

Is this the company we should be keeping? Children need their parents. I do not support the ban on dependents.

missjekyll:


Is this the company we should be keeping? Children need their parents. I do not support the ban on dependents.

The point is that many people choose to relocate without their family members, whether to the above mentioned countries or to the UK.

lavida001:

Japan in trouble

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LklSTNozWuE

Interesting. Racking up endless debt to prop up the economy was likely to result in conundrums especially if not backed by fundamentals. I'm not holding my breath though, Japan had a way of edging through certain issues in the past hence being the pioneers of 'unconventional economics'. This seems dire.

What's aso interesting is the rapid rise of China's automobile industry. So quick that the U.S and EU had to quickly introduce tarrifs to slow them. Even in the UK, the MG brand has quickly cornered most of the EV market and I gather their cars are quite good.

Zahra29:


The point is that many people choose to relocate without their family members, whether to the above mentioned countries or to the UK.

Choice. But that has been taken away now. Parents are forced away from their families. It's either leave them or starve.
What kind of choice is that?

Thinking about expat issue, I remember a while back one of the drivers at a site I work detailing what his relatives who are expats in a Spain were upto. Chap kept emphasising the expat word until I asked: 'by expat, do you mean immigrant'? Long talk ensued.

Not long ago, I stumbled upon this thread on reddit https://www.reddit.com/r/AskUK/s/v2xLYbqYMi ) and it became clear that 'an expat' is the packaged name for migrants from few select nations. Should be an interesting chat with the next 'expat' I meet

Another is the cliché common in certain nations- 'we need high skilled immigrants not Bleep'.
The entitlement with which its said leaves me wondering. Like immigrants are groceries on a shelf to select and pick from as need be. Who then retains the 'bad fruit'? Odd thing is that many nations brand themselves this way which manytimes flies in the face of what the do.

An economy needs the skills it lacks - be it in care, teaching, nursing, IT, masonry, drivers e.t.c
I dont know of any nation that can easily absorb 1000 brain surgeons or astronauts.

P.S. this is not saying a nation should not target the skill they need but blaming poor economic outcomes on the 'quality' of immigrants they take reeks of an absurd entitlement and classism.

missjekyll:


Choice. But that has been taken away now. Parents are forced away from their families. It's either leave them or starve.
What kind of choice is that?

Starve? That doesn't make sense. The fact is that there are only 2 occupation codes out of over 400 that have the dependant ban - less than 1%.

There is a free choice to apply to any of the 99% of occupations that do allow dependants. The government has been fair in not applying the ban retrospectively so that families already on a route are not forced apart.

However for families who are not already on a route, they should be fully aware of the rules and restrictions and the 2 occupation codes that have the dependant ban, and it's completely up to them where they choose to apply. The government has not turned up at anyone's door to march them into a care job.

mayowa94:
£90 per month

I doubt you can get it cheaper than what you’re offered.

I’ll suggest you take it.

Insurance rates are crazy right now.

missjekyll:


Choice. But that has been taken away now. Parents are forced away from their families. It's either leave them or starve.
What kind of choice is that?

Honestly, I wonder what the UK will look like, if persons having this sort of thinking are allowed to run the country.

A 47 year old Mr’s A gets a CoS of sponsorship to be a Care worker in the UK (£22,000 pa max).
Mrs A has 5 children and 1 husband. The oldest child in SS1, the youngest in primary 2. Mrs A travels to the UK to work (as Care worker on a 22k salary). Mrs A does not pay IHS. Even Mrs A’s visa application fee is massively discounted.

The family of 7 arrives the UK. Mrs A is the only one working (on a 22k pa salary). Although the husband can work, he can’t, because of child care. All 5 children are enrolled in free school. All 6 dependants can access the NHS and other public services.

Any country that doesn’t see what the problem is, and curtail this is bound to fail.

Portraying this as some sort of ‘parents are forced away from their families’ is absolute bunkum!

ReesheesuKnack:


Honestly, I wonder what the UK will look like, if persons having this sort of thinking are allowed to run the country.

A 47 year old Mr’s A gets a CoS of sponsorship to be a Care worker in the UK (£22,000 pa max).
Mrs A has 5 children and 1 husband. The oldest child in SS1, the youngest in primary 2. Mrs A travels to the UK to work (as Care worker on a 22k salary). Mrs A does not pay IHS. Even Mrs A’s visa application fee is massively discounted.

The family of 7 arrives the UK. Mrs A is the only one working (on a 22k pa salary). Although the husband can work, he can’t, because of child care. All 5 children are enrolled in free school. All 6 dependants can access the NHS and other public services.

Any country that doesn’t see what the problem is, and curtail this is bound to fail.

Portraying this as some sort of ‘parents are forced away from their families’ is absolute bunkum!

💯

The issue is that, understandably, people tend to view situations through a narrow or sentimental lens.

A PP commented that immigrants are not groceries to be selected from. Presumably they expect that desirable countries should just let in everyone who declares an interest, afterall this is payback for colonialism you know.

However they conveniently forget that immigrants themselves pick and choose which countries they go to. Most Nigerians, for example, say "God forbid" to other African countries (is that one Japa?), they turn up their noses at certain European and non western countries. Many say how they really wanted Canada or the US but "settled" for the UK lol...but the UK is not allowed to choose who they want? Ok.

ReesheesuKnack:


Honestly, I wonder what the UK will look like, if persons having this sort of thinking are allowed to run the country.

A 47 year old Mr’s A gets a CoS of sponsorship to be a Care worker in the UK (£22,000 pa max).
Mrs A has 5 children and 1 husband. The oldest child in SS1, the youngest in primary 2. Mrs A travels to the UK to work (as Care worker on a 22k salary). Mrs A does not pay IHS. Even Mrs A’s visa application fee is massively discounted.

The family of 7 arrives the UK. Mrs A is the only one working (on a 22k pa salary). Although the husband can work, he can’t, because of child care. All 5 children are enrolled in free school. All 6 dependants can access the NHS and other public services.

Any country that doesn’t see what the problem is, and curtail this is bound to fail.

Portraying this as some sort of ‘parents are forced away from their families’ is absolute bunkum!

Just to add that Mrs A's 6 dependants also do not pay IHS.

jedisco:
Another is the cliché common in certain nations- 'we need high skilled immigrants not Bleep'.
The entitlement with which its said leaves me wondering. Like immigrants are groceries on a shelf to select and pick from as need be. Who then retains the 'bad fruit'? Odd thing is that many nations brand themselves this way which manytimes flies in the face of what the do.

An economy needs the skills it lacks - be it in care, teaching, nursing, IT, masonry, drivers e.t.c
I dont know of any nation that can easily absorb 1000 brain surgeons or astronauts.

P.S. this is not saying a nation should not target the skill they need but blaming poor economic outcomes on the 'quality' of immigrants they take reeks of an absurd entitlement and classism.

In a way the highly skilled worker they meant are our politicians that brings stolen funds into their economy to buy mansions and pay for their kids tuition from crèche to university.

justwise:
[/b]

If you watched the whole programme to the end you see where younger members like Rob Bates, Dan Jukes etc made some strong homophobia comment when they spotted a police car with pride sign on it.

If Reform pick up some seats after this election you will see that many young people will start looking around Reform political party.

Homophobia and racism are two different issues, they are not mutually exclusive. Needless to say, a racist might not be homophobic.

ehizario2012:


Homophobia and racism are two different issues, they are not mutually exclusive. Needless to say, a racist might not be homophobic.

Yes Homophobia and racism are two different issues but in the same program we have seen these two issues in one political party, so what does that tell you?

Zahra29:


Just to add that Mrs A's 6 dependants also do not pay IHS.

Again my question to you is this… how did Mr A and all 6 dependants get a visa to come in? Who created this visa category?

Please don’t tell me that this government was unaware of the number of visas issued until it was published by certain agency.

lavida001:


In a way the highly skilled worker they meant are our politicians that brings stolen funds into their economy to buy mansions and pay for their kids tuition from crèche to university.

Hehe. They'd still moan when foreign based folks buy houses for themselves or kids in the UK. It appears the aim is to have a constant stream of migrants arrive at Heathrow, turn over £50k to the UK government and return home. Even with that, they'd still complain about overcrowding the airport. They should borrow a leaf from Japan and own their problems.


A question I often encounter is - are you thinking of going back? It's easy to guage where this is coming from. My response is usually in the line of: 'I'm considering options outside the UK where pay and work-life balance is better. However if I leave, as a Brit, UK would be a potential option for retirement as an increasing number of relatives are coming over'. You need to see how red face dey get. Like say I be cheating spouse ‐ folks dont want you to come, folks don't want you to go.

I once asked one when all the British migrants who went to Australia, U.S and S.A to displace native populations are returning home. UK needs their skill afterall.

justwise:


Again my question to you is this… how did Mr A and all 6 dependants get a visa to come in? Who created this visa category?

Please don’t tell me that this government was unaware of the number of visas issued until it was published by certain agency.

Justwise, that is the point Zahra29 has been making for ages.
Govt created a policy, post COVID. There were problems with the implementation of the policy. Plus, the route was massively abused by our people. Govt decided to NOT ENTIRELY scrap the policy, but to tighten loose ends and block loopholes. That is the common sense thing to do.

What is baffling is how some people portray the plugging of these loopholes to mean the Govt is ‘forcing parents away from their children’ what absolute tosh!

ReesheesuKnack:



A 47 year old Mr’s A gets a CoS of sponsorship to be a Care worker in the UK (£22,000 pa max).
Mrs A has 5 children and 1 husband. The oldest child in SS1, the youngest in primary 2. Mrs A travels to the UK to work (as Care worker on a 22k salary). Mrs A does not pay IHS. Even Mrs A’s visa application fee is massively discounted.

I wonder why you stopped at 5 kids. Why not 10, 15 or 20 since we're driving dubious narratives. After all, Nigel the other day insinuated students come with their parents, grandparents, children and even cousins as 'dependents'

You should start by looking at how many student or care visas were issued and how many dependent visas were also issued. Work out the average and take things from there.

jedisco:


Hehe. They'd still moan when foreign based folks buy houses for themselves or kids in the UK. It appears the aim is to have a constant stream of migrants arrive at Heathrow, turn over £50k to the UK government and return home. Even with that, they'd still complain about overcrowding the airport. They should borrow a leaf from Japan and own their problems.

I don't think that's it at all.

There are just different groups of people in the UK.

There's a decent size group of people who would just prefer net zero migration and for the UK to be like Japan.

And there's a decent size group of people who don't mind or they're business owners looking for talent and workers or they're the chancellor trying to fix growth numbers.

Neither group is inherently right but it leads to an incoherent set of policies.

IridescentAge:


I don't think that's it at all.

There are just different groups of people in the UK.

There's a decent size group of people who would just prefer net zero migration and for the UK to be like Japan.

And there's a decent size group of people who don't mind or they're business owners looking for talent and workers or they're the chancellor trying to fix growth numbers.

Neither group is inherently right but it leads to an incoherent set of policies.

I agree with you. There's lots of incoherence in their legal migration policy which gives room for certain folks to case aspersions against anyone who is brown or black. For decades, every PM has let in more migrants than the last despite promising to cut migration and far exceeded thrir own migration target. It's very clear than those in power and their economic advisors know the facts but they have been timid in relaying this to the public.

Two questions the general populace are still grappling with are:
1. Does the UK need immigrants. Keyword: need
2. If yes to Q.1, what number of immigrants does the UK need yearly and how should this number be aloocated to different sectors.

The US and Canada have gone past the first question and now dealing with the second. The US has a fixed number of certain work visas they issue - employers have to jostle for this. Canada has already outlined how many PRs it'd take in for the next few years. They're now looking to finetune entrants via other pathways. The UK populace OTOH is still stuck on the first.

Zahra29:


The government relaxed the care route, mainly by reducing the income threshold and removing IHS costs, to make it easier for genuine immigrants seeking to work in care. They did not send a memo to all practising and aspiring fraudsters that it was perfectly acceptable to sell thousands of bogus CoS that did not have valid employment attached so that loads of immigrants would come in and have no jobs to do and end up relying on public services like the council and food banks to survive, many becoming illegal immigrants in the process. How does it benefit the government if those given care visas don't have care jobs

The government opened up a generous route which would likely still be open in its original form if it hadn't been so flagrantly abused - it was an own goal by immigrants which has led to tighter restrictions and negative opinion.

The dependants ban will not be reversed any time soon simply because the demand from immigrants for care visas (both within and outside the UK) far exceeds the available care sponsorships (especially with the new checks and CQC regulations). There are enough single immigrants to fill available roles as well as immigrants who do not mind leaving their families for a time to pursue work opportunities abroad. For example in countries like Israel, Lebanon, Qatar and others , it is common practice for immigrants to relocate for work without their families. Many of these countries don't even have a route to settlement or human rights and yet they still attract migrants looking for certain types of work. The UK will be fine.

I think you're deviating from the issue I raised earlier. Nobody said govt invited those dubious individuals to abuse the route. And for the record, I have no problem with the govt sanitising the immigration system in whatever way they deem fit, including banning dependents. What I'm against is how they moan on something they saw coming and had the power to curb much earlier but waited until it got festered. To me that's playing on people's intelligence.

The point is that visa route got abused for that long not because govt was naive or clueless. They allowed it to fester and shouldn't be absolved from the blame or blame less as you're subtly attempting to do. I'll resist the urge to go into the argument on whether that route was based on generosity or not, because that's another subjective point that can be open to multiple interpretations.

Lastly, you can never be sure on the possibility of care dependent visa being reintroduced in the future (though i don't know your timeframe of "anytime soon).

Maybe you could have sworn a few years back that 2 year post study visa wouldn't make a comeback, giving how Theresa May's govt went about it then. But guess what not only was it brought back when reality hit, a whole policy was created on using it to target certain countries, including Nigeria and other countries many folks like to directly or indirectly refer to as those with low value.

ReesheesuKnack:




Justwise, that is the point Zahra29 has been making for ages.
Govt created a policy, post COVID. There were problems with the implementation of the policy. Plus, the route was massively abused by our people. Govt decided to NOT ENTIRELY scrap the policy, but to tighten loose ends and block loopholes. That is the common sense thing to do.

What is baffling is how some people portray the plugging of these loopholes to mean the Govt is ‘forcing parents away from their children’ what absolute tosh!

Thank you.

Some criticise the government for being too relaxed and blame them for the visa abuse and CoS racketeering. Fine, let's agree that it's all the government's fault. Then the government takes action to curb the abuse and the same people complain that the government is far right, forcing immigrants into care and separating families, anti immigrant, they shouldn't pick and choose immigrants, they should be more like Germany or is it Japan, and so on.

Whatever it does the government will never win with some who just want to believe that immigrants are being exploited and scape goated.

jedisco:


I wonder why you stopped at 5 kids. Why not 10, 15 or 20 since we're driving dubious narratives. After all, Nigel the other day insinuated students come with their parents, grandparents, children and even cousins as 'dependents'

You should start by looking at how many student or care visas were issued and how many dependent visas were also issued. Work out the average and take things from there.

Hahaha 😆
I thought I was the only one who got lol at that analogy. Maybe that's even possible (I won't rule out the possibility), I wonder why such an outlier should form the representation of the wider group.

On student visa, the record is there for everyone to see that the highest student to dependent ratio was 5:1. Yet this time last year, many folks including those in the media, who should know better, went about it as if student dependents have taken over the whole of the country and were the cause of all infrastructural and economic problems facing the country. Then it's all about narrative and agenda.

LionInZion:


I think you're deviating from the issue I raised earlier. Nobody said govt invited those dubious individuals to abuse the route. And for the record, I have no problem with the govt sanitising the immigration system in whatever way they deem fit, including banning dependents. What I'm against is how they moan on something they saw coming and had the power to curb much earlier but waited until it got festered. To me that's playing on people's intelligence.

The point is that visa route got abused for that long not because govt was naive or clueless. They allowed it to fester and shouldn't be absolved from the blame or blame less as you're subtly attempting to do. I'll resist the urge to go into the argument on whether that route was based on generosity or not, because that's another subjective point that can be open to multiple interpretations.

Lastly, you can never be sure on the possibility of care dependent visa being reintroduced in the future (though i don't know your timeframe of "anytime soon).

Maybe you could have sworn a few years back that 2 year post study visa wouldn't make a comeback, giving how Theresa May's govt went about it then. But guess what not only was it brought back when reality hit, a whole policy was created on using it to target certain countries, including Nigeria and other countries many folks like to directly or indirectly refer to as those with low value.

We can agree to disagree on the bolded. I don't believe the government foresaw or had intelligence warnings about an impending large-scale abuse of the route and decided to go ahead regardless. What would be the benefit to them, as the immigration issue has cost them dearly in the polls. A Lessons Learned exercise exists in every programme for a reason - no organisation knows or gets everything right from the onset.

The route was "generous" in that it was relaxed with very low barriers of entry compared with any other work visa route.

The postgraduate visa made a comeback but is no longer in its original form due to tighter restrictions from lessons learned. In the same way, even if care dependants are reinstated in the near future, I doubt it will be in the original form because the evidence has shown that it doesn't work.