News1 min ago
Immigrants Make Net Contribution Apparently !
http://
45% less likely to be on the Dole than our own dear natives. So most of them are not claiming the Dole , and they are paying taxes !
45% less likely to be on the Dole than our own dear natives. So most of them are not claiming the Dole , and they are paying taxes !
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by mikey4444. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
naomi...I missed out nothing at all...its all in my original post...here it is again :::
"Despite the positive figures in the decade since the millennium, the study found that between 1995 and 2011, immigrants from non-EEA countries claimed more in benefits than they paid in taxes, mainly because they tended to have more children than native Britons."
"Despite the positive figures in the decade since the millennium, the study found that between 1995 and 2011, immigrants from non-EEA countries claimed more in benefits than they paid in taxes, mainly because they tended to have more children than native Britons."
Yes it was naomi...read the BBC News item...a few paragraphs down :::
Despite the positive figures in the decade since the millennium, the study found that between 1995 and 2011, immigrants from non-EEA countries claimed more in benefits than they paid in taxes, mainly because they tended to have more children than native Britons.
Despite the positive figures in the decade since the millennium, the study found that between 1995 and 2011, immigrants from non-EEA countries claimed more in benefits than they paid in taxes, mainly because they tended to have more children than native Britons.
factor:
We can't just assume any research we don't like the results of is necessarily untrue - we can only work that out when we've actually found flaws in the methods. If we just have our views in mind first and dismiss any results that don't agree with them, then there's no point doing any research in the first place.
It's true that some bad research does make it through peer-review. I think that proportion is actually slightly higher in the natural sciences than in humanities or social science because it has more corporate funding, and private funders tend to be a little more "interventionist" with research they are funding, whereas the govt research councils generally aren't.
We can't just assume any research we don't like the results of is necessarily untrue - we can only work that out when we've actually found flaws in the methods. If we just have our views in mind first and dismiss any results that don't agree with them, then there's no point doing any research in the first place.
It's true that some bad research does make it through peer-review. I think that proportion is actually slightly higher in the natural sciences than in humanities or social science because it has more corporate funding, and private funders tend to be a little more "interventionist" with research they are funding, whereas the govt research councils generally aren't.
Kromo
\\\\We can't just assume any research we don't like the results of is necessarily untrue \\\
Conversely, we can't just assume any research we like is true. Indeed in the last 10-15 years and particularly statistics provided by certain ABers, my faith in statistics has been severely questioned.
However, I do like the balance of your post.
\\\\We can't just assume any research we don't like the results of is necessarily untrue \\\
Conversely, we can't just assume any research we like is true. Indeed in the last 10-15 years and particularly statistics provided by certain ABers, my faith in statistics has been severely questioned.
However, I do like the balance of your post.
Hi Krom- I can understand why people are wary of statistics and research findings. I am a great fan of More or Less on Radio 4 and this programme shows how politicians, the press and even scientists and other researchers get things wrong. I don't accept statistics at face value and I can understand why people don't analyse reports like this in detail - if the findings don't reflect their own perception they are unlikely to change their minds.
Interestingly the detailed findings differ from some of the headlines, as it shows there is a big difference between the figures for those coming from EEA and non EEA areas.
Interestingly the detailed findings differ from some of the headlines, as it shows there is a big difference between the figures for those coming from EEA and non EEA areas.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.