On 2006-07-16, Tom Woods <
[email protected]> wrote:
> 200,000/60 million is one in 300 isnt it?
Yes, 0.3%, so 99.7% don't emigrate.
> in which case, I should think that a lot of the emigrates are people
> aged 20-30 (my generation). Or that number is totally off.
I don't think it's that really, expats seem to mostly be old, and a
fair whack of them come back to use the NHS on a regular basis, using
a relative's address as their "place of residence". After leaving the
country, you're not eligible for NHS treatment after 3 months. Ronnie
Biggs gave himself up and came to Britain, specifically so he could
use the NHS, goes to show you what health care can be like overseas ;-)
My ex-landlady has a son who's returned from New Zealand in the last 5
years after living there long enough to pick up a wife and a few kids,
originally he came back to use the NHS to fix a cancerous tumour in
his ankle, but has now re-settled in the UK because he could get a job
easier and the schools were better. So he comes from the nirvana that
is New Zealand to use the much-slated NHS, then finds getting a job
easier, and the schooling better. The grass is always greener I
suppose. On the basis of personal testimonies it's very easy to get
confusing pictures as each situation is so different.
> where did the 200,000 numbe come from and i wonder if that just counts
> 'permenants' or 'indefinates'
Yeah, it's hard to tell really, e.g. young adults who spend a year or
two mooching around Australia before coming home for a career.
I'd imagine that the number of people emigrating has gone up over the
years, but I'd reckon it's more to do with the price of travel, and
the relative wealth of Britons these days. Despite the moaning, I
don't know of a single person in my group of associates/family who was
better off 10 years ago than they are today. That's a 100%
improvement rate, if you're going to use your 6/300 rate then I'll use
my 100% better-off "statistic" ;-)
--
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!