The elites who made up the EU did not want to give EU members the mandate to elect the leadership of the EU. It is semantics to say that the EU only proposes treaties and it is the up to the individual countries to pass the legislation. The point is that an unelected body, a body appointed by elites who appear to be clueless about the feelings of the citizens of the EU, dictates policy that has to be enforced by member states.
For example, PM Cameron wanted to keep his word about reducing the number of immigrants to 10,000 per year from 333,000 but he was not allowed to because of EU leadership who was unelected. Offices in the EU should be elected by the people just as they are in the United States.
The additional burden on the social services was caused by the increased number of immigrants from 0.9 million 20 years ago to 3.3 million today. The original member states of the EU when Britain first joined were by and large of similar economic wealth to Britain. But then the EU started adding much poorer member states from the former Soviet Union (eg Eastern Europe) and it is these immigrants that lowered the wage rates in Britain (Microeconomics) by competing with Brits for low-skilled jobs and at the same time created an enormous burden on social services which paid for four years for these uneducated immigrants.
The increased NHS costs due to immigration would be about £6 billion. There are 3.3 million immigrants out of a total British population of 64 million and an NHS budget of £115 billion. To say that immigrants added only £160 million to the NHS budget, or a mere 1% increase simply isn't credible. Someone is fudging the numbers.
Readers of HN are in a position to challenge numbers fed to them and since I reported that there is 3.3 million immigrants and that the population of Britain is around 60 million, it should have felt wrong to see that the increase for immigrants, 5% of the population would only be £160 million. The NHS budget is £115 billion so 5% of that would be about £6 billion. Clearly this "facts site" that you are quoting is fudging their numbers and probably shouldn't be trusted for anything.
As mentioned earlier, the people should have been able to decide whether they wanted to remain members of the EU. The Elites clearly didn't want them to decide. Regardless of PM Cameron's reasoning for calling the referendum, he and other elites had the hubris to think that they were right and that they could not possibly lose. It simply shows how out of touch the elites are with the will of the people whom they are supposed to represent.
Similarly the "rise of Trump" and that of Sanders was caused by the hubris of the Republican and Democratic elite who thought they could use dollars and connections to dictate policy instead of realizing that American is supposed to be a democracy.
Representative Eric Canter, the second most powerful person in the House of Representatives lost the primary to a political unknown -- an event which "could never happen." The reason is that he simply did not listen to his constituents who were against immigrants who broke the law to stay in the US. His constituents were against illegal immigration.
One might have thought that the Republicans would have learned from Cantor's loss, but they had the hubris to ignore this clear warning sign that people do not want illegal immigration. Jeb Bush, Rubio, were for illegal immigration.
If Jeb Bush had listened to the voters and campaigned against illegal immigration, if he had spoke up about the export of factory jobs out of the country as Trump did when Carrier air conditions closed an Indiana factory and moved the jobs to Mexico, then he probably would have been the Republican candidate. It was Bush's hubris, that of Rubio, Paul Ryan, and other Republican leadership that they could ignore the voters that created Trump.
Similarly, it was the hubris PM Cameron and the other British Elite that had the led to ignoring the will of the voters even after he had agreed to reduce immigration to 10,000 from 333,000 that to the BrExit situation.
PM Cameron wanted to keep his word about reducing the number of immigrants to 10,000 per year from 333,000 but he was not allowed to because of EU leadership
No, he blamed the EU to hide his own government's failure. EU immigration accounted for only 50% of the 300,000. So his own government allowed 150,000 non-EU immigrants into the country. The EU had nothing to do with that. You may have had a valid point if the total immigration number was 160,000, of which 150,000 from the EU. But not now.
Readers of HN are in a position to challenge numbers fed to them
Thank you, I can, and I will. First of all, the 3.3 million immigrants are not all from the EU. If the numbers for other years are similar, at most 50% of those are from the EU. I suspect the number is even smaller because EU citizens can also more easily move back home.
Secondly, the EU citizens entering the country are mainly migrant workers, that implies that they are on average younger and more able-bodied than the native population. So your argument that the 1.6 million EU migrants are a similar burden on the NHS than the native (elderly) population is a stretch.
Your £6 billion figure comes completely without backing, so I will reject it because of the above.
The people were upset about all immigration independent of whether they were from the EU or not. The BrExit vote was about all immigration, not just that from the EU. The working class hardly cares whether their jobs are taken or wages depressed by EU immigrants or immigrants outside the EU.
You present no data about immigration ages (many parents, grandparents presumably come with their adult children to stay in Britain). In addition, immigrants from poorer countries independent of age may have more health problems and unhealthy behaviors (eg, cigarette smoking) that are more expensive to treat. Thus, without additional data about the health characteristics of the immigrant population, it is reasonable to assume that their health problems are consistent with those non-immigrants if not more expensive because of unhealthy environments and lower quality medical care in poorer countries that the immigrants came from.
Thus it is reasonable to assume 3.3 million immigrants, about 5% of the population consuming 5% of the NHS budget of £6 billion. Even if this were off by a factor of two, it would still be £3 billion, not £160 million.
The £160 million additional increase would suggest that the NHS additional cost for 5% of the population is 0.15% of £115.
The "fact source" you cite seems to have some sort of political axe to grind for a 0.15% increase for 5% of the population is simply not credible.
For example, PM Cameron wanted to keep his word about reducing the number of immigrants to 10,000 per year from 333,000 but he was not allowed to because of EU leadership who was unelected. Offices in the EU should be elected by the people just as they are in the United States.
The additional burden on the social services was caused by the increased number of immigrants from 0.9 million 20 years ago to 3.3 million today. The original member states of the EU when Britain first joined were by and large of similar economic wealth to Britain. But then the EU started adding much poorer member states from the former Soviet Union (eg Eastern Europe) and it is these immigrants that lowered the wage rates in Britain (Microeconomics) by competing with Brits for low-skilled jobs and at the same time created an enormous burden on social services which paid for four years for these uneducated immigrants.
The increased NHS costs due to immigration would be about £6 billion. There are 3.3 million immigrants out of a total British population of 64 million and an NHS budget of £115 billion. To say that immigrants added only £160 million to the NHS budget, or a mere 1% increase simply isn't credible. Someone is fudging the numbers.
Readers of HN are in a position to challenge numbers fed to them and since I reported that there is 3.3 million immigrants and that the population of Britain is around 60 million, it should have felt wrong to see that the increase for immigrants, 5% of the population would only be £160 million. The NHS budget is £115 billion so 5% of that would be about £6 billion. Clearly this "facts site" that you are quoting is fudging their numbers and probably shouldn't be trusted for anything.
As mentioned earlier, the people should have been able to decide whether they wanted to remain members of the EU. The Elites clearly didn't want them to decide. Regardless of PM Cameron's reasoning for calling the referendum, he and other elites had the hubris to think that they were right and that they could not possibly lose. It simply shows how out of touch the elites are with the will of the people whom they are supposed to represent.
Similarly the "rise of Trump" and that of Sanders was caused by the hubris of the Republican and Democratic elite who thought they could use dollars and connections to dictate policy instead of realizing that American is supposed to be a democracy.
Representative Eric Canter, the second most powerful person in the House of Representatives lost the primary to a political unknown -- an event which "could never happen." The reason is that he simply did not listen to his constituents who were against immigrants who broke the law to stay in the US. His constituents were against illegal immigration.
One might have thought that the Republicans would have learned from Cantor's loss, but they had the hubris to ignore this clear warning sign that people do not want illegal immigration. Jeb Bush, Rubio, were for illegal immigration.
If Jeb Bush had listened to the voters and campaigned against illegal immigration, if he had spoke up about the export of factory jobs out of the country as Trump did when Carrier air conditions closed an Indiana factory and moved the jobs to Mexico, then he probably would have been the Republican candidate. It was Bush's hubris, that of Rubio, Paul Ryan, and other Republican leadership that they could ignore the voters that created Trump.
Similarly, it was the hubris PM Cameron and the other British Elite that had the led to ignoring the will of the voters even after he had agreed to reduce immigration to 10,000 from 333,000 that to the BrExit situation.