There's a big discrepancy regarding immigration.

[gasbanni]

http://www.niesr.ac.uk/blog/governm...-migration-and-wont-publish-them#.VuX_vqinzMI

So there you have it, two vastly differing government figures.
Work it out for yourself.

 

[jockscott]

I mentioned this over a week ago . Himmy jumped right in saying the difference between NINO applications and immigration statistics was down to "children leaving school" and "People already here who'd never applied for a NINO" I replied stating that the official NINO, statistics were purely for immigrants and also pointed out that people who'd been here for "x amount of time" would have had to have money behind them, to survive for that amount of time. Himmy believes the "immigration statistics" because they're much lower. He also stated that these were the official statistics of a government department (till I pointed out that the NINO statistics also came from a government department) They can't both be correct. ...... I know which statistics I believe to be nearer the truth, but Himmy will disagree vociferously.

 

[gasbanni]

I mentioned this over a week ago . Himmy jumped right in saying the difference between NINO applications and immigration statistics was down to "children leaving school" and "People already here who'd never applied for a NINO" I replied stating that the official NINO, statistics were purely for immigrants and also pointed out that people who'd been here for "x amount of time" would have had to have money behind them, to survive for that amount of time. Himmy believes the "immigration statistics" because they're much lower. He also stated that these were the official statistics of a government department (till I pointed out that the NINO statistics also came from a government department) They can't both be correct. ...... I know which statistics I believe to be nearer the truth, but Himmy will disagree vociferously.

I missed it when you posted on this, Apparently MPs are asking for a clarification of these two conflicting figures.
Theres obviously something amiss as the figures should be in agreement.
Who cares what himmy thinks.

 

[Himaginn]

I mentioned this over a week ago . Himmy jumped right in saying the difference between NINO applications and immigration statistics was down to "children leaving school" and "People already here who'd never applied for a NINO" I replied stating that the official NINO, statistics were purely for immigrants and also pointed out that people who'd been here for "x amount of time" would have had to have money behind them, to survive for that amount of time. Himmy believes the "immigration statistics" because they're much lower. He also stated that these were the official statistics of a government department (till I pointed out that the NINO statistics also came from a government department) They can't both be correct. ...... I know which statistics I believe to be nearer the truth, but Himmy will disagree vociferously.

This has been discussd in depth and detail. The upshot was you believed the government website about NINO and used those figures to account for immigration. A purpose for which the website was never intended and the government and scholars agree that that was never the intention of the figures or that the figures could be, in any way, used for that purpose. However you insist on using those figures for that purpose. And now that nincompoop gasbag has raised the same thread again, saying exactly the same old nonsense, you're quick to reassure your self that you were right all along.

However the government website that does deal with migration, you choose to ignore, arguing that we can't trust this website's figures. Yet you'll happily accept another website's figures, which was never intended to be used in that way, and use it to support your theory.

Even the author of the article linked to has tried to use the figures in a way that was never intended:

So I asked DWP and HMRC to tell me, using the same computer systems from which this data comes (which holds information on national insurance, benefits, tax credits and PAYE) to tell me how many National Insurance Numbers issued to recent migrants were "active" - ie showed recent payments of tax or NI, or benefit claims. This would give us a much better idea of the accuracy of the official statistics, which, using only survey data, estimate how many EU migrants have migrated here and how many are in the workforce.

Now Jonathon Portes believes, because his request was refused, is because his suspicion was correct.
You can't prove a point on the basis of you don't have the proof!
It's a false premise and methodology!
I could use figures from Bible to indicate how old the earth is, but it wouldn't be accurate! That's exactly akin to what you, gasbag and Jonathan Portes are doing, using one set of unrelated figures to proof the error in another set of more relevant figures.

I'll add the link to the governments own explanation in a mo'. Although you'll choose to ignore those as well. Do you not see that you're choosing to believe what you want and claiming other official figures to be false? Blinkered or what!

Edit. to add the comment from the governments website quoted before when we were discussing this very issue.

Why don't you try reading the website, not just grabbing the first number that jumps out at you!

The NINo statistics are not directly comparable to the ..., nor do they necessarily align well with ONS long-term estimates of immigration

I suggest you go back and re-read that thread and come up with a different argument, not the same old, same old!

 

[Himaginn]

I missed it when you posted on this, ......
Theres obviously something amiss as the figures should be in agreement.
...

Lying toad! From the previous discussion on this very point, from the previous thread which you started on this very issue.

It was actually 630,000 NI numbers issued to EU nationals coming to the UK in 2015 (and 197,000 allocated to non EU nationals) A total of 828,000 in 2015.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...rations-adult-overseas-nationals-feb-2016.pdf
Nothing to do with school leavers, duplication, etc, etc.

What's that as a percentage of the population a sixtieth something like that ......in one year .....that level of immigration year on year is unsustainable.
No wonder there's a housing shortage, the health service is struggling and the roads are a nightmare !

Single polish mum two kids and her mother. She works but probably gets tax credits and housing benefit ( rents the house from a relative) left Poland because of money problems. So if you do the maths it doesn't take genius to work out she gets more out of the system than she puts in.
Health care x4 schooling x 2
Purely from an economic point of view how can this make sense. Obviously someone born here is a citizen of this country and could be in the same boat but they belong here ........what if millions more in the EU decide to make their life here ....what then ?

You have a very selective memory.
You can't remember how to pm another poster.
You can't remember what comments you've previously made.
You can't remember what threads you've started.

And you want to make comments about credibility and hypocrisy!

 

[jockscott]

This has been discussd in depth and detail. The upshot was you believed the government website about NINO and used those figures to account for immigration. !

Just the same as you believed the government website about immigration figures.. They both can't be correct. As I've already pointed out, the .gov NINO website shows figures for people from EU countries and people from non EU countries (as opposed to all NINO's issued to everyone including British people ) You can argue all you like Himmy. The figures do not lie.. However we all know that politicians do tell lies.. Make your own mind up Himmy (he won't)
Why would a government department decline a "freedom of information" request, such as the one the author made to them? Again, make your own mind up. (if your even capable of doing such a thing)

 

[Himaginn]

This has been discussd in depth and detail. The upshot was you believed the government website about NINO and used those figures to account for immigration. !

Just the same as you believed the government website about immigration figures.. They both can't be correct. As I've already pointed out, the .gov NINO website shows figures for people from EU countries and people from non EU countries (as opposed to all NINO's issued to everyone including British people ) You can argue all you like Himmy. The figures do not lie.. However we all know that politicians do tell lies.. Make your own mind up Himmy (he won't)
Why would a government department decline a "freedom of information" request, such as the one the author made to them? Again, make your own mind up. (if your even capable of doing such a thing)

The difference is, I believed the government website about migration, and the government website about NINO. They can both be correct. They don't measure the same thing. What I didn't do is confuse the one with the other. Migration website is about migration and NINO website is about NINO. You can't confuse the two. Although you just have.
The government website makes it abundantly clear that the two figures cannot be simply interchanged.
Perhaps Jonathon Portes can't be believed because he is distorting the facts, in exactly the same way as you're trying to do, so his credibility is suspect.

 

[jockscott]

This has been discussd in depth and detail. The upshot was you believed the government website about NINO and used those figures to account for immigration. !

Just the same as you believed the government website about immigration figures.. They both can't be correct. As I've already pointed out, the .gov NINO website shows figures for people from EU countries and people from non EU countries (as opposed to all NINO's issued to everyone including British people ) You can argue all you like Himmy. The figures do not lie.. However we all know that politicians do tell lies.. Make your own mind up Himmy (he won't)
Why would a government department decline a "freedom of information" request, such as the one the author made to them? Again, make your own mind up. (if your even capable of doing such a thing)

The difference is, I believed the government website about migration, and the government website about NINO. They can both be correct. They don't measure the same thing. What I didn't do is confuse the one with the other. Migration website is about migration and NINO website is about NINO. You can't confuse the two. Although you just have.
The government website makes it abundantly clear that the two figures cannot be simply interchanged.
Perhaps Jonathon Portes can't be believed because he is distorting the facts, in exactly the same way as you're trying to do, so his credibility is suspect.

So, what your saying is, in one year, one government department gets figures of 300,000,, and in the same year 648,000 immigrants apply for NINO's . Come on Himmy, tell me (and the rest of the UK, where the extra 348,000 came from.. As I pointed out previously, 348,000 immigrants could not have been working in this country to support themselves. (they'd have already needed the NINO) They can't have been claiming benefits. (again they'd need a NINO) So you tell me (and more importantly, the PM David Camoron) just where these 348,000 came from to appear on the figures produced by the National Insurance people. Just to be sure, we are talking about figures for one year only, not cumulative figures over many years.

 

[Himaginn]

This has been discussd in depth and detail. The upshot was you believed the government website about NINO and used those figures to account for immigration. !

Just the same as you believed the government website about immigration figures.. They both can't be correct. As I've already pointed out, the .gov NINO website shows figures for people from EU countries and people from non EU countries (as opposed to all NINO's issued to everyone including British people ) You can argue all you like Himmy. The figures do not lie.. However we all know that politicians do tell lies.. Make your own mind up Himmy (he won't)
Why would a government department decline a "freedom of information" request, such as the one the author made to them? Again, make your own mind up. (if your even capable of doing such a thing)

The difference is, I believed the government website about migration, and the government website about NINO. They can both be correct. They don't measure the same thing. What I didn't do is confuse the one with the other. Migration website is about migration and NINO website is about NINO. You can't confuse the two. Although you just have.
The government website makes it abundantly clear that the two figures cannot be simply interchanged.
Perhaps Jonathon Portes can't be believed because he is distorting the facts, in exactly the same way as you're trying to do, so his credibility is suspect.

So, what your saying is, in one year, one government department gets figures of 300,000,, and in the same year 648,000 immigrants apply for NINO's . Come on Himmy, tell me (and the rest of the UK, where the extra 348,000 came from.. As I pointed out previously, 348,000 immigrants could not have been working in this country to support themselves. (they'd have already needed the NINO) They can't have been claiming benefits. (again they'd need a NINO) So you tell me (and more importantly, the PM David Camoron) just where these 348,000 came from to appear on the figures produced by the National Insurance people. Just to be sure, we are talking about figures for one year only, not cumulative figures over many years.

Let me explain it in DIY terms.

You're using the wrong tool!

You're trying to tighten a nut and bolt with pliers!
You're trying to rip a length of 150mm X 50mm with a junior hacksaw!
You're using that chisel as a screwdriver!
You can't sand that wood with a plane!

You might make an approximate job of it. You're just as likely to make a complete hash of it.
Do you understand now?

 

[Himaginn]

Allow me to remind you again, jock:

.. using NI numbers .. presents problems. .. everyone who wants to work in the UK must have a NI number, even if only working in the country for a few weeks, the migration figures only count people planning to stay for a year or more. the migration stats include people who are not planning to work or claim benefits, children or non-working partners. People applying for a NI number could have arrived at any time, not necessarily in the year or quarter in question.So the difference between the two figures is striking, but National Insurance numbers are not a better figure to use than the migration figures.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-p...&13:03&ns_fee=0#post_56d986663e0000b7a426ba63
Only you, Farage, Portes and gasbag insist on using the wrong tools

 

[fender]

Allow me to remind you again, jock:

.. using NI numbers .. presents problems. .. everyone who wants to work in the UK must have a NI number, even if only working in the country for a few weeks, the migration figures only count people planning to stay for a year or more. the migration stats include people who are not planning to work or claim benefits, children or non-working partners. People applying for a NI number could have arrived at any time, not necessarily in the year or quarter in question.So the difference between the two figures is striking, but National Insurance numbers are not a better figure to use than the migration figures.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35603388?ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter&ns_campaign=bbc_live&ns_linkname=56d986663e0000b7a426ba63&How much do UK farmers get from the European Union?&13:03&ns_fee=0#post_56d986663e0000b7a426ba63
Only you, Farage, Portes and gasbag insist on using the wrong tools

Sometimes I think you're a tool..........

 

[Himaginn]

Only you, Farage, Portes and gasbag insist on using the wrong tools

Sometimes I think you're a tool..........

Sharper than any in your box.

 

[fender]

Only you, Farage, Portes and gasbag insist on using the wrong tools

Sometimes I think you're a tool..........

Sharper than any in your box.

You've not seen my box...

 

[Himaginn]

Only you, Farage, Portes and gasbag insist on using the wrong tools

Sometimes I think you're a tool..........

Sharper than any in your box.

You've not seen my box...

I don't need to.

 

[jockscott]

Allow me to remind you again, jock:

.. using NI numbers .. presents problems. .. everyone who wants to work in the UK must have a NI number, even if only working in the country for a few weeks, the migration figures only count people planning to stay for a year or more. the migration stats include people who are not planning to work or claim benefits, children or non-working partners. People applying for a NI number could have arrived at any time, not necessarily in the year or quarter in question.

Ahh so according to your source, there are immigrants , not planning to work or claim benefits? (questions,, what are they going to live on? Are they retiring here? Millionaires?) Secondly.. "People applying for a NI number could have arrived here at any time." So if they've been here for some years, what exactly have they been living off? As I said before, they couldn't claim benefits (because they'd have already needed the NI number) and couldn not have been working (again they'd need the NI number) Your sources don't even attempt to answer these two points Himmy. Over to you (more filibustering expected in your reply)