FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

Immigrants and the media

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

Ok, I don't normally go this deep in a post but I feel I need to share my thoughts.

The media are a joke, they are telling lies and spreading malicious scaremongering bulshit across the whole of the UK, they tell us that we are in the middle of an immigration melt down, that thousands upon thousands of immigrants are crossing our borders every day, and taking our jobs and taking our benefits, which is it? Are they taking our jobs and paying tax into the country, so that British born layabouts can buy their big TVs and tracksuits, or are they all calming the £36ish that is the maximum they can claim per week, and not the £20k that everyone thinks they are getting, and social media is just as bad, you have pages like Britain first, shouting from the roof tops about immigrants getting houses, driving lessons, cars, and free everything, if I lived in a war torn country and I saw the posts telling me that I'd be on the first boat here, the reality is that people do not leave their lives and homes just to live on easy street, and living in Britain as an immigrant is not easy street, they have to face the barrage of abuse, that is stirred up by the press, Polish people have the right to live and work in Britain, but the amount of times I have heard people say to work colleagues "did you get here in a container?" It shows your ignorance.

Go and have a look out if your window, have a look now, are there hordes of Eastern Europeans, running down the street raping and pillaging? No? Well there you go, I am the son of immigrants, my father was practically begged to come here, and my mother came from Ireland, so I know first hand of the suspicion of people thinking your family are terrorists, my father worked hard, and got abused by the very people he came here to help in rebuilding of a country almost destroyed by war, only the country's have changed, the sentiment stays the same.

Final thought, if people are coming to this country, and they can't speak English, and they are taking your job, you need to have a look at your life, because if a non English speaking foreigner is better at the job than you, that says more about your skills as a person than it does about the state of the country, stop blaming everyone else because you failed at life

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *trawberry-popWoman
over a year ago

South East Midlands NOT

I'd have to agree that the press are scaremongering. A lot of people here will also be the descendants of immigrants. I know I am!

Immigration is actually good for our country on the whole.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *icketysplitsWoman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

Listen to two series' on R4:

Brits Abroad - 5 short programmes on "expat" Brits;

£3 In My Pocket - onto it's second series but covers the recent history of Asians in the UK.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury

7 myths about immigration:

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Listen to two series' on R4:

Brits Abroad - 5 short programmes on "expat" Brits;

£3 In My Pocket - onto it's second series but covers the recent history of Asians in the UK.

"

Should be available on the radio version of Iplayer I think I'll have a look

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury

Myth One: Immigration is a taboo subject, everybody is afraid to talk about immigration

.

.

“One common gripe is that ‘no one is allowed to talk about immigration’”, writes Michael Rundell. “This will come as a surprise to anyone who scans the front pages of the Sun, Mail or Express, which rarely fail to feature a shouty headline about scrounging migrants or health tourists.”

In reality, as commentator Mehdi Hasan argued in 2011, “There is no conspiracy of silence on immigration. We talk about little else.”

A 2014 report by the British Futures thinktank agrees: “Immigration is the issue that everyone is talking about. Repeated surveys show it is neck-and-neck with the economy as number one issue for the public now, and will be, come the general election.”

As Hasan notes “The very first question of the first televised leader’s debate in British political history [in 2010] was on the subject of immigration.” Immigration was also one of the central discussion topics during the 2015 ITV leadership debate.

The public’s interest is likely energised by continuous public statements by our leaders. In 2011 Prime Minister David Cameron said “This time last year, we said we would listen to people’s concerns and get immigration under control. Today I can confidently say that we are getting there.”

In the same year, in a speech in Munich, Cameron argued that immigrants “speak the language of their new home.”

In 2007, in his first conference speech as Prime Minister, Gordon Brown promised “British jobs for British workers.”

In 2004 the then Prime Minister Tony Blair said the public’s concern about immigration “are real concerns; they are not figments of racist imagination; and they have to be tackled precisely in order to sustain a balanced and sensible argument about migration.”

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury

Myth Two: Immigrants take jobs away from British people and reduce wages

.

.

First, note how this popular myth directly contradicts Myth Three.

In 2009 the Guardian reported “Claims that migrants ‘take our jobs’ and ‘cut our pay’ are misplaced and wrong, according to research published today by the Institute for Public Policy Research.”

The study found no evidence that migration from Eastern Europe since 2004 had had any substantial negative impact on either jobs or wage levels.

Little seems to have changed six years later.

In its 2015 General Election briefing, the Centre for Economic Performance at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) observed “There is still no evidence of an overall negative impact of immigration on jobs” and “wages” and that “any negative impacts on wages of less skilled groups are small.”

Answering the question of whether immigration negatively effects jobs or wages, Jonathan Portes, the Director of the National Institute of Economic and Social Research, notes “The short answer seems to be: not much.” Portes continues: “It’s fairly obvious that wages are generally higher and jobs easier to come by in areas of high immigration like London, while many low migration areas have relatively depressed labour markets.”

How could this be? Portes explains: “People who say this… usually don’t actually know or understand basic economics. More immigrant workers do increase the supply of labour.

But, because immigrants earn money, spend money, set up businesses and so on, they also increase the demand for labour. And it’s true that, if an immigrant takes a job, then a British worker can’t take that job – but it doesn’t meant he or she won’t find another one that may have been created, directly or indirectly, as a result of immigration.”

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury

Myth Three: Immigrants come to the UK to claim benefits, creating a real problem of benefit tourism

.

.

In October 2013 Prime Minster David Cameron said the public’s concern about benefit tourism – migrants coming to the UK to claim benefits rather than work – was “widespread and understandable.”

In contrast, in the same month Business Secretary Vince Cable noted “there is very little evidence of benefit tourism from people coming from Eastern Europe.” Portes concurs, stating “the evidence that a significant number of people come here just to claim benefits is very thin.”

So thin, in fact, that in 2013 a spokesperson for the European Employment Commissioner publicly stated the UK Government had “completely failed to come up with any specific evidence” to show that the UK benefits system was being abused.

It turns out the European Commission had been asking the UK Government for evidence for three years.

Embarrassingly a 2013 classified Home Office report confirmed the British government doesn’t keep any figures on how many European Union nationals claim welfare payments in the UK.

The reality, according to a 2014 University College London study, is that European migrants overwhelmingly come to the UK to work. Eastern Europeans and Western Europeans have an employment rate of 81 percent and 70 percent, respectively.

The study goes on to estimate that migrants coming to the UK since 2000 have been 43 percent less likely to claim benefits or tax credits compared to the UK-born workforce.

This conclusion is supported by the Centre for Economic Performance at LSE that concluded this year “Immigrants, especially in recent years, tend to be younger and better educated than the UK-born and less likely to be unemployed.”

This myth feeds off a wider popular myth about welfare – that people can have a comfortable life living on welfare and that they may even be better off on benefits than in work. However, a plethora of research and first-hand experience has shown this not to be the case.

Moreover, this myth is also based on the assumption that higher benefits will act as a draw for migrants. However, a 2011 study from the Institute for the Study of Labour in Bonn found no correlation between levels of unemployment benefit and immigration to different countries in the European Union, with the authors explicitly rejecting the concept of a "welfare magnet".

As it happens, the Guardian report on the study also notes “Almost no evidence has been produced to show that in international terms UK benefits are more generous than other EU countries.”

An interesting aside: in Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Belgium, Luxembourg, Germany, Austria, France and Ireland the number of British people claiming unemployment benefit is almost three times as high as the number of nationals from these countries receiving parallel benefits in the UK. Moreover, often the benefits in these countries are more generous than benefits in the UK.

See also Myth Four.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury

Myth Four: Immigrants are a strain on public services, such as hospitals and schools

.

.

A 2014 study by the Centre for Research and Analysis of Migration at University College London found European immigrants to the UK have paid more in taxes than they received in benefits, helping to relieve the fiscal burden on UK-born workers and contributing to the financing of public services.

“A key concern in the public debate on migration is whether immigrants contribute their fair share to the tax and welfare systems”, notes co-author Professor Christian Dustmann. “Our new analysis draws a positive picture of the overall fiscal contribution made by recent immigrant cohorts, particularly of immigrants arriving from the EU.”

Portes notes that while there can be local pressures on public services, as these services are funded by taxation, and as EU migrants tend to pay more into the system than they take out, “overall, stopping EU migration would cost public services more in lost tax revenue than it would save in reduced demand.”

In addition, it is important to remember foreign nationals play a key role in the NHS. According to recent figures from the Health and Social Care Information Centre, 11 percent of NHS staff are not British. This figure rises to 26 percent for doctors.

As the British Medical Association has noted, without non-British staff “many NHS services would struggle to provide effective care to their patients.”

When it comes to schools, the influence of immigration can be surprising, argues Portes: “Despite the pressures of a growing population and a very large number of children for whom English is not the first language, London schools significantly outperform the rest of the country, especially for more disadvantaged children.

And recent research suggests that the presence of children from Eastern Europe actually improved the educational attainment of kids here already.”

See also Myth Three.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury

Myth Five: Health tourism is a big problem for the UK

.

.

A 2013 Guardian report highlighted new government commissioned research that “flies in the face of assertions by Jeremy Hunt, the health secretary, that the tourists cost the health service money.”

The study found that more people leave the UK seeking medical treatment abroad than arrive in this country to receive care.

Moreover, the study found that medical tourism is a lucrative source of income for the NHS (and the wider economy), with the 18 hospitals deemed the top destinations for overseas patients earning £42m in 2010.

In addition, in 2013 Guardian columnist Zoe Williams reported that there were more than 20 private Polish medical centres in London, as well as in Manchester, Reading, Bristol and Glasgow. After speaking to Polish people using these clinics, Williams explains they are used for a variety of reasons including the perception the NHS provides a poor service, because of long NHS wait times, the belief Polish nurses are better trained than UK nurses and because of the language barrier.

“Many Polish immigrants will go to some lengths to avoid NHS ‘tourism’, up to and including paying for their care”, writes Williams.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury

Myth Six: Immigrants are a drain on social housing and often get preferential treatment

.

.

This myth was given a boost in 2009 when the Labour Government said it wanted to give local people greater priority for social housing.

However, as the Guardian reported in 2009 “The allegation that new migrants are jumping the queue for council housing and housing association homes was nailed as a myth by research recently published by the Equality and Human Rights Commission.”

The study found that more than 60% of migrants who had come to Britain in the past five years were living in privately rented accommodation, with most newly arrived migrants and asylum seekers actually banned from access to social housing.

A 2009 University College London paper that found immigrants from A8 countries – those who arrived after EU enlargement in 2004 – “are far less likely to live in social housing” than the rest of the UK population.

In 2015 the Centre for Economic Performance at LSE noted “There is still no evidence of an overall negative impact of immigration” on social housing.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury

Myth Seven: Immigrants commit more crime than British people

.

.

“Crime in neighbourhoods that have experienced mass immigration from eastern Europe over the past 10 years has fallen significantly, according to research that challenges a widely held view over the impact of foreigners in the UK”, noted the Guardian about a 2013 report published by LSE.

“Rates of burglary, vandalism and car theft all dropped following the arrival of migrants from Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary and seven other countries after they joined the European Union in 2004.”

The Guardian story quoted Brian Bell, a research fellow at LSE: "The view that foreigners commit more crime is not true. The truth is that immigrants are just like natives: if they have a good job and a good income they don't commit crime."

These findings echo a 2008 report prepared for the Association of Chief Police Officers, which found offending rates among eastern European immigrants were in line with the rate of offending in the general population.

A senior source with in-depth knowledge of the report explained: "Any rise has been broadly proportionate to the number of people from those communities coming into this country. People are saying crime is rising because of this influx. Given 1 million people have come in, that doesn't make sense as crime is significantly down."

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury

There we go, got that off my chest

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *icketysplitsWoman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound


"There we go, got that off my chest

"

You're too quick for me. I was just checking British Futures.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow

Sometimes perception is as important as reality but it 'seems', from media reports of actual convictions that a disproportionate number of offences, especially offences of serious violence, are committed by immigrants to the UK.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury


"Sometimes perception is as important as reality but it 'seems', from media reports of actual convictions that a disproportionate number of offences, especially offences of serious violence, are committed by immigrants to the UK."

Yep. See above

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow


"Sometimes perception is as important as reality but it 'seems', from media reports of actual convictions that a disproportionate number of offences, especially offences of serious violence, are committed by immigrants to the UK.

Yep. See above"

I noted the para "The Guardian story quoted Brian Bell, a research fellow at LSE: "The view that foreigners commit more crime is not true. The truth is that immigrants are just like natives: if they have a good job and a good income they don't commit crime." "

Can we conclude that those who don't have a good job and a good income DO commit crime?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Providing those who come over work and pay their own way,I couldn't care less tbh. There are more than enough uk idiots taking the piss, taking away from the people who genuinely need the help

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Ok, I don't normally go this deep in a post but I feel I need to share my thoughts.

The media are a joke, they are telling lies and spreading malicious scaremongering bulshit across the whole of the UK, they tell us that we are in the middle of an immigration melt down, that thousands upon thousands of immigrants are crossing our borders every day, and taking our jobs and taking our benefits, which is it? Are they taking our jobs and paying tax into the country, so that British born layabouts can buy their big TVs and tracksuits, or are they all calming the £36ish that is the maximum they can claim per week, and not the £20k that everyone thinks they are getting, and social media is just as bad, you have pages like Britain first, shouting from the roof tops about immigrants getting houses, driving lessons, cars, and free everything, if I lived in a war torn country and I saw the posts telling me that I'd be on the first boat here, the reality is that people do not leave their lives and homes just to live on easy street, and living in Britain as an immigrant is not easy street, they have to face the barrage of abuse, that is stirred up by the press, Polish people have the right to live and work in Britain, but the amount of times I have heard people say to work colleagues "did you get here in a container?" It shows your ignorance.

Go and have a look out if your window, have a look now, are there hordes of Eastern Europeans, running down the street raping and pillaging? No? Well there you go, I am the son of immigrants, my father was practically begged to come here, and my mother came from Ireland, so I know first hand of the suspicion of people thinking your family are terrorists, my father worked hard, and got abused by the very people he came here to help in rebuilding of a country almost destroyed by war, only the country's have changed, the sentiment stays the same.

Final thought, if people are coming to this country, and they can't speak English, and they are taking your job, you need to have a look at your life, because if a non English speaking foreigner is better at the job than you, that says more about your skills as a person than it does about the state of the country, stop blaming everyone else because you failed at life"
.

To be honest you seem as bigoted as a bnp supporter but diametrically opposite!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *inaTitzTV/TS
over a year ago

Titz Towers, North Notts

I like immigration and diversity. It's healthy and interesting.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I like immigration and diversity. It's healthy and interesting. "
.

Uganda is the most ethically diverse country in the world.

Just saying for next year's holls

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow


"I like immigration and diversity. It's healthy and interesting. .

Uganda is the most ethically diverse country in the world.

Just saying for next year's holls"

And a great place for discussion

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

My brother works in a immigration support centre (general advice) on what there are entitled too etc etc. and it is very hard and no way are they entitled to the amount people think they are. On the other hand there are people that come in and ask about if one of there family comes in from holiday from abroad about the procedure on settlement and entitlement. There's good and bad out there. As for the Immigration debate when all else fails, blame the immigrant there not likley to answer back. That's how it comes across from the media.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *funtimes.Man
over a year ago

Preston

Its called propaganda, could be its to take our attention away from how much debt we are in, if thats the case its working a treat

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *etsaroundMan
over a year ago

Valley's

We are an island, we are full, we need self sustainability.

If you want to join us at the table, you got to bring something with you.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Hang on we work damm hard and can't afford dentist glasses even the bloody rent some weeks but you never see a skint immergrant ...

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 19/08/15 13:06:40]

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ythenshawefredMan
over a year ago

stockport

Immigration is a good thing in general but at the same time there does need to be a balance ie with housing and school places etc

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The media has been like this for a while. It seems to be there to push an agenda and most of the news isn't biased. Not sure if it's also what some of the people want.

I see you mention british born layabouts buying big screen TVs & track suits. Seems you fell for some of the lies yourself...

Most of us aren't stupid, we know that it is employers taking our jobs when they give them away to someone else for less pay. We know this system is designed to make sure we have as little monetary value, and as little choices, as possible. We know tax payers are paying the wages for millions who should be getting paid by their multi-million profitting employers. We know welfare to work is designed to under cut real jobs and real wages. We know immigrants need jobs and somewhere to live.

We know that the word employment is another word for use, employers is another word for user, and employed is another word for used.

We also know divide and rule is a good technique to use if you want to keep people arguing amongst themselves and the media is a tool for that.

We know that some of the news is real, such as immigrants exploiting the system for benefits but we also know that this is vastly over blown and not reported properly, just like all stories about people on benefits are. A woman got fined £300 for stealing baby food this week after she got sanctioned. She can't pay that but i don;t see stuff like this reported in the same news that slags off benefit claimants. One guy stole food out of a super market bin and the courts let him off, the judge said he could not charge anyone with the crime of wanting to stay alive. There's loads of these stories, people going hungry in a wealthy country that allows tax loopholes that would mean a more compassionate society if those taxes were paid, but people are wising up to this and spreading this news and trying to stop sanctions or feed those who've been sanctioned. We're being run by liars who twist figures for their own agenda, make up lies and don't even care they're doing that as it benefits them. It's sad.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I live in a Borough where 30% of residents were not born in the UK. I live amongst people from all countries and continents. The problems that arose when the population grew rapidly were: Schools not having enough places; doctors appointments more difficult to get when you wanted; roads becoming more congested; small rise in crime. What the Government did was: Build schools; build new health centres; put on more public transport and build new homes and sell off land for private properties. There is still a long list of people waiting for affordable housing but it's being worked on. Pubs, buildings and shops were sitting empty are now being rented out to foreign born clients-bringing in revenue. New building has boosted the building trade. I have one gripe and that is the buses crammed at certain times,but children no longer have schools within walking distance and people have to get around. The crime that came with the criminal element has been addressed and dealt with. All crime in the Borough has reportedly gone down. I like the diversity that immigration brings; we won't all get along, but hopefully the longer we live together the more people try.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Personally, I think the standard of journalism and television has dropped in this country, however in a capitalist society, what there doing is selling you stuff and there going to sell you the stuff that you wanna buy and fear sells stuff better than love!

And to be perfectly honest in this day and age, there's no excuse to be ill informed!

My problem is you have one side screaming bloody murder for letting anyone come in.

And then you have the other side screaming bloody murder for not letting everyone in.

And the reality is there's good and bad points to both arguments but in reality there both impossible practicalities.

Myth 3

Immigration(growth) has never paid for itself anywhere at any time!

You may decide you want to expand certain industries for various reasons, but that has to be paid for!

Infrastructure is not cheap!

It's mainly what separates wealthy countries from poor ones!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Its called propaganda, could be its to take our attention away from how much debt we are in, if thats the case its working a treat"

Maybe the debt is propaganda too, to divert our attention from the cruelty inflicted by our government upon vulnerable people in the UK.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

There are people of all nationalities exploiting our benefits and housing system. I blame the Government for making it too easy. An Asian woman I worked with said to me You wouldn't believe the amount of Asian people who are conning the Government. I said I would but it's not just Asian people. She admitted to helping people make new claims and how to get higher up the housing list. It happens with all races and people who were born in the country I told her.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow


"We are an island, we are full, we need self sustainability.

If you want to join us at the table, you got to bring something with you."

We are NOT full. Not by a long way.

There's loads of space. What we're short of is resources - schools, homes, hospital beds etc and you can't bring a hospital bed from Ethiopia.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"We are an island, we are full, we need self sustainability.

If you want to join us at the table, you got to bring something with you."

So a persons life is only judged worthy in accordance with what they have to offer, not based upon how far our compassion reaches. The Uk is not an island floating in space, it is part of a planet called Earth.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Ok, I don't normally go this deep in a post but I feel I need to share my thoughts.

The media are a joke, they are telling lies and spreading malicious scaremongering bulshit across the whole of the UK, they tell us that we are in the middle of an immigration melt down, that thousands upon thousands of immigrants are crossing our borders every day, and taking our jobs and taking our benefits, which is it? Are they taking our jobs and paying tax into the country, so that British born layabouts can buy their big TVs and tracksuits, or are they all calming the £36ish that is the maximum they can claim per week, and not the £20k that everyone thinks they are getting, and social media is just as bad, you have pages like Britain first, shouting from the roof tops about immigrants getting houses, driving lessons, cars, and free everything, if I lived in a war torn country and I saw the posts telling me that I'd be on the first boat here, the reality is that people do not leave their lives and homes just to live on easy street, and living in Britain as an immigrant is not easy street, they have to face the barrage of abuse, that is stirred up by the press, Polish people have the right to live and work in Britain, but the amount of times I have heard people say to work colleagues "did you get here in a container?" It shows your ignorance.

Go and have a look out if your window, have a look now, are there hordes of Eastern Europeans, running down the street raping and pillaging? No? Well there you go, I am the son of immigrants, my father was practically begged to come here, and my mother came from Ireland, so I know first hand of the suspicion of people thinking your family are terrorists, my father worked hard, and got abused by the very people he came here to help in rebuilding of a country almost destroyed by war, only the country's have changed, the sentiment stays the same.

Final thought, if people are coming to this country, and they can't speak English, and they are taking your job, you need to have a look at your life, because if a non English speaking foreigner is better at the job than you, that says more about your skills as a person than it does about the state of the country, stop blaming everyone else because you failed at life"

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *funtimes.Man
over a year ago

Preston


"Its called propaganda, could be its to take our attention away from how much debt we are in, if thats the case its working a treat

Maybe the debt is propaganda too, to divert our attention from the cruelty inflicted by our government upon vulnerable people in the UK."

sure the debt is propaganda, its far worse than they say

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Its called propaganda, could be its to take our attention away from how much debt we are in, if thats the case its working a treat

Maybe the debt is propaganda too, to divert our attention from the cruelty inflicted by our government upon vulnerable people in the UK.

sure the debt is propaganda, its far worse than they say"

How can you be sure?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow


"Its called propaganda, could be its to take our attention away from how much debt we are in, if thats the case its working a treat

Maybe the debt is propaganda too, to divert our attention from the cruelty inflicted by our government upon vulnerable people in the UK.

sure the debt is propaganda, its far worse than they say

How can you be sure?"

Cos it's the Tories ho are telling us about the debt.

Lying bastards!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Its called propaganda, could be its to take our attention away from how much debt we are in, if thats the case its working a treat

Maybe the debt is propaganda too, to divert our attention from the cruelty inflicted by our government upon vulnerable people in the UK.

sure the debt is propaganda, its far worse than they say

How can you be sure?

Cos it's the Tories ho are telling us about the debt.

Lying bastards!"

A Tory politician, lying, surely not.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"We are an island, we are full, we need self sustainability.

If you want to join us at the table, you got to bring something with you.

We are NOT full. Not by a long way.

There's loads of space. What we're short of is resources - schools, homes, hospital beds etc and you can't bring a hospital bed from Ethiopia."
.

Actually England is one of the most densely populated countries in the world!.

Just because you can look out a window and see fields doesn't mean there's loads of space!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I will address the taking our jobs issue. I work for a company that has to tender for contracts in the building /maintenance trade. At one point,a few years ago the boss told my husband he was thinking of laying off some of the workforce and employing foreign workers,because they will work for a lot less. One man who currently worked for him was paid £50 per night less than everyone else. Good business practice for someone who is struggling to gain contracts because the prices are falling. Bad for the men who were either laid off for not taking a pay cut or who had to now live on a £250 per week pay cut. Bear in mind that the foreign workers did not have families here,did not have mortgages and were going home after 8/10 years of working abroad. I found it ironic that the man on £50 less than everyone else used to complain about the Polish workers invading his country and undercutting all the work. It has changed since those days,people now need a lot of paperwork to do this work and get on building sites and Underground stations to prove they can do the work and know the health and safety rules. I hope they also get the going rates of pay too.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"We are an island, we are full, we need self sustainability.

If you want to join us at the table, you got to bring something with you.

We are NOT full. Not by a long way.

There's loads of space. What we're short of is resources - schools, homes, hospital beds etc and you can't bring a hospital bed from Ethiopia..

Actually England is one of the most densely populated countries in the world!.

Just because you can look out a window and see fields doesn't mean there's loads of space!"

The people who can see fields may not like waking up to find 4'800 new flats being built on them. And the rest..

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow


"We are an island, we are full, we need self sustainability.

If you want to join us at the table, you got to bring something with you.

We are NOT full. Not by a long way.

There's loads of space. What we're short of is resources - schools, homes, hospital beds etc and you can't bring a hospital bed from Ethiopia..

Actually England is one of the most densely populated countries in the world!.

Just because you can look out a window and see fields doesn't mean there's loads of space!"

So what does it mean?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Golf courses take up more of our island than housing. Just to get that into perspective about the housing shortage/over crowding situation.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"We are an island, we are full, we need self sustainability.

If you want to join us at the table, you got to bring something with you.

We are NOT full. Not by a long way.

There's loads of space. What we're short of is resources - schools, homes, hospital beds etc and you can't bring a hospital bed from Ethiopia..

Actually England is one of the most densely populated countries in the world!.

Just because you can look out a window and see fields doesn't mean there's loads of space!

So what does it mean?"
.

It's called agricultural land!

You know for growing stuff

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Golf courses take up more of our island than housing. Just to get that into perspective about the housing shortage/over crowding situation. "
.

Lol no they don't!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Golf courses take up more of our island than housing. Just to get that into perspective about the housing shortage/over crowding situation. .

Lol no they don't!"

Aw, but i got told that just this week, by the biased media.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow


"We are an island, we are full, we need self sustainability.

If you want to join us at the table, you got to bring something with you.

We are NOT full. Not by a long way.

There's loads of space. What we're short of is resources - schools, homes, hospital beds etc and you can't bring a hospital bed from Ethiopia..

Actually England is one of the most densely populated countries in the world!.

Just because you can look out a window and see fields doesn't mean there's loads of space!

So what does it mean?.

It's called agricultural land!

You know for growing stuff "

Like grouse?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Golf courses take up more of our island than housing. Just to get that into perspective about the housing shortage/over crowding situation. .

Lol no they don't!

Aw, but i got told that just this week, by the biased media."
.

Just turn on your Google maps and look at Any city or town, you'll see lots and lots of houses, houses that need roads, shops, schools, hospitals, offices, industrial estates, you'll probably see some big ponds and reservoirs to provide water for the houses, and then you'll see a big green bit outside of the towns and we use that green stuff for growing food for the people in the houses and growing food for the animals which those people in those houses eat!

Now if you look further afield you'll probably see a large proportion of land that's not really'farmed' and not got houses

There national parks, dales, hilly areas like welsh mountains, lake district.. Not only would it be wrong morally to build there but also unpractical!

I think if I remember correctly England's population density is somewhere around 450p km

That puts us in the top 20 and most of the top 20 is made up of tiny island's if you removed them England would be in the top 10 most densely populated

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

All this fear of immigration is conceptual, people read and believe, find out for yourselves, do some research, The truth is out there.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"All this fear of immigration is conceptual, people read and believe, find out for yourselves, do some research, The truth is out there."

And that's how you condense everything I said down to the truth, good work

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"We are an island, we are full, we need self sustainability.

If you want to join us at the table, you got to bring something with you.

We are NOT full. Not by a long way.

There's loads of space. What we're short of is resources - schools, homes, hospital beds etc and you can't bring a hospital bed from Ethiopia..

Actually England is one of the most densely populated countries in the world!.

Just because you can look out a window and see fields doesn't mean there's loads of space!

So what does it mean?.

It's called agricultural land!

You know for growing stuff

Like grouse?"
.

What do you mean like grouse?

Are you trying to say there's massive amounts of land in Scotland that could be used!

There's a reason why Scotland's sparsely populated... It's not ideally suited for mass population, a bit like a lot of Wales!.

Or are you trying to say there's huge amounts of land that's being used for farming grouse by the ultra wealthy few.

Because that's not actually true either, although there are some very large areas owned by a some nobility, your not taking big percentages of the total!

What I really don't get about immigration is the fact that nobody seems like they want to fix the problems that cause 95% of immigration,

Let 500 Eritreans in at Calais because there all cold and Hungary but what about the million other Eritreans in Eritrea who are Hungary and persecuted... Ohh fuck them, I've eased my moral conscience with the 500 at Calais

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Golf courses take up more of our island than housing. Just to get that into perspective about the housing shortage/over crowding situation. .

Lol no they don't!

Aw, but i got told that just this week, by the biased media..

Just turn on your Google maps and look at Any city or town, you'll see lots and lots of houses, houses that need roads, shops, schools, hospitals, offices, industrial estates, you'll probably see some big ponds and reservoirs to provide water for the houses, and then you'll see a big green bit outside of the towns and we use that green stuff for growing food for the people in the houses and growing food for the animals which those people in those houses eat!

Now if you look further afield you'll probably see a large proportion of land that's not really'farmed' and not got houses

There national parks, dales, hilly areas like welsh mountains, lake district.. Not only would it be wrong morally to build there but also unpractical!

I think if I remember correctly England's population density is somewhere around 450p km

That puts us in the top 20 and most of the top 20 is made up of tiny island's if you removed them England would be in the top 10 most densely populated"

That population density is what you get when you put a referee and two linesmen on a full sized football pitch. We're not being compressed shoulder to shoulder as some would like us to believe. Population densities in towns in England are anything from 10 to 25 times that including in some of the wealthiest and upmarket regions.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Golf courses take up more of our island than housing. Just to get that into perspective about the housing shortage/over crowding situation. .

Lol no they don't!

Aw, but i got told that just this week, by the biased media..

Just turn on your Google maps and look at Any city or town, you'll see lots and lots of houses, houses that need roads, shops, schools, hospitals, offices, industrial estates, you'll probably see some big ponds and reservoirs to provide water for the houses, and then you'll see a big green bit outside of the towns and we use that green stuff for growing food for the people in the houses and growing food for the animals which those people in those houses eat!

Now if you look further afield you'll probably see a large proportion of land that's not really'farmed' and not got houses

There national parks, dales, hilly areas like welsh mountains, lake district.. Not only would it be wrong morally to build there but also unpractical!

I think if I remember correctly England's population density is somewhere around 450p km

That puts us in the top 20 and most of the top 20 is made up of tiny island's if you removed them England would be in the top 10 most densely populated

That population density is what you get when you put a referee and two linesmen on a full sized football pitch. We're not being compressed shoulder to shoulder as some would like us to believe. Population densities in towns in England are anything from 10 to 25 times that including in some of the wealthiest and upmarket regions. "
.

It's 450 people per sq kilometre

Or 1000 metres by 1000 metres.

In that land you have to obviously allow for

Space for houses, grow food, harvest water, provide energy, keep livestock, houses etc etc

This country is nearly at a traditional capacity, that's just factual, you don't have to be a member of ukip or even the green party to see that!

You could possibly accommodate twice as much maybe 120 130 million but you would almost certainly have to make wholesale changes like importing 50% of your food minimum probably more like 80% unless everyone goes vegetarian, cremate every dead person or even better biodegrade them for fertiliser, change planning laws, wholesale changes to your energy system, water, sewage, transport, health!

What people just don't understand is all the stuff they don't see!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *nleashedCrakenMan
over a year ago

Widnes


"Hang on we work damm hard and can't afford dentist glasses even the bloody rent some weeks but you never see a skint immergrant ..."

You clearly never got those glasses then.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Golf courses take up more of our island than housing. Just to get that into perspective about the housing shortage/over crowding situation. .

Lol no they don't!

Aw, but i got told that just this week, by the biased media..

Just turn on your Google maps and look at Any city or town, you'll see lots and lots of houses, houses that need roads, shops, schools, hospitals, offices, industrial estates, you'll probably see some big ponds and reservoirs to provide water for the houses, and then you'll see a big green bit outside of the towns and we use that green stuff for growing food for the people in the houses and growing food for the animals which those people in those houses eat!

Now if you look further afield you'll probably see a large proportion of land that's not really'farmed' and not got houses

There national parks, dales, hilly areas like welsh mountains, lake district.. Not only would it be wrong morally to build there but also unpractical!

I think if I remember correctly England's population density is somewhere around 450p km

That puts us in the top 20 and most of the top 20 is made up of tiny island's if you removed them England would be in the top 10 most densely populated

That population density is what you get when you put a referee and two linesmen on a full sized football pitch. We're not being compressed shoulder to shoulder as some would like us to believe. Population densities in towns in England are anything from 10 to 25 times that including in some of the wealthiest and upmarket regions. .

It's 450 people per sq kilometre

Or 1000 metres by 1000 metres.

In that land you have to obviously allow for

Space for houses, grow food, harvest water, provide energy, keep livestock, houses etc etc

This country is nearly at a traditional capacity, that's just factual, you don't have to be a member of ukip or even the green party to see that!

You could possibly accommodate twice as much maybe 120 130 million but you would almost certainly have to make wholesale changes like importing 50% of your food minimum probably more like 80% unless everyone goes vegetarian, cremate every dead person or even better biodegrade them for fertiliser, change planning laws, wholesale changes to your energy system, water, sewage, transport, health!

What people just don't understand is all the stuff they don't see!"

I've no idea what a 'traditional capacity' is. It's about as meaningless to me as saying 400/sq km is crowded.

The point is that 400 ish people per sq Km covers a whole range of figures. So population density tends to be far far higher in cities (e.g. 11000/sq km in Westminster) and much much lower in the countryside down to 25/sq km in Eden in Cumbria. Maidstone in Kent has the 'average' population density (407/sq km) and is a rural borough where you won't find people moaning about being overcrowded except that now I've provoked it.

Take for example the massive increase in the Polish population in the early part of this century. Many of them went to the East of London in existing housing without gobbling up the countryside around.

UK Population growth at the moment is about 0.7% per year according to ONS figures in June (0.8% for England) which isn't beyond the skills of planners to cope with. It's been at that average rate since 2000 without the national infrastructure collapsing totally.

Overall the UK population density puts it at about 50th in the world; England is at about 30th and roughly the same as the Netherlands and 10% or so higher than Germany or Italy.

But then again a single population density figure doesn't say anything particularly useful given the variations it covers, so I'm not sure why people get so het up about it - I bet the worst complainers are in Eden

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Golf courses take up more of our island than housing. Just to get that into perspective about the housing shortage/over crowding situation. .

Lol no they don't!

Aw, but i got told that just this week, by the biased media..

Just turn on your Google maps and look at Any city or town, you'll see lots and lots of houses, houses that need roads, shops, schools, hospitals, offices, industrial estates, you'll probably see some big ponds and reservoirs to provide water for the houses, and then you'll see a big green bit outside of the towns and we use that green stuff for growing food for the people in the houses and growing food for the animals which those people in those houses eat!

Now if you look further afield you'll probably see a large proportion of land that's not really'farmed' and not got houses

There national parks, dales, hilly areas like welsh mountains, lake district.. Not only would it be wrong morally to build there but also unpractical!

I think if I remember correctly England's population density is somewhere around 450p km

That puts us in the top 20 and most of the top 20 is made up of tiny island's if you removed them England would be in the top 10 most densely populated

That population density is what you get when you put a referee and two linesmen on a full sized football pitch. We're not being compressed shoulder to shoulder as some would like us to believe. Population densities in towns in England are anything from 10 to 25 times that including in some of the wealthiest and upmarket regions. .

It's 450 people per sq kilometre

Or 1000 metres by 1000 metres.

In that land you have to obviously allow for

Space for houses, grow food, harvest water, provide energy, keep livestock, houses etc etc

This country is nearly at a traditional capacity, that's just factual, you don't have to be a member of ukip or even the green party to see that!

You could possibly accommodate twice as much maybe 120 130 million but you would almost certainly have to make wholesale changes like importing 50% of your food minimum probably more like 80% unless everyone goes vegetarian, cremate every dead person or even better biodegrade them for fertiliser, change planning laws, wholesale changes to your energy system, water, sewage, transport, health!

What people just don't understand is all the stuff they don't see!"

According to the most recent figures on the ONS website, in mid-2013 the population density of England was 413 people per sq km compared with 149 people per sq km in Wales and 135 people per sq km in Northern Ireland. Scotland has the lowest population density at 68 people per sq km.

There you go - it's shrunk by about 10% since you posted that it was 450.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *nleashedCrakenMan
over a year ago

Widnes


"We are an island, we are full, we need self sustainability.

If you want to join us at the table, you got to bring something with you.

We are NOT full. Not by a long way.

There's loads of space. What we're short of is resources - schools, homes, hospital beds etc and you can't bring a hospital bed from Ethiopia..

Actually England is one of the most densely populated countries in the world!.

Just because you can look out a window and see fields doesn't mean there's loads of space!

So what does it mean?.

It's called agricultural land!

You know for growing stuff

Like grouse?.

What do you mean like grouse?

Are you trying to say there's massive amounts of land in Scotland that could be used!

There's a reason why Scotland's sparsely populated... It's not ideally suited for mass population, a bit like a lot of Wales!.

Or are you trying to say there's huge amounts of land that's being used for farming grouse by the ultra wealthy few.

Because that's not actually true either, although there are some very large areas owned by a some nobility, your not taking big percentages of the total!

What I really don't get about immigration is the fact that nobody seems like they want to fix the problems that cause 95% of immigration,

Let 500 Eritreans in at Calais because there all cold and Hungary but what about the million other Eritreans in Eritrea who are Hungary and persecuted... Ohh fuck them, I've eased my moral conscience with the 500 at Calais "

Well said and actually hits the real problem with immigration. It's not the harm done here, if any, that's the real problem; its the harm done in the countries they have left that's definitely a problem for those countries.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Golf courses take up more of our island than housing. Just to get that into perspective about the housing shortage/over crowding situation. .

Lol no they don't!

Aw, but i got told that just this week, by the biased media..

Just turn on your Google maps and look at Any city or town, you'll see lots and lots of houses, houses that need roads, shops, schools, hospitals, offices, industrial estates, you'll probably see some big ponds and reservoirs to provide water for the houses, and then you'll see a big green bit outside of the towns and we use that green stuff for growing food for the people in the houses and growing food for the animals which those people in those houses eat!

Now if you look further afield you'll probably see a large proportion of land that's not really'farmed' and not got houses

There national parks, dales, hilly areas like welsh mountains, lake district.. Not only would it be wrong morally to build there but also unpractical!

I think if I remember correctly England's population density is somewhere around 450p km

That puts us in the top 20 and most of the top 20 is made up of tiny island's if you removed them England would be in the top 10 most densely populated

That population density is what you get when you put a referee and two linesmen on a full sized football pitch. We're not being compressed shoulder to shoulder as some would like us to believe. Population densities in towns in England are anything from 10 to 25 times that including in some of the wealthiest and upmarket regions. .

It's 450 people per sq kilometre

Or 1000 metres by 1000 metres.

In that land you have to obviously allow for

Space for houses, grow food, harvest water, provide energy, keep livestock, houses etc etc

This country is nearly at a traditional capacity, that's just factual, you don't have to be a member of ukip or even the green party to see that!

You could possibly accommodate twice as much maybe 120 130 million but you would almost certainly have to make wholesale changes like importing 50% of your food minimum probably more like 80% unless everyone goes vegetarian, cremate every dead person or even better biodegrade them for fertiliser, change planning laws, wholesale changes to your energy system, water, sewage, transport, health!

What people just don't understand is all the stuff they don't see!

According to the most recent figures on the ONS website, in mid-2013 the population density of England was 413 people per sq km compared with 149 people per sq km in Wales and 135 people per sq km in Northern Ireland. Scotland has the lowest population density at 68 people per sq km.

There you go - it's shrunk by about 10% since you posted that it was 450."
.

Well I don't have all day to look every figure up!

That's why I put "I think it's 450"

You can't qoute UK figures

Scotland and Wales completely disfigure the reality.

Scotland's not far from the size of England with what 4 million? (Again top of my head from what I can remember).

Most of it is completely uninhabitable for modern life, unless you want to spend a trillion on infrastructure?.

Let's stick with England as that's where the vast vast majority of the UK population live (for a reason).

So it's population density is 422 did you say? Anyhow what ever it's very high by world standards, you keep making the same mistake by quoting it against city density's?

Now where do the 11 million people in London get there food! Or water, sewerage, energy,... Etc etc... From outside of London!

Read my post, I said you could jam in 130 million but you ain't doing it without one major fucking overhaul of our current economy and infrastructure.

So anyhow traditional requirements for space per person, it relies on space to grow food! Live in a house with a garden, have recreational space... You know shit like we've had for years!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

There are a couple of non British big issue sellers in the town I live in.

Every week, they can be seen in the post office doing a money transfer out of the Uk.

And the local do-gooders take them to Costa or similar for lunch...

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Sometimes perception is as important as reality but it 'seems', from media reports of actual convictions that a disproportionate number of offences, especially offences of serious violence, are committed by immigrants to the UK."

In what possible way is "perception as important as reality"????

If you perceive something, then check the facts and realise you were wrong surely you change your perception.

Earlier posts reafirmed my faith that Fabswingers are better people than the bigots who write lies in the tabloids

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *rightonsteveMan
over a year ago

Brighton - even Hove!

If I and my family lived in a war zone, I'd do anything possible to try and keep them safe and give them a future.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Golf courses take up more of our island than housing. Just to get that into perspective about the housing shortage/over crowding situation. .

Lol no they don't!

Aw, but i got told that just this week, by the biased media..

Just turn on your Google maps and look at Any city or town, you'll see lots and lots of houses, houses that need roads, shops, schools, hospitals, offices, industrial estates, you'll probably see some big ponds and reservoirs to provide water for the houses, and then you'll see a big green bit outside of the towns and we use that green stuff for growing food for the people in the houses and growing food for the animals which those people in those houses eat!

Now if you look further afield you'll probably see a large proportion of land that's not really'farmed' and not got houses

There national parks, dales, hilly areas like welsh mountains, lake district.. Not only would it be wrong morally to build there but also unpractical!

I think if I remember correctly England's population density is somewhere around 450p km

That puts us in the top 20 and most of the top 20 is made up of tiny island's if you removed them England would be in the top 10 most densely populated

That population density is what you get when you put a referee and two linesmen on a full sized football pitch. We're not being compressed shoulder to shoulder as some would like us to believe. Population densities in towns in England are anything from 10 to 25 times that including in some of the wealthiest and upmarket regions. .

It's 450 people per sq kilometre

Or 1000 metres by 1000 metres.

In that land you have to obviously allow for

Space for houses, grow food, harvest water, provide energy, keep livestock, houses etc etc

This country is nearly at a traditional capacity, that's just factual, you don't have to be a member of ukip or even the green party to see that!

You could possibly accommodate twice as much maybe 120 130 million but you would almost certainly have to make wholesale changes like importing 50% of your food minimum probably more like 80% unless everyone goes vegetarian, cremate every dead person or even better biodegrade them for fertiliser, change planning laws, wholesale changes to your energy system, water, sewage, transport, health!

What people just don't understand is all the stuff they don't see!

According to the most recent figures on the ONS website, in mid-2013 the population density of England was 413 people per sq km compared with 149 people per sq km in Wales and 135 people per sq km in Northern Ireland. Scotland has the lowest population density at 68 people per sq km.

There you go - it's shrunk by about 10% since you posted that it was 450..

Well I don't have all day to look every figure up!

That's why I put "I think it's 450"

You can't qoute UK figures

Scotland and Wales completely disfigure the reality.

Scotland's not far from the size of England with what 4 million? (Again top of my head from what I can remember).

Most of it is completely uninhabitable for modern life, unless you want to spend a trillion on infrastructure?.

Let's stick with England as that's where the vast vast majority of the UK population live (for a reason).

So it's population density is 422 did you say? Anyhow what ever it's very high by world standards, you keep making the same mistake by quoting it against city density's?

Now where do the 11 million people in London get there food! Or water, sewerage, energy,... Etc etc... From outside of London!

Read my post, I said you could jam in 130 million but you ain't doing it without one major fucking overhaul of our current economy and infrastructure.

So anyhow traditional requirements for space per person, it relies on space to grow food! Live in a house with a garden, have recreational space... You know shit like we've had for years!"

No you said 422, I wrote the figure from the ONS. You also made up 130 million, which isn't relevant to any reality, or fucking reality if it helps to swear about it, given a growth rate of 0.7-0.8% per year at the moment. Only in a dream world does everyone have a house built for them - have a quick look at inner city living where most of these people go - they tend to increase their number density or go upwards in high rise. You're quite right that more people consume more resources and need more infrastructure, but that's got absolutely nothing to do with population density but absolute population numbers. The population density figure is a red herring.

There are lots of factors that affect our need to overhaul infrastructure. Population growth is one, as is having to retire worn out infrastructure, which happens independently of the population, or the drive to replace polluting energy resources with less polluting resources. There are huge requirements for infrastructure replacement because the stuff wears out, not just because of population -think about power stations, sewers, roads, public buildings - they all have a limited life independent of population growth

None of this is a problem with a single dimension. It pleases some people to blame immigration or population growth without thinking that that is just part of a wider problem that infrastructure planners have to take account of each year... each day.

Just misquoting one dimension, population density, as if it's the scary cause of all our ills is misleading.

If you can't get the basic numbers right, you can't plan properly. I hope the planners can be arsed to look them up.

Of course I can quote UK figures if I want to. For example they include much of that recreational space you refer to. Just because you say that Scotland and Wales 'disfigure reality' doesn't make that true. Your world view always wants to take the most pessimistic view of numbers (and just occasionally exaggerate them too???).

As before, you don't need to build everywhere to increase population in a country. It tends to happen in cities where people already are. Some might say Scotland is far better placed to take more people with ample supplies of energy, more water than they know what to do with and a vibrant population with a positive outlook to the rest of Europe. And tons of recreational space too.

I don't mind your doom and gloom view of the world. Eventually it will all come tumbling down round our ears but I doubt that you or any of the rest of us here will be alive for you to be able to say 'I told you so'.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Golf courses take up more of our island than housing. Just to get that into perspective about the housing shortage/over crowding situation. .

Lol no they don't!

Aw, but i got told that just this week, by the biased media..

Just turn on your Google maps and look at Any city or town, you'll see lots and lots of houses, houses that need roads, shops, schools, hospitals, offices, industrial estates, you'll probably see some big ponds and reservoirs to provide water for the houses, and then you'll see a big green bit outside of the towns and we use that green stuff for growing food for the people in the houses and growing food for the animals which those people in those houses eat!

Now if you look further afield you'll probably see a large proportion of land that's not really'farmed' and not got houses

There national parks, dales, hilly areas like welsh mountains, lake district.. Not only would it be wrong morally to build there but also unpractical!

I think if I remember correctly England's population density is somewhere around 450p km

That puts us in the top 20 and most of the top 20 is made up of tiny island's if you removed them England would be in the top 10 most densely populated

That population density is what you get when you put a referee and two linesmen on a full sized football pitch. We're not being compressed shoulder to shoulder as some would like us to believe. Population densities in towns in England are anything from 10 to 25 times that including in some of the wealthiest and upmarket regions. .

It's 450 people per sq kilometre

Or 1000 metres by 1000 metres.

In that land you have to obviously allow for

Space for houses, grow food, harvest water, provide energy, keep livestock, houses etc etc

This country is nearly at a traditional capacity, that's just factual, you don't have to be a member of ukip or even the green party to see that!

You could possibly accommodate twice as much maybe 120 130 million but you would almost certainly have to make wholesale changes like importing 50% of your food minimum probably more like 80% unless everyone goes vegetarian, cremate every dead person or even better biodegrade them for fertiliser, change planning laws, wholesale changes to your energy system, water, sewage, transport, health!

What people just don't understand is all the stuff they don't see!

According to the most recent figures on the ONS website, in mid-2013 the population density of England was 413 people per sq km compared with 149 people per sq km in Wales and 135 people per sq km in Northern Ireland. Scotland has the lowest population density at 68 people per sq km.

There you go - it's shrunk by about 10% since you posted that it was 450..

Well I don't have all day to look every figure up!

That's why I put "I think it's 450"

You can't qoute UK figures

Scotland and Wales completely disfigure the reality.

Scotland's not far from the size of England with what 4 million? (Again top of my head from what I can remember).

Most of it is completely uninhabitable for modern life, unless you want to spend a trillion on infrastructure?.

Let's stick with England as that's where the vast vast majority of the UK population live (for a reason).

So it's population density is 422 did you say? Anyhow what ever it's very high by world standards, you keep making the same mistake by quoting it against city density's?

Now where do the 11 million people in London get there food! Or water, sewerage, energy,... Etc etc... From outside of London!

Read my post, I said you could jam in 130 million but you ain't doing it without one major fucking overhaul of our current economy and infrastructure.

So anyhow traditional requirements for space per person, it relies on space to grow food! Live in a house with a garden, have recreational space... You know shit like we've had for years!

No you said 422, I wrote the figure from the ONS. You also made up 130 million, which isn't relevant to any reality, or fucking reality if it helps to swear about it, given a growth rate of 0.7-0.8% per year at the moment. Only in a dream world does everyone have a house built for them - have a quick look at inner city living where most of these people go - they tend to increase their number density or go upwards in high rise. You're quite right that more people consume more resources and need more infrastructure, but that's got absolutely nothing to do with population density but absolute population numbers. The population density figure is a red herring.

There are lots of factors that affect our need to overhaul infrastructure. Population growth is one, as is having to retire worn out infrastructure, which happens independently of the population, or the drive to replace polluting energy resources with less polluting resources. There are huge requirements for infrastructure replacement because the stuff wears out, not just because of population -think about power stations, sewers, roads, public buildings - they all have a limited life independent of population growth

None of this is a problem with a single dimension. It pleases some people to blame immigration or population growth without thinking that that is just part of a wider problem that infrastructure planners have to take account of each year... each day.

Just misquoting one dimension, population density, as if it's the scary cause of all our ills is misleading.

If you can't get the basic numbers right, you can't plan properly. I hope the planners can be arsed to look them up.

Of course I can quote UK figures if I want to. For example they include much of that recreational space you refer to. Just because you say that Scotland and Wales 'disfigure reality' doesn't make that true. Your world view always wants to take the most pessimistic view of numbers (and just occasionally exaggerate them too???).

As before, you don't need to build everywhere to increase population in a country. It tends to happen in cities where people already are. Some might say Scotland is far better placed to take more people with ample supplies of energy, more water than they know what to do with and a vibrant population with a positive outlook to the rest of Europe. And tons of recreational space too.

I don't mind your doom and gloom view of the world. Eventually it will all come tumbling down round our ears but I doubt that you or any of the rest of us here will be alive for you to be able to say 'I told you so'.

"
.

Sorry I'll temper my swearing for you, it's not on purpose it's a lifetime in the building industry.

OK right let's go though this once again because you seem to be struggling with the concept of food!

If you want to import 100% of your food the figures vary massively

In reality you could squeeze 300 million into the UK. But your not going to feed them, or have a place for them to work, or recreational space or have any national parks whatsoever!!

Hey if that's what people want it's a democracy they can vote for that.

But in reality what your actually doing is taking people from the least populated places, Africa and replacing them in the most densely populated areas (the reason there dense is because there usually buy not always arable land). Concreting over that arable land for housing these people you're shifting from areas that are perfectly sustainable.... Except you yes you with your car and your big house and your fatty diet and your massive energy consumption and your well paying job... Yes you!

Your consuming there resources.

Now if you could get out of your armchair, cycle, walk, eat a better diet and consume less resources.... Guess FUCKING what?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

And this is why I no longer read papers or watch the news....

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

You know I'm sick to fucking death of actually telling people where the fucking problem is!.

It's not fucking Africans

It's not fucking Chinese

It's fucking guess what... first world arseholes!

70% of the world's resources is consumed in guess where!

70% consumed by 25% of the population?.

Now don't worry your fat fucking arse, don't write a letter to me or your mp, because quite frankly myself or your mp couldn't give two shits about your fat fucking lazy sloth lifestyle and your great big ego over of who's the nicest fat fucking lazy European with your car and your antibiotics and your big fucking pension!

ASK YOURSELF WHAT HAVE YOU DONE TO CURE ANYTHING YOU MOAN ABOUT!

Now I'm just guessing... But I reckon it's fuck all(excuse my language)

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"And this is why I no longer read papers or watch the news....

"
.

Well quite frankly I'm having a perfectly good argument with a very nice chap, who despite us having different views,I actually quite like the guy, in fact I have some respect for him, because he has something to actually say, other than this is why I don't watch the news

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Golf courses take up more of our island than housing. Just to get that into perspective about the housing shortage/over crowding situation. .

Lol no they don't!

Aw, but i got told that just this week, by the biased media..

Just turn on your Google maps and look at Any city or town, you'll see lots and lots of houses, houses that need roads, shops, schools, hospitals, offices, industrial estates, you'll probably see some big ponds and reservoirs to provide water for the houses, and then you'll see a big green bit outside of the towns and we use that green stuff for growing food for the people in the houses and growing food for the animals which those people in those houses eat!

Now if you look further afield you'll probably see a large proportion of land that's not really'farmed' and not got houses

There national parks, dales, hilly areas like welsh mountains, lake district.. Not only would it be wrong morally to build there but also unpractical!

I think if I remember correctly England's population density is somewhere around 450p km

That puts us in the top 20 and most of the top 20 is made up of tiny island's if you removed them England would be in the top 10 most densely populated

That population density is what you get when you put a referee and two linesmen on a full sized football pitch. We're not being compressed shoulder to shoulder as some would like us to believe. Population densities in towns in England are anything from 10 to 25 times that including in some of the wealthiest and upmarket regions. .

It's 450 people per sq kilometre

Or 1000 metres by 1000 metres.

In that land you have to obviously allow for

Space for houses, grow food, harvest water, provide energy, keep livestock, houses etc etc

This country is nearly at a traditional capacity, that's just factual, you don't have to be a member of ukip or even the green party to see that!

You could possibly accommodate twice as much maybe 120 130 million but you would almost certainly have to make wholesale changes like importing 50% of your food minimum probably more like 80% unless everyone goes vegetarian, cremate every dead person or even better biodegrade them for fertiliser, change planning laws, wholesale changes to your energy system, water, sewage, transport, health!

What people just don't understand is all the stuff they don't see!

According to the most recent figures on the ONS website, in mid-2013 the population density of England was 413 people per sq km compared with 149 people per sq km in Wales and 135 people per sq km in Northern Ireland. Scotland has the lowest population density at 68 people per sq km.

There you go - it's shrunk by about 10% since you posted that it was 450..

Well I don't have all day to look every figure up!

That's why I put "I think it's 450"

You can't qoute UK figures

Scotland and Wales completely disfigure the reality.

Scotland's not far from the size of England with what 4 million? (Again top of my head from what I can remember).

Most of it is completely uninhabitable for modern life, unless you want to spend a trillion on infrastructure?.

Let's stick with England as that's where the vast vast majority of the UK population live (for a reason).

So it's population density is 422 did you say? Anyhow what ever it's very high by world standards, you keep making the same mistake by quoting it against city density's?

Now where do the 11 million people in London get there food! Or water, sewerage, energy,... Etc etc... From outside of London!

Read my post, I said you could jam in 130 million but you ain't doing it without one major fucking overhaul of our current economy and infrastructure.

So anyhow traditional requirements for space per person, it relies on space to grow food! Live in a house with a garden, have recreational space... You know shit like we've had for years!

No you said 422, I wrote the figure from the ONS. You also made up 130 million, which isn't relevant to any reality, or fucking reality if it helps to swear about it, given a growth rate of 0.7-0.8% per year at the moment. Only in a dream world does everyone have a house built for them - have a quick look at inner city living where most of these people go - they tend to increase their number density or go upwards in high rise. You're quite right that more people consume more resources and need more infrastructure, but that's got absolutely nothing to do with population density but absolute population numbers. The population density figure is a red herring.

There are lots of factors that affect our need to overhaul infrastructure. Population growth is one, as is having to retire worn out infrastructure, which happens independently of the population, or the drive to replace polluting energy resources with less polluting resources. There are huge requirements for infrastructure replacement because the stuff wears out, not just because of population -think about power stations, sewers, roads, public buildings - they all have a limited life independent of population growth

None of this is a problem with a single dimension. It pleases some people to blame immigration or population growth without thinking that that is just part of a wider problem that infrastructure planners have to take account of each year... each day.

Just misquoting one dimension, population density, as if it's the scary cause of all our ills is misleading.

If you can't get the basic numbers right, you can't plan properly. I hope the planners can be arsed to look them up.

Of course I can quote UK figures if I want to. For example they include much of that recreational space you refer to. Just because you say that Scotland and Wales 'disfigure reality' doesn't make that true. Your world view always wants to take the most pessimistic view of numbers (and just occasionally exaggerate them too???).

As before, you don't need to build everywhere to increase population in a country. It tends to happen in cities where people already are. Some might say Scotland is far better placed to take more people with ample supplies of energy, more water than they know what to do with and a vibrant population with a positive outlook to the rest of Europe. And tons of recreational space too.

I don't mind your doom and gloom view of the world. Eventually it will all come tumbling down round our ears but I doubt that you or any of the rest of us here will be alive for you to be able to say 'I told you so'.

.

Sorry I'll temper my swearing for you, it's not on purpose it's a lifetime in the building industry.

OK right let's go though this once again because you seem to be struggling with the concept of food!

If you want to import 100% of your food the figures vary massively

In reality you could squeeze 300 million into the UK. But your not going to feed them, or have a place for them to work, or recreational space or have any national parks whatsoever!!

Hey if that's what people want it's a democracy they can vote for that.

But in reality what your actually doing is taking people from the least populated places, Africa and replacing them in the most densely populated areas (the reason there dense is because there usually buy not always arable land). Concreting over that arable land for housing these people you're shifting from areas that are perfectly sustainable.... Except you yes you with your car and your big house and your fatty diet and your massive energy consumption and your well paying job... Yes you!

Your consuming there resources.

Now if you could get out of your armchair, cycle, walk, eat a better diet and consume less resources.... Guess FUCKING what?"

As you know nothing about my lifestyle or consumption of resources I'll assume most of that is aimed at other people who fit that description, unless you're describing yourself?

I've no problem with the concept of food or feeding the population at all. I would be concerned if the population here grew to 120 million or 130 million BUT at the risk of repetition, you and I would be long dead by then and I wouldn't be bothered at all by the sound of you rolling over in your grave croaking the words 'I told you so' for the thousandth or ten thousandth time. If you're going to use numbers, try starting from a reasonably accurate start point. If you were planning for a population density of 450 per sq Km you would be about 6 million or so people out before you started. You would clearly be throwing away a lot of unneeded food, building useless schools, hospitals, roads, sewers, newly trained teachers, nurses etc for non-existent people. That's what happens when you make ridiculous assumptions about population density now and future population.

If you don't get the basics right in calculations about your own country then you can look forward to wasting loads of resources that the 3rd world could have used.

Now just sit back in that armchair and try not to think about the energy used in producing and delivering that bottle of wine or for you to drive down to the supermarket to collect it in your fancy car.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Hang on we work damm hard and can't afford dentist glasses even the bloody rent some weeks but you never see a skint immergrant ..."

Well the young lads with nothing but the clothes they are wearing who are sleeping with empty bellies on grass verges by the side of the road in Calais and risking their lives to try to get through the tunnel don't look too wealthy...

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"And this is why I no longer read papers or watch the news....

.

Well quite frankly I'm having a perfectly good argument with a very nice chap, who despite us having different views,I actually quite like the guy, in fact I have some respect for him, because he has something to actually say, other than this is why I don't watch the news "

And I'm enjoying following this thread. In fact it's precisely why I find reading papers and watching news an important part of my day/week/life.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"And this is why I no longer read papers or watch the news....

.

Well quite frankly I'm having a perfectly good argument with a very nice chap, who despite us having different views,I actually quite like the guy, in fact I have some respect for him, because he has something to actually say, other than this is why I don't watch the news "

See - people are taking exception to all that bad language. Tut, tut

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Hang on we work damm hard and can't afford dentist glasses even the bloody rent some weeks but you never see a skint immergrant ...

Well the young lads with nothing but the clothes they are wearing who are sleeping with empty bellies on grass verges by the side of the road in Calais and risking their lives to try to get through the tunnel don't look too wealthy..."

That's because they've given all their cash to the people smugglers to get them there.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Golf courses take up more of our island than housing. Just to get that into perspective about the housing shortage/over crowding situation. .

Lol no they don't!

Aw, but i got told that just this week, by the biased media..

Just turn on your Google maps and look at Any city or town, you'll see lots and lots of houses, houses that need roads, shops, schools, hospitals, offices, industrial estates, you'll probably see some big ponds and reservoirs to provide water for the houses, and then you'll see a big green bit outside of the towns and we use that green stuff for growing food for the people in the houses and growing food for the animals which those people in those houses eat!

Now if you look further afield you'll probably see a large proportion of land that's not really'farmed' and not got houses

There national parks, dales, hilly areas like welsh mountains, lake district.. Not only would it be wrong morally to build there but also unpractical!

I think if I remember correctly England's population density is somewhere around 450p km

That puts us in the top 20 and most of the top 20 is made up of tiny island's if you removed them England would be in the top 10 most densely populated

That population density is what you get when you put a referee and two linesmen on a full sized football pitch. We're not being compressed shoulder to shoulder as some would like us to believe. Population densities in towns in England are anything from 10 to 25 times that including in some of the wealthiest and upmarket regions. .

It's 450 people per sq kilometre

Or 1000 metres by 1000 metres.

In that land you have to obviously allow for

Space for houses, grow food, harvest water, provide energy, keep livestock, houses etc etc

This country is nearly at a traditional capacity, that's just factual, you don't have to be a member of ukip or even the green party to see that!

You could possibly accommodate twice as much maybe 120 130 million but you would almost certainly have to make wholesale changes like importing 50% of your food minimum probably more like 80% unless everyone goes vegetarian, cremate every dead person or even better biodegrade them for fertiliser, change planning laws, wholesale changes to your energy system, water, sewage, transport, health!

What people just don't understand is all the stuff they don't see!

According to the most recent figures on the ONS website, in mid-2013 the population density of England was 413 people per sq km compared with 149 people per sq km in Wales and 135 people per sq km in Northern Ireland. Scotland has the lowest population density at 68 people per sq km.

There you go - it's shrunk by about 10% since you posted that it was 450..

Well I don't have all day to look every figure up!

That's why I put "I think it's 450"

You can't qoute UK figures

Scotland and Wales completely disfigure the reality.

Scotland's not far from the size of England with what 4 million? (Again top of my head from what I can remember).

Most of it is completely uninhabitable for modern life, unless you want to spend a trillion on infrastructure?.

Let's stick with England as that's where the vast vast majority of the UK population live (for a reason).

So it's population density is 422 did you say? Anyhow what ever it's very high by world standards, you keep making the same mistake by quoting it against city density's?

Now where do the 11 million people in London get there food! Or water, sewerage, energy,... Etc etc... From outside of London!

Read my post, I said you could jam in 130 million but you ain't doing it without one major fucking overhaul of our current economy and infrastructure.

So anyhow traditional requirements for space per person, it relies on space to grow food! Live in a house with a garden, have recreational space... You know shit like we've had for years!

No you said 422, I wrote the figure from the ONS. You also made up 130 million, which isn't relevant to any reality, or fucking reality if it helps to swear about it, given a growth rate of 0.7-0.8% per year at the moment. Only in a dream world does everyone have a house built for them - have a quick look at inner city living where most of these people go - they tend to increase their number density or go upwards in high rise. You're quite right that more people consume more resources and need more infrastructure, but that's got absolutely nothing to do with population density but absolute population numbers. The population density figure is a red herring.

There are lots of factors that affect our need to overhaul infrastructure. Population growth is one, as is having to retire worn out infrastructure, which happens independently of the population, or the drive to replace polluting energy resources with less polluting resources. There are huge requirements for infrastructure replacement because the stuff wears out, not just because of population -think about power stations, sewers, roads, public buildings - they all have a limited life independent of population growth

None of this is a problem with a single dimension. It pleases some people to blame immigration or population growth without thinking that that is just part of a wider problem that infrastructure planners have to take account of each year... each day.

Just misquoting one dimension, population density, as if it's the scary cause of all our ills is misleading.

If you can't get the basic numbers right, you can't plan properly. I hope the planners can be arsed to look them up.

Of course I can quote UK figures if I want to. For example they include much of that recreational space you refer to. Just because you say that Scotland and Wales 'disfigure reality' doesn't make that true. Your world view always wants to take the most pessimistic view of numbers (and just occasionally exaggerate them too???).

As before, you don't need to build everywhere to increase population in a country. It tends to happen in cities where people already are. Some might say Scotland is far better placed to take more people with ample supplies of energy, more water than they know what to do with and a vibrant population with a positive outlook to the rest of Europe. And tons of recreational space too.

I don't mind your doom and gloom view of the world. Eventually it will all come tumbling down round our ears but I doubt that you or any of the rest of us here will be alive for you to be able to say 'I told you so'.

.

Sorry I'll temper my swearing for you, it's not on purpose it's a lifetime in the building industry.

OK right let's go though this once again because you seem to be struggling with the concept of food!

If you want to import 100% of your food the figures vary massively

In reality you could squeeze 300 million into the UK. But your not going to feed them, or have a place for them to work, or recreational space or have any national parks whatsoever!!

Hey if that's what people want it's a democracy they can vote for that.

But in reality what your actually doing is taking people from the least populated places, Africa and replacing them in the most densely populated areas (the reason there dense is because there usually buy not always arable land). Concreting over that arable land for housing these people you're shifting from areas that are perfectly sustainable.... Except you yes you with your car and your big house and your fatty diet and your massive energy consumption and your well paying job... Yes you!

Your consuming there resources.

Now if you could get out of your armchair, cycle, walk, eat a better diet and consume less resources.... Guess FUCKING what?

As you know nothing about my lifestyle or consumption of resources I'll assume most of that is aimed at other people who fit that description, unless you're describing yourself?

I've no problem with the concept of food or feeding the population at all. I would be concerned if the population here grew to 120 million or 130 million BUT at the risk of repetition, you and I would be long dead by then and I wouldn't be bothered at all by the sound of you rolling over in your grave croaking the words 'I told you so' for the thousandth or ten thousandth time. If you're going to use numbers, try starting from a reasonably accurate start point. If you were planning for a population density of 450 per sq Km you would be about 6 million or so people out before you started. You would clearly be throwing away a lot of unneeded food, building useless schools, hospitals, roads, sewers, newly trained teachers, nurses etc for non-existent people. That's what happens when you make ridiculous assumptions about population density now and future population.

If you don't get the basics right in calculations about your own country then you can look forward to wasting loads of resources that the 3rd world could have used.

Now just sit back in that armchair and try not to think about the energy used in producing and delivering that bottle of wine or for you to drive down to the supermarket to collect it in your fancy car.

"
.

You see that's where we differ!

I make my own fuel for my twenty year old car, produce my own electricity, my house is completely carbon neutral! And has the minimum amount of energy consumption!, now I would add that this comes at great personal time consumption to myself and my family and at great cost! somebody has to make the diesel, chop the logs, plant the garden, feed the chickens. Etc etc.

Our life's and our journeys are planned and minimised, we haven't been abroad or even flown in 17 years!

I don't own a single piece of new clothing (my wife I can't speak for),I eat meat twice a week and my wine consumption is less than three bottles a week .

Now let's get back to those figures you love!.

412 people per sq km

It doesn't matter whether you build upwards or not, you've still got to provide infrastructure for them, food, schools, hospitals, jobs.

What your saying is we should spend all that money here in the UK.... That's already well off!, so we can move a sizeable proportion of the third world that's got no land limitations to a country that has... That concept is why Africa is bollocksed and why there having to flee for their lives for basics like fucking water???

You know where that money/energy needs spending... Not here,

Think really fucking hard you don't need Google or figures to guess it....

And no I'm not ranting at you personally, it's the entire first world I'm moaning at, you know that first world with an obesity crises and a diabetes crises and a debt crises!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The problem shouldn't be what do we do with asylum seekers, it should be WHY do we have asylum seekers?

There is nothing on this planet that suggest or even remotely hints at 8 out of 10 people should live in poverty, no poverty is the wrong word, should live without basic necessities.

Now if your living in opulence it's because somebody is doing without.

So the real question is, why do you think you need a foreign holiday or a new car, or to put the heating on in fucking July when you've got a wardrobe full of friggin clothes, some of which you've never fucking worn!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Now if you've answered not me to those questions, you can come and take the moral high ground with me, until then stick your morals up your arse because I'm seeing right though you!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Golf courses take up more of our island than housing. Just to get that into perspective about the housing shortage/over crowding situation. .

Lol no they don't!

Aw, but i got told that just this week, by the biased media..

Just turn on your Google maps and look at Any city or town, you'll see lots and lots of houses, houses that need roads, shops, schools, hospitals, offices, industrial estates, you'll probably see some big ponds and reservoirs to provide water for the houses, and then you'll see a big green bit outside of the towns and we use that green stuff for growing food for the people in the houses and growing food for the animals which those people in those houses eat!

Now if you look further afield you'll probably see a large proportion of land that's not really'farmed' and not got houses

There national parks, dales, hilly areas like welsh mountains, lake district.. Not only would it be wrong morally to build there but also unpractical!

I think if I remember correctly England's population density is somewhere around 450p km

That puts us in the top 20 and most of the top 20 is made up of tiny island's if you removed them England would be in the top 10 most densely populated

That population density is what you get when you put a referee and two linesmen on a full sized football pitch. We're not being compressed shoulder to shoulder as some would like us to believe. Population densities in towns in England are anything from 10 to 25 times that including in some of the wealthiest and upmarket regions. .

It's 450 people per sq kilometre

Or 1000 metres by 1000 metres.

In that land you have to obviously allow for

Space for houses, grow food, harvest water, provide energy, keep livestock, houses etc etc

This country is nearly at a traditional capacity, that's just factual, you don't have to be a member of ukip or even the green party to see that!

You could possibly accommodate twice as much maybe 120 130 million but you would almost certainly have to make wholesale changes like importing 50% of your food minimum probably more like 80% unless everyone goes vegetarian, cremate every dead person or even better biodegrade them for fertiliser, change planning laws, wholesale changes to your energy system, water, sewage, transport, health!

What people just don't understand is all the stuff they don't see!

According to the most recent figures on the ONS website, in mid-2013 the population density of England was 413 people per sq km compared with 149 people per sq km in Wales and 135 people per sq km in Northern Ireland. Scotland has the lowest population density at 68 people per sq km.

There you go - it's shrunk by about 10% since you posted that it was 450..

Well I don't have all day to look every figure up!

That's why I put "I think it's 450"

You can't qoute UK figures

Scotland and Wales completely disfigure the reality.

Scotland's not far from the size of England with what 4 million? (Again top of my head from what I can remember).

Most of it is completely uninhabitable for modern life, unless you want to spend a trillion on infrastructure?.

Let's stick with England as that's where the vast vast majority of the UK population live (for a reason).

So it's population density is 422 did you say? Anyhow what ever it's very high by world standards, you keep making the same mistake by quoting it against city density's?

Now where do the 11 million people in London get there food! Or water, sewerage, energy,... Etc etc... From outside of London!

Read my post, I said you could jam in 130 million but you ain't doing it without one major fucking overhaul of our current economy and infrastructure.

So anyhow traditional requirements for space per person, it relies on space to grow food! Live in a house with a garden, have recreational space... You know shit like we've had for years!

No you said 422, I wrote the figure from the ONS. You also made up 130 million, which isn't relevant to any reality, or fucking reality if it helps to swear about it, given a growth rate of 0.7-0.8% per year at the moment. Only in a dream world does everyone have a house built for them - have a quick look at inner city living where most of these people go - they tend to increase their number density or go upwards in high rise. You're quite right that more people consume more resources and need more infrastructure, but that's got absolutely nothing to do with population density but absolute population numbers. The population density figure is a red herring.

There are lots of factors that affect our need to overhaul infrastructure. Population growth is one, as is having to retire worn out infrastructure, which happens independently of the population, or the drive to replace polluting energy resources with less polluting resources. There are huge requirements for infrastructure replacement because the stuff wears out, not just because of population -think about power stations, sewers, roads, public buildings - they all have a limited life independent of population growth

None of this is a problem with a single dimension. It pleases some people to blame immigration or population growth without thinking that that is just part of a wider problem that infrastructure planners have to take account of each year... each day.

Just misquoting one dimension, population density, as if it's the scary cause of all our ills is misleading.

If you can't get the basic numbers right, you can't plan properly. I hope the planners can be arsed to look them up.

Of course I can quote UK figures if I want to. For example they include much of that recreational space you refer to. Just because you say that Scotland and Wales 'disfigure reality' doesn't make that true. Your world view always wants to take the most pessimistic view of numbers (and just occasionally exaggerate them too???).

As before, you don't need to build everywhere to increase population in a country. It tends to happen in cities where people already are. Some might say Scotland is far better placed to take more people with ample supplies of energy, more water than they know what to do with and a vibrant population with a positive outlook to the rest of Europe. And tons of recreational space too.

I don't mind your doom and gloom view of the world. Eventually it will all come tumbling down round our ears but I doubt that you or any of the rest of us here will be alive for you to be able to say 'I told you so'.

.

Sorry I'll temper my swearing for you, it's not on purpose it's a lifetime in the building industry.

OK right let's go though this once again because you seem to be struggling with the concept of food!

If you want to import 100% of your food the figures vary massively

In reality you could squeeze 300 million into the UK. But your not going to feed them, or have a place for them to work, or recreational space or have any national parks whatsoever!!

Hey if that's what people want it's a democracy they can vote for that.

But in reality what your actually doing is taking people from the least populated places, Africa and replacing them in the most densely populated areas (the reason there dense is because there usually buy not always arable land). Concreting over that arable land for housing these people you're shifting from areas that are perfectly sustainable.... Except you yes you with your car and your big house and your fatty diet and your massive energy consumption and your well paying job... Yes you!

Your consuming there resources.

Now if you could get out of your armchair, cycle, walk, eat a better diet and consume less resources.... Guess FUCKING what?

As you know nothing about my lifestyle or consumption of resources I'll assume most of that is aimed at other people who fit that description, unless you're describing yourself?

I've no problem with the concept of food or feeding the population at all. I would be concerned if the population here grew to 120 million or 130 million BUT at the risk of repetition, you and I would be long dead by then and I wouldn't be bothered at all by the sound of you rolling over in your grave croaking the words 'I told you so' for the thousandth or ten thousandth time. If you're going to use numbers, try starting from a reasonably accurate start point. If you were planning for a population density of 450 per sq Km you would be about 6 million or so people out before you started. You would clearly be throwing away a lot of unneeded food, building useless schools, hospitals, roads, sewers, newly trained teachers, nurses etc for non-existent people. That's what happens when you make ridiculous assumptions about population density now and future population.

If you don't get the basics right in calculations about your own country then you can look forward to wasting loads of resources that the 3rd world could have used.

Now just sit back in that armchair and try not to think about the energy used in producing and delivering that bottle of wine or for you to drive down to the supermarket to collect it in your fancy car.

.

You see that's where we differ!

I make my own fuel for my twenty year old car, produce my own electricity, my house is completely carbon neutral! And has the minimum amount of energy consumption!, now I would add that this comes at great personal time consumption to myself and my family and at great cost! somebody has to make the diesel, chop the logs, plant the garden, feed the chickens. Etc etc.

Our life's and our journeys are planned and minimised, we haven't been abroad or even flown in 17 years!

I don't own a single piece of new clothing (my wife I can't speak for),I eat meat twice a week and my wine consumption is less than three bottles a week .

Now let's get back to those figures you love!.

412 people per sq km

It doesn't matter whether you build upwards or not, you've still got to provide infrastructure for them, food, schools, hospitals, jobs.

What your saying is we should spend all that money here in the UK.... That's already well off!, so we can move a sizeable proportion of the third world that's got no land limitations to a country that has... That concept is why Africa is bollocksed and why there having to flee for their lives for basics like fucking water???

You know where that money/energy needs spending... Not here,

Think really fucking hard you don't need Google or figures to guess it....

And no I'm not ranting at you personally, it's the entire first world I'm moaning at, you know that first world with an obesity crises and a diabetes crises and a debt crises!"

Only 3 bottles a week. I take it all back - you're a saint and now I understand why you are so grumpy, but, as you already knew your green credentials were already far better than mine. Plus most of your clothes must be due to come back into style soon...

Mind you my numbers are so much more accurate/upto date than yours Funnily enough very few people seem to spot when I get them wrong

Anyway, we're violently agreeing about much of this stuff, though you're a much better practician than all of us.

Where we depart is that I'm saying that a) we need to replace infrastructure over time for a variety of reasons even if the population stays fixed - things wear out/break/catch fire/get stolen/whatever b) the change due to population growth is a small percentage of the overall cost. People tend to forget about that because it's sunk until we need billions to replace sewers or power stations or to build hundreds of schools etc.

We need to spend that money here in any case and the planning for any population change here should take account of reasonable assumptions about population density and growth - if it doesn't then we waste resources.

An example that comes to mind is when I used to do some work for a London borough. After many years of struggling to get the number of school places in balance with the needs of a highly dynamic population, we'd just got it right when one of the good old Victorian buildings decided to burn down one afternoon (electrical problem). Until it was replaced we worked with the surviving building stock. No amount of fixing the problems of immigrants in Africa changed the need to replace infrastructure.

Of course the reasons for mass emigration from other parts of the world have to be solved at source. I couldn't agree with you more about that. BUT If we did that tomorrow we'd still need to build/replace infrastructure here. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Now if you've answered not me to those questions, you can come and take the moral high ground with me, until then stick your morals up your arse because I'm seeing right though you!"

There's loads of room here on the moral foothills

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"And this is why I no longer read papers or watch the news....

.

Well quite frankly I'm having a perfectly good argument with a very nice chap, who despite us having different views,I actually quite like the guy, in fact I have some respect for him, because he has something to actually say, other than this is why I don't watch the news "

Sorry I'm saying I don't watch the news. Not sure why you would take that personally as to have a dig or insinuate I'm dense/docile because I don't watch the news. The whole thread looks exhausting to me. That was my point. But thanks for the public beration all the same.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Golf courses take up more of our island than housing. Just to get that into perspective about the housing shortage/over crowding situation. .

Lol no they don't!

Aw, but i got told that just this week, by the biased media..

Just turn on your Google maps and look at Any city or town, you'll see lots and lots of houses, houses that need roads, shops, schools, hospitals, offices, industrial estates, you'll probably see some big ponds and reservoirs to provide water for the houses, and then you'll see a big green bit outside of the towns and we use that green stuff for growing food for the people in the houses and growing food for the animals which those people in those houses eat!

Now if you look further afield you'll probably see a large proportion of land that's not really'farmed' and not got houses

There national parks, dales, hilly areas like welsh mountains, lake district.. Not only would it be wrong morally to build there but also unpractical!

I think if I remember correctly England's population density is somewhere around 450p km

That puts us in the top 20 and most of the top 20 is made up of tiny island's if you removed them England would be in the top 10 most densely populated

That population density is what you get when you put a referee and two linesmen on a full sized football pitch. We're not being compressed shoulder to shoulder as some would like us to believe. Population densities in towns in England are anything from 10 to 25 times that including in some of the wealthiest and upmarket regions. .

It's 450 people per sq kilometre

Or 1000 metres by 1000 metres.

In that land you have to obviously allow for

Space for houses, grow food, harvest water, provide energy, keep livestock, houses etc etc

This country is nearly at a traditional capacity, that's just factual, you don't have to be a member of ukip or even the green party to see that!

You could possibly accommodate twice as much maybe 120 130 million but you would almost certainly have to make wholesale changes like importing 50% of your food minimum probably more like 80% unless everyone goes vegetarian, cremate every dead person or even better biodegrade them for fertiliser, change planning laws, wholesale changes to your energy system, water, sewage, transport, health!

What people just don't understand is all the stuff they don't see!

According to the most recent figures on the ONS website, in mid-2013 the population density of England was 413 people per sq km compared with 149 people per sq km in Wales and 135 people per sq km in Northern Ireland. Scotland has the lowest population density at 68 people per sq km.

There you go - it's shrunk by about 10% since you posted that it was 450..

Well I don't have all day to look every figure up!

That's why I put "I think it's 450"

You can't qoute UK figures

Scotland and Wales completely disfigure the reality.

Scotland's not far from the size of England with what 4 million? (Again top of my head from what I can remember).

Most of it is completely uninhabitable for modern life, unless you want to spend a trillion on infrastructure?.

Let's stick with England as that's where the vast vast majority of the UK population live (for a reason).

So it's population density is 422 did you say? Anyhow what ever it's very high by world standards, you keep making the same mistake by quoting it against city density's?

Now where do the 11 million people in London get there food! Or water, sewerage, energy,... Etc etc... From outside of London!

Read my post, I said you could jam in 130 million but you ain't doing it without one major fucking overhaul of our current economy and infrastructure.

So anyhow traditional requirements for space per person, it relies on space to grow food! Live in a house with a garden, have recreational space... You know shit like we've had for years!

No you said 422, I wrote the figure from the ONS. You also made up 130 million, which isn't relevant to any reality, or fucking reality if it helps to swear about it, given a growth rate of 0.7-0.8% per year at the moment. Only in a dream world does everyone have a house built for them - have a quick look at inner city living where most of these people go - they tend to increase their number density or go upwards in high rise. You're quite right that more people consume more resources and need more infrastructure, but that's got absolutely nothing to do with population density but absolute population numbers. The population density figure is a red herring.

There are lots of factors that affect our need to overhaul infrastructure. Population growth is one, as is having to retire worn out infrastructure, which happens independently of the population, or the drive to replace polluting energy resources with less polluting resources. There are huge requirements for infrastructure replacement because the stuff wears out, not just because of population -think about power stations, sewers, roads, public buildings - they all have a limited life independent of population growth

None of this is a problem with a single dimension. It pleases some people to blame immigration or population growth without thinking that that is just part of a wider problem that infrastructure planners have to take account of each year... each day.

Just misquoting one dimension, population density, as if it's the scary cause of all our ills is misleading.

If you can't get the basic numbers right, you can't plan properly. I hope the planners can be arsed to look them up.

Of course I can quote UK figures if I want to. For example they include much of that recreational space you refer to. Just because you say that Scotland and Wales 'disfigure reality' doesn't make that true. Your world view always wants to take the most pessimistic view of numbers (and just occasionally exaggerate them too???).

As before, you don't need to build everywhere to increase population in a country. It tends to happen in cities where people already are. Some might say Scotland is far better placed to take more people with ample supplies of energy, more water than they know what to do with and a vibrant population with a positive outlook to the rest of Europe. And tons of recreational space too.

I don't mind your doom and gloom view of the world. Eventually it will all come tumbling down round our ears but I doubt that you or any of the rest of us here will be alive for you to be able to say 'I told you so'.

.

Sorry I'll temper my swearing for you, it's not on purpose it's a lifetime in the building industry.

OK right let's go though this once again because you seem to be struggling with the concept of food!

If you want to import 100% of your food the figures vary massively

In reality you could squeeze 300 million into the UK. But your not going to feed them, or have a place for them to work, or recreational space or have any national parks whatsoever!!

Hey if that's what people want it's a democracy they can vote for that.

But in reality what your actually doing is taking people from the least populated places, Africa and replacing them in the most densely populated areas (the reason there dense is because there usually buy not always arable land). Concreting over that arable land for housing these people you're shifting from areas that are perfectly sustainable.... Except you yes you with your car and your big house and your fatty diet and your massive energy consumption and your well paying job... Yes you!

Your consuming there resources.

Now if you could get out of your armchair, cycle, walk, eat a better diet and consume less resources.... Guess FUCKING what?

As you know nothing about my lifestyle or consumption of resources I'll assume most of that is aimed at other people who fit that description, unless you're describing yourself?

I've no problem with the concept of food or feeding the population at all. I would be concerned if the population here grew to 120 million or 130 million BUT at the risk of repetition, you and I would be long dead by then and I wouldn't be bothered at all by the sound of you rolling over in your grave croaking the words 'I told you so' for the thousandth or ten thousandth time. If you're going to use numbers, try starting from a reasonably accurate start point. If you were planning for a population density of 450 per sq Km you would be about 6 million or so people out before you started. You would clearly be throwing away a lot of unneeded food, building useless schools, hospitals, roads, sewers, newly trained teachers, nurses etc for non-existent people. That's what happens when you make ridiculous assumptions about population density now and future population.

If you don't get the basics right in calculations about your own country then you can look forward to wasting loads of resources that the 3rd world could have used.

Now just sit back in that armchair and try not to think about the energy used in producing and delivering that bottle of wine or for you to drive down to the supermarket to collect it in your fancy car.

.

You see that's where we differ!

I make my own fuel for my twenty year old car, produce my own electricity, my house is completely carbon neutral! And has the minimum amount of energy consumption!, now I would add that this comes at great personal time consumption to myself and my family and at great cost! somebody has to make the diesel, chop the logs, plant the garden, feed the chickens. Etc etc.

Our life's and our journeys are planned and minimised, we haven't been abroad or even flown in 17 years!

I don't own a single piece of new clothing (my wife I can't speak for),I eat meat twice a week and my wine consumption is less than three bottles a week .

Now let's get back to those figures you love!.

412 people per sq km

It doesn't matter whether you build upwards or not, you've still got to provide infrastructure for them, food, schools, hospitals, jobs.

What your saying is we should spend all that money here in the UK.... That's already well off!, so we can move a sizeable proportion of the third world that's got no land limitations to a country that has... That concept is why Africa is bollocksed and why there having to flee for their lives for basics like fucking water???

You know where that money/energy needs spending... Not here,

Think really fucking hard you don't need Google or figures to guess it....

And no I'm not ranting at you personally, it's the entire first world I'm moaning at, you know that first world with an obesity crises and a diabetes crises and a debt crises!

Only 3 bottles a week. I take it all back - you're a saint and now I understand why you are so grumpy, but, as you already knew your green credentials were already far better than mine. Plus most of your clothes must be due to come back into style soon...

Mind you my numbers are so much more accurate/upto date than yours Funnily enough very few people seem to spot when I get them wrong

Anyway, we're violently agreeing about much of this stuff, though you're a much better practician than all of us.

Where we depart is that I'm saying that a) we need to replace infrastructure over time for a variety of reasons even if the population stays fixed - things wear out/break/catch fire/get stolen/whatever b) the change due to population growth is a small percentage of the overall cost. People tend to forget about that because it's sunk until we need billions to replace sewers or power stations or to build hundreds of schools etc.

We need to spend that money here in any case and the planning for any population change here should take account of reasonable assumptions about population density and growth - if it doesn't then we waste resources.

An example that comes to mind is when I used to do some work for a London borough. After many years of struggling to get the number of school places in balance with the needs of a highly dynamic population, we'd just got it right when one of the good old Victorian buildings decided to burn down one afternoon (electrical problem). Until it was replaced we worked with the surviving building stock. No amount of fixing the problems of immigrants in Africa changed the need to replace infrastructure.

Of course the reasons for mass emigration from other parts of the world have to be solved at source. I couldn't agree with you more about that. BUT If we did that tomorrow we'd still need to build/replace infrastructure here. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

"
.

Oh good God it's a battle of who's got the right numbers .

OK we'll start with your assumption that we can reasonably guess population growth.

Labour said they estimate 250 thousands people would come

4 million came?

Let's look at your other assumptions... Like infrastructure, were going to have to replace it anyhow, so no new extra cost?

Are you serious, 5 new Manchester's in ten years and that's at no cost.... All we've done is push the limits of our infrastructure to breaking point

National grid is at near breaking point.

National gas grid and storage at under capacity (last long winter ring a bell when they said hey guys what, two more weeks and we run out of fucking gas)

Schools are maxed out

Hospitals

Roads

Sewerage, we've lost over 50 blue flag beach's in two years because of effluent.

250 thousand new houses a year... Where on more floods plains..

Floods.. Remember Somerset under water... Oh yeah I bet you thought oh look at all that land just sitting there... Look you could house another million people on that land!

And those floods caused by excessive carbon emissions, the ones we've committed to reduce so we don't make the problem worse.. you know those ones that scientific evidence says is going to be worse especially for... Err Africans, who you've displaced, stole their resources, sold arms too, manoeuvred civil wars, ignored and generally treated like shit for 40 years so you could have a jolly good jolly... But no let's ease your conscience, because your so liberal and multi cultural, it's all just gravy.

Of course if we asked you to actually put your hand in your pocket to actually make Africa better for Africans you'd be super supportive and just vote in the most liberal party, oh yes, let's examine those figures of how people actually vote... In their best interest, which is why Africa's not doing so well, which is why tens of millions are running for their lives.... Still your conscience is clear..

I mean you've got all the figures and your always right? Right

Now according to an mit study I read awhile back and yes I'm not exactly sure of these figures..

It was around 2 acres needed to feed a family of four, who wished to eat a standard diet (meat eggs grain vegetables).

They extrapolated this down to a maximum of 1000 people per square km eating only a vegetarian diet and maybe getting to around 3000 people with advanced hydroponics.

Now according to the WWF at 7 billion yes 7 billion we've already reached maximum capacity without... How shall we say impeding on other stuff!

Yes that 7 billion figure

Let's think about that when we state things like.... Immigration has always been going on, my grandad was an immigrant, these are facts but are they relevant?

So in 1900 when your grandad and my grandad were busy emigrating, the world population was 1-1.5 billon? (Again a rough estimate but close enough for arguments sake)

You can't compare one to the other there's 7 billion today, it's completely different, we need to think differently to reflect different times!

There's a limit of carbon dioxide that we think though science, that we can put into the atmosphere before we get real big problems!

Right now we're around 400 ppm

And that's not good, we'd really like to reduce that to 350ppm(but let's forget that because your holidays and you car and your meat eating aint going to do it),450 ppm will cause big problems and 500 ppm will cause really big problems.

Now to get from 400 to 500 , you get so many tonnes of c02 for every Terra joule of energy used, so we really need to be thinking ahead because there's only so much energy we can use before it pushes us over the 500 limit,

So what's the best way to use that limited about of energy we've got!

Moving half the world around to fit in with your morals?

Buying more shit than you know what to do with?

Foreign holidays

New cars

Heating on in July because it's fucking dizzily outside!

Wearing in fashion clothing, while throwing out non fashionable clothing to poor Africans?

In poker they say if you can't see the patsy at the table, it's because it's you!

I think it's the same with middle class white dudes and morals, always looking for the patsy

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury

This thread is living proof that people don't read threads.

:/

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"And this is why I no longer read papers or watch the news....

.

Well quite frankly I'm having a perfectly good argument with a very nice chap, who despite us having different views,I actually quite like the guy, in fact I have some respect for him, because he has something to actually say, other than this is why I don't watch the news

Sorry I'm saying I don't watch the news. Not sure why you would take that personally as to have a dig or insinuate I'm dense/docile because I don't watch the news. The whole thread looks exhausting to me. That was my point. But thanks for the public beration all the same. "
.

I could have said your tits look great but in reality every other guy will tell you that, so what's the point!.

I was busy arguing something I believe passionately about, I saw your comment as belittling that!.

I apologise if I got the wrong end of the stick!, it wasnt meant personally!.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I like Angela Merkel reply, 'we can't take you all'......

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ngel n tedCouple
over a year ago

maidstone

There's a post on here, a few posts above, which in my opinion has to be the longest frigging post i've ever seen in these forums......this is why i don't take part in these hothead topics

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Ok, I don't normally go this deep in a post but I feel I need to share my thoughts.

The media are a joke, they are telling lies and spreading malicious scaremongering bulshit across the whole of the UK, they tell us that we are in the middle of an immigration melt down, that thousands upon thousands of immigrants are crossing our borders every day, and taking our jobs and taking our benefits, which is it? Are they taking our jobs and paying tax into the country, so that British born layabouts can buy their big TVs and tracksuits, or are they all calming the £36ish that is the maximum they can claim per week, and not the £20k that everyone thinks they are getting, and social media is just as bad, you have pages like Britain first, shouting from the roof tops about immigrants getting houses, driving lessons, cars, and free everything, if I lived in a war torn country and I saw the posts telling me that I'd be on the first boat here, the reality is that people do not leave their lives and homes just to live on easy street, and living in Britain as an immigrant is not easy street, they have to face the barrage of abuse, that is stirred up by the press, Polish people have the right to live and work in Britain, but the amount of times I have heard people say to work colleagues "did you get here in a container?" It shows your ignorance.

Go and have a look out if your window, have a look now, are there hordes of Eastern Europeans, running down the street raping and pillaging? No? Well there you go, I am the son of immigrants, my father was practically begged to come here, and my mother came from Ireland, so I know first hand of the suspicion of people thinking your family are terrorists, my father worked hard, and got abused by the very people he came here to help in rebuilding of a country almost destroyed by war, only the country's have changed, the sentiment stays the same.

Final thought, if people are coming to this country, and they can't speak English, and they are taking your job, you need to have a look at your life, because if a non English speaking foreigner is better at the job than you, that says more about your skills as a person than it does about the state of the country, stop blaming everyone else because you failed at life"

A very positive post in favour of immigration/immigrants, however what you must take into account is illegal immigrants working on the black market for a lot less, below minimum wage, not paying taxes yet still use NHS some even have there children in schools. They are a parasite on our services, Whilst there is genuine reasons for people wanting to enter the uk, there is a process which must be adhered to not enter the country illegally for financial gain. Which you don't seem to have mentioned. Its a known fact Europeans entered the UK in there 1000s Had children in this country claimed family allowance then went back to there country, and we the tax payer are paying for there children in another country.

My grandparents and parents entered the UK after the war and had to go through a long process before arriving here, it is only fair people entering the UK follow the rules and when here follow the law. We are British citizens with British/European passports. Those that enter here and go through the asylum process and are accepted then go to there embassy for there country of origin passport then bring the family over it is not right we are an easy touch and people of the world know that we are a laughing stock. Sorry mate there is another side to the argument,

Follow the rules and abide by our laws and your most welcome here.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *reelove1969Couple
over a year ago

bristol

ilegal immigrants have no regard for our laws by virtue of the fact that they break the law to get here ...it doesnt bode well for future conduct

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston

Just a few little thoughts...

As it is we cant produce enough food in this country to feed the population. Nor do we have enough housing stock to give everyone a home. Therefore it strikes me as eminently sensible to restrict the number of immigrants to this country.

Further, since the end of WW2 we have seen an exponential growth in humanitarian and medical aid to Africa and a similar growth in illegal immigration from Africa. We now face an invasion of Europe across the med that is now in the 10s of thousands a month and we hear briefly but regularly of atrocities being carried out on grounds of religion and tribal allegiance.

At the same time there are primetime adds on national TV pulling at our heartstrings to provide more food, water and medicines in order to continue the population growth in sub Saharan Africa that is fuelling our crisis.

At what point do we in Europe say enough is enough? Or have we all become so weak-willed that our neo-liberalism that we continue the way we are going until it is our children who are starving?

Now having said all that I have to agree with the comments about the standards of journalism and political debate in this country. They have become so dumbed down that even the broadsheets no longer seem to be able to differentiate between legal migrants who do contribute much more to our society than many UK nationals and illegal migrants and the mass of asylum seekers who are a very real drain on our resources and an increasingly a real and very immanent danger to our peace and security.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

There is nothing on this planet that suggest or even remotely hints at 8 out of 10 people should live in poverty, no poverty is the wrong word, should live without basic necessities.

"

Yes there is.... greed and / or unchecked capitalism.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

Oh good God it's a battle of who's got the right numbers .

OK we'll start with your assumption that we can reasonably guess population growth.

Labour said they estimate 250 thousands people would come

4 million came?

Let's look at your other assumptions... Like infrastructure, were going to have to replace it anyhow, so no new extra cost?

Are you serious, 5 new Manchester's in ten years and that's at no cost.... All we've done is push the limits of our infrastructure to breaking point

National grid is at near breaking point.

National gas grid and storage at under capacity (last long winter ring a bell when they said hey guys what, two more weeks and we run out of fucking gas)

Schools are maxed out

Hospitals

Roads

Sewerage, we've lost over 50 blue flag beach's in two years because of effluent.

250 thousand new houses a year... Where on more floods plains..

Floods.. Remember Somerset under water... Oh yeah I bet you thought oh look at all that land just sitting there... Look you could house another million people on that land!

And those floods caused by excessive carbon emissions, the ones we've committed to reduce so we don't make the problem worse.. you know those ones that scientific evidence says is going to be worse especially for... Err Africans, who you've displaced, stole their resources, sold arms too, manoeuvred civil wars, ignored and generally treated like shit for 40 years so you could have a jolly good jolly... But no let's ease your conscience, because your so liberal and multi cultural, it's all just gravy.

Of course if we asked you to actually put your hand in your pocket to actually make Africa better for Africans you'd be super supportive and just vote in the most liberal party, oh yes, let's examine those figures of how people actually vote... In their best interest, which is why Africa's not doing so well, which is why tens of millions are running for their lives.... Still your conscience is clear..

I mean you've got all the figures and your always right? Right

Now according to an mit study I read awhile back and yes I'm not exactly sure of these figures..

It was around 2 acres needed to feed a family of four, who wished to eat a standard diet (meat eggs grain vegetables).

They extrapolated this down to a maximum of 1000 people per square km eating only a vegetarian diet and maybe getting to around 3000 people with advanced hydroponics.

Now according to the WWF at 7 billion yes 7 billion we've already reached maximum capacity without... How shall we say impeding on other stuff!

Yes that 7 billion figure

Let's think about that when we state things like.... Immigration has always been going on, my grandad was an immigrant, these are facts but are they relevant?

So in 1900 when your grandad and my grandad were busy emigrating, the world population was 1-1.5 billon? (Again a rough estimate but close enough for arguments sake)

You can't compare one to the other there's 7 billion today, it's completely different, we need to think differently to reflect different times!

There's a limit of carbon dioxide that we think though science, that we can put into the atmosphere before we get real big problems!

Right now we're around 400 ppm

And that's not good, we'd really like to reduce that to 350ppm(but let's forget that because your holidays and you car and your meat eating aint going to do it),450 ppm will cause big problems and 500 ppm will cause really big problems.

Now to get from 400 to 500 , you get so many tonnes of c02 for every Terra joule of energy used, so we really need to be thinking ahead because there's only so much energy we can use before it pushes us over the 500 limit,

So what's the best way to use that limited about of energy we've got!

Moving half the world around to fit in with your morals?

Buying more shit than you know what to do with?

Foreign holidays

New cars

Heating on in July because it's fucking dizzily outside!

Wearing in fashion clothing, while throwing out non fashionable clothing to poor Africans?

In poker they say if you can't see the patsy at the table, it's because it's you!

I think it's the same with middle class white dudes and morals, always looking for the patsy

"

Blimey, you must have had all 3 bottles at once – that was a bit of a rant. I’m going to stick to the point of the thread which I think was immigration and not my personal responsibility for what my grandfathers, who weren’t even born in 1900, did or did not do to Africa then, or how my own personal non-use of air travel for the past 15 years has not contributed to global warming and/or CO2 levels. It also doesn’t matter if the labour government got its predictions wrong when with the benfit of hindsight we can look at what actually happened.

Once again you’ve made some pretty scare mongering use of analogies that don’t stack up. According to the ONS, in 10 years the UK population has risen from just under 60 million to 64.5 million, which is a change of about 0.7% to 0.8% per year, which is exactly what I quoted miles above. That would be 9 new towns the size of the Manchester City area over 10 years where Manchester is roughly 500,000 people in 116 sq km. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt by assuming that you didn’t mean to mislead people/yourself by relating the change to Greater Manchester with its population of about 2.5 million.

Incidentally if the baseline for comparison is ‘Manchesters’ we currently have the equivalent of about 130 of them and your figure meant we’d have to increase that by 0.5 a year (my estimate is 0.9).

Before anyone leaps up with the standard ‘I don’t even want to build one new town’ line, natural population growth over that period would cause half of that growth, so whatever happened we’d have needed to cope with 2.2 million people or 4-5 new Manchester City areas.

So what was the impact of that on land use for England’s populated land area? If you’re using Manchester as a yardstick then over 10 years the extra consumption of land would be 9 x 116 sq km. The land area of England is about 130,000 sq km so that’s an increase of about 0.8% in land use for population growth in 10 years. Don’t forget half of that is caused by natural growth, not migration, so the impact of migration over 10 years is an increase in land use of 0.4% - using your own example of Manchester.

When you factor in the way that people actually tend to move – into cities and towns where they already know people/have relatives, the impact on rural/farming land is minimal. The point I made above was that the use of population density is misleading. These people aren’t gobbling up vast new tracts of land (0.4% in ten years) and are mostly moving within existing populations.

Given some of your other posts you may be ever so slightly disingenuous about capacity problems in the electrical and gas grids. Once you’ve run all the old nuclear reactors into the ground after extending them far beyond their planned lifetime and you’ve got rid of out of date heavily polluting coal fired capacity you have to replace it. That has to be done whether or not the population is static or naturally growing or growing with migration (at 0.8% per year) or the lights go out. No one said there’s no new extra cost because of immigration, but that cost is frankly negligible compared to the overall amounts that we will spend anyway.

The gas grid doesn’t run down to the level of only 2 weeks of reserves left because the population increases by .8% in a year. It’s kept at that level because it maximises the profits of gas companies who don’t want lots of product in storage facilities costing them money and not making them money. Gas company senior managers will pat themselves on the back for keeping reserves low without running out. It might also happen if we piss off the Russians and they turn off our supplies – not the fault of either immigrants or the 0.4% of population growth each year due to new babies.

Sewers wear out and need replacing because they are old. Adding 0.8% to the population each year adds exactly 0.8% to the amount of piss, crap, waste cooking fat, insoluble tissues and other rubbish we chuck down them. The other 99.2% still need the infrastructure.

Housing stock – here I can’t be arsed to look up any more numbers for you, but about 200,000 houses have to be replaced each year because they are no longer habitable. If people choose to build them on flood plains and other people choose to buy them, that has nothing at all to do with immigrants (who elsewhere we’ll be told are poor, scrounging, living on benefits and can’t afford to buy £1 million 5 bedroom houses in Maidenhead so certainly shouldn’t be housed in them when we could use prison hulks and detention centres or bury them down the pits by our less liberal friends).

Schools/hospitals etc maxed out? What would we be saying about the waste of public money if they were half full? Assets like that are expected to run at near a certain capacity level or they are wasting money and valuable resources. Yet again, population growth isn’t a huge surprise – it’s broadly predictable at about .8% which is manageable by any competent planning authorities who use the right numbers (you’re obviously excluded).

As for the rest – it was a lovely expression of your personal manifesto but had little to do with the alleged impact of immigration. And if you're playing poker it helps to know something about the numbers and get them right or you'll be the patsy.

Finally will whoever the fuck had their heating on in July please not do that again – you’re going to kill him through apoplexy.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury


"This thread is living proof that people don't read threads.

:/"

Everyone's shouting, no-one's listening

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"This thread is living proof that people don't read threads.

:/

Everyone's shouting, no-one's listening"

Business as usual in the forums then

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"This thread is living proof that people don't read threads.

:/

Everyone's shouting, no-one's listening"

I'm trying to listen.... And trying to critically evaluate the quality of the different noises!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

We put the heating on yesterday and I looked at a new car this week.

I'm at the gallows on Saturday if anyone wants to come watch and throw rotten tomatoes

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"This thread is living proof that people don't read threads.

:/

Everyone's shouting, no-one's listening

Business as usual in the forums then "
.

Yes busy as normal, still in my out of fashion clothing, with my out of fashion hangover, not!

Anyhow let's take your figure of 0.8% population growth, that figure alone puts growth to 120 million in a generation or 70 years, the fact that 25% of all new births are born to women who were born outside of the UK suggest where the increase is coming from!.

Anyhow 70 years time with 0.8% growth, we've nearly doubled to 120 million... Sustainable?

So let's get back to this critical infrastructure.... Were currently at 400 ppm carbon dioxide, we don't want it to get to 450 ppm and certainly not 500 ppm?

So you need to spend a certain amount of energy to transform the infrastructure, the energy used to just transform it, if were really really careful, would take us to about 450ppm!.

Now let's get back to where we need to put that new infrastructure... Here, where we already have schools and hospitals and sewers and clean water! Here you want to double it here, do you know what that means for people who don't have clean water or sewers, it means they can't have any, we the industrious countries suck up there resources, so people in south America, Africa, India, they get shit on from a great height, because of our growth... That's just the way it works!

So you can pontificate all day about your conscience and your liberal eu philanthropy and your multi cultural diversity (speaking of which I noticed the Slovakians aren't quite as nice a bunch as you thought).

58 million to 65 million, 0.6-0.8% and great planners will adapt,

There'll move to cities and all the green stuff will be cared for by great thinking and fracking and a new housing estate!

The rhetoric of sustainability is like what came from some right wing philosophy of deregulating banks in 1981 ... It will be all great and we'll all live really happily with finance and middle management... 30 years later, oh yes it didn't quite go as planned!

And that's what will happen to uk growth, which is an intentional push towards by government to get out of a mess they created which was to get out of a mess the last lot created and on and on, until oh it didn't quite go as planned

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury

*huffs*

I answered the question, with evidence, in the first 10 posts.

*rolls eyes*

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"We put the heating on yesterday and I looked at a new car this week.

I'm at the gallows on Saturday if anyone wants to come watch and throw rotten tomatoes "

They'd probably miss

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"*huffs*

I answered the question, with evidence, in the first 10 posts.

*rolls eyes*"

You did a wonderful job of it too - well worth repeating again and again and again

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Ok, I don't normally go this deep in a post but I feel I need to share my thoughts.

The media are a joke, they are telling lies and spreading malicious scaremongering bulshit across the whole of the UK, they tell us that we are in the middle of an immigration melt down, that thousands upon thousands of immigrants are crossing our borders every day, and taking our jobs and taking our benefits, which is it? Are they taking our jobs and paying tax into the country, so that British born layabouts can buy their big TVs and tracksuits, or are they all calming the £36ish that is the maximum they can claim per week, and not the £20k that everyone thinks they are getting, and social media is just as bad, you have pages like Britain first, shouting from the roof tops about immigrants getting houses, driving lessons, cars, and free everything, if I lived in a war torn country and I saw the posts telling me that I'd be on the first boat here, the reality is that people do not leave their lives and homes just to live on easy street, and living in Britain as an immigrant is not easy street, they have to face the barrage of abuse, that is stirred up by the press, Polish people have the right to live and work in Britain, but the amount of times I have heard people say to work colleagues "did you get here in a container?" It shows your ignorance.

Go and have a look out if your window, have a look now, are there hordes of Eastern Europeans, running down the street raping and pillaging? No? Well there you go, I am the son of immigrants, my father was practically begged to come here, and my mother came from Ireland, so I know first hand of the suspicion of people thinking your family are terrorists, my father worked hard, and got abused by the very people he came here to help in rebuilding of a country almost destroyed by war, only the country's have changed, the sentiment stays the same.

Final thought, if people are coming to this country, and they can't speak English, and they are taking your job, you need to have a look at your life, because if a non English speaking foreigner is better at the job than you, that says more about your skills as a person than it does about the state of the country, stop blaming everyone else because you failed at life"

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"This thread is living proof that people don't read threads.

:/

Everyone's shouting, no-one's listening

Business as usual in the forums then .

Yes busy as normal, still in my out of fashion clothing, with my out of fashion hangover, not!

Anyhow let's take your figure of 0.8% population growth, that figure alone puts growth to 120 million in a generation or 70 years, the fact that 25% of all new births are born to women who were born outside of the UK suggest where the increase is coming from!.

Anyhow 70 years time with 0.8% growth, we've nearly doubled to 120 million... Sustainable?

So let's get back to this critical infrastructure.... Were currently at 400 ppm carbon dioxide, we don't want it to get to 450 ppm and certainly not 500 ppm?

So you need to spend a certain amount of energy to transform the infrastructure, the energy used to just transform it, if were really really careful, would take us to about 450ppm!.

Now let's get back to where we need to put that new infrastructure... Here, where we already have schools and hospitals and sewers and clean water! Here you want to double it here, do you know what that means for people who don't have clean water or sewers, it means they can't have any, we the industrious countries suck up there resources, so people in south America, Africa, India, they get shit on from a great height, because of our growth... That's just the way it works!

So you can pontificate all day about your conscience and your liberal eu philanthropy and your multi cultural diversity (speaking of which I noticed the Slovakians aren't quite as nice a bunch as you thought).

58 million to 65 million, 0.6-0.8% and great planners will adapt,

There'll move to cities and all the green stuff will be cared for by great thinking and fracking and a new housing estate!

The rhetoric of sustainability is like what came from some right wing philosophy of deregulating banks in 1981 ... It will be all great and we'll all live really happily with finance and middle management... 30 years later, oh yes it didn't quite go as planned!

And that's what will happen to uk growth, which is an intentional push towards by government to get out of a mess they created which was to get out of a mess the last lot created and on and on, until oh it didn't quite go as planned

"

There you go again. I was looking at history and how it stacked up against your assertions where they got a bit sensational , not planning the future where you get even more sensational. I know you think these things through but that non-hungover fuzzy sensation isn't helping you.

My point is that if you are going to build for the future you have to work on realistic assumptions about the baseline population and what the impact of that growth is. It's meaningless to stretch the 0.8% out for 70 years. Why not say for 1000 years? God knows how many billion you can be scared of squashing into England then at that rate and it would be a truly sensational and meaningless number. By the way 0.8% per year is meaningless for planning too because its a national average. London will have to cater for more, Eden in Cumbria can sleep on safely. People doing this job day to day have to factor in loads of variables.

Of course they get it wrong - it's in the nature of the game and an impossible task to do exactly, but they get it done a lot better than people who work on nothing more constructive than the assumption that whatever we do means shitting on other parts of the world from a great height.

I wasn't thinking of 'great planners'. Averagely competent ones would do.

I don't think I've ever expressed any sentiment about Slovakians and I've no idea whether or not they are nice people.

I'm certainly not saying everything will be great. Not even everything will be average. In the end it will all fall apart unless we do something positive about it. Running around shouting that the sky is falling in doesn't help - we need to make decisions based on reality not rhetoric

In 70 years time I'll be putting earplugs in to avoid your ghostly wail of 'I told you so', though in reality I think you'll be turning over in your grave to yet again quote a series of numbers or analogies that don't stack up and, at least for me, ruin the valid points that you do have

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"the fact that 25% of all new births are born to women who were born outside of the UK suggest where the increase is coming from!"

Yep it suggests that 75% (that's by any measure most, a majority, lots) of the increase was from women who were born inside the UK. It says absolutely nothing about the distribution of women born outside the UK who gave birth in the UK. For all you know they could be British nationals born abroad who returned to live here.

Anyway, now you're trying to nit pick over 0.1% of national capacity. Worry about the 99.2%!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"This thread is living proof that people don't read threads.

:/

Everyone's shouting, no-one's listening

Business as usual in the forums then .

Yes busy as normal, still in my out of fashion clothing, with my out of fashion hangover, not!

Anyhow let's take your figure of 0.8% population growth, that figure alone puts growth to 120 million in a generation or 70 years, the fact that 25% of all new births are born to women who were born outside of the UK suggest where the increase is coming from!.

Anyhow 70 years time with 0.8% growth, we've nearly doubled to 120 million... Sustainable?

So let's get back to this critical infrastructure.... Were currently at 400 ppm carbon dioxide, we don't want it to get to 450 ppm and certainly not 500 ppm?

So you need to spend a certain amount of energy to transform the infrastructure, the energy used to just transform it, if were really really careful, would take us to about 450ppm!.

Now let's get back to where we need to put that new infrastructure... Here, where we already have schools and hospitals and sewers and clean water! Here you want to double it here, do you know what that means for people who don't have clean water or sewers, it means they can't have any, we the industrious countries suck up there resources, so people in south America, Africa, India, they get shit on from a great height, because of our growth... That's just the way it works!

So you can pontificate all day about your conscience and your liberal eu philanthropy and your multi cultural diversity (speaking of which I noticed the Slovakians aren't quite as nice a bunch as you thought).

58 million to 65 million, 0.6-0.8% and great planners will adapt,

There'll move to cities and all the green stuff will be cared for by great thinking and fracking and a new housing estate!

The rhetoric of sustainability is like what came from some right wing philosophy of deregulating banks in 1981 ... It will be all great and we'll all live really happily with finance and middle management... 30 years later, oh yes it didn't quite go as planned!

And that's what will happen to uk growth, which is an intentional push towards by government to get out of a mess they created which was to get out of a mess the last lot created and on and on, until oh it didn't quite go as planned

There you go again. I was looking at history and how it stacked up against your assertions where they got a bit sensational , not planning the future where you get even more sensational. I know you think these things through but that non-hungover fuzzy sensation isn't helping you.

My point is that if you are going to build for the future you have to work on realistic assumptions about the baseline population and what the impact of that growth is. It's meaningless to stretch the 0.8% out for 70 years. Why not say for 1000 years? God knows how many billion you can be scared of squashing into England then at that rate and it would be a truly sensational and meaningless number. By the way 0.8% per year is meaningless for planning too because its a national average. London will have to cater for more, Eden in Cumbria can sleep on safely. People doing this job day to day have to factor in loads of variables.

Of course they get it wrong - it's in the nature of the game and an impossible task to do exactly, but they get it done a lot better than people who work on nothing more constructive than the assumption that whatever we do means shitting on other parts of the world from a great height.

I wasn't thinking of 'great planners'. Averagely competent ones would do.

I don't think I've ever expressed any sentiment about Slovakians and I've no idea whether or not they are nice people.

I'm certainly not saying everything will be great. Not even everything will be average. In the end it will all fall apart unless we do something positive about it. Running around shouting that the sky is falling in doesn't help - we need to make decisions based on reality not rhetoric

In 70 years time I'll be putting earplugs in to avoid your ghostly wail of 'I told you so', though in reality I think you'll be turning over in your grave to yet again quote a series of numbers or analogies that don't stack up and, at least for me, ruin the valid points that you do have"
.

Now you complain about giving misleading stats... Why not say a thousand years?

Well what was the population in 1900 in England then and we'll take the hundred year average.

Can we then assume the next 70 based on that 100 year average for planning purposes?

There's a maximum sustainable figure for any country based on space and resources!

My original point was were close or already over it,I added the sentence "without a major overhaul of infrastructure".... You as always counter this with completely misleading counter arguments like, we have to replace existing... If your expanding your not just replacing your replacing and putting new in!

We'll agree to disagree, and see how it turns out in thirty years time

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 20/08/15 11:57:13]

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

One thing that does jump out at me is these days, I don't seem to be able to address a white person in public without discovering them to be Polish when they respond. I can't really complain about this given my own grandfather was a Polish immigrant and it would thus be hypocritical of me, but it does get me thinking.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


""the fact that 25% of all new births are born to women who were born outside of the UK suggest where the increase is coming from!"

Yep it suggests that 75% (that's by any measure most, a majority, lots) of the increase was from women who were born inside the UK. It says absolutely nothing about the distribution of women born outside the UK who gave birth in the UK. For all you know they could be British nationals born abroad who returned to live here.

Anyway, now you're trying to nit pick over 0.1% of national capacity. Worry about the 99.2%!

"
.

No the biggest increase was from immigration 260k to 250k births

I was pointing out where the increase in birth rate was coming from... But again another counter argument by you while complaining vigorously about people's mislead statistics!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo

Thems big quotes they is

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Thems big quotes they is "

I believe they'll be replacing the ubiquitous Sky remote for a certain well known purpose within the next 70 years or so.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


""the fact that 25% of all new births are born to women who were born outside of the UK suggest where the increase is coming from!"

Yep it suggests that 75% (that's by any measure most, a majority, lots) of the increase was from women who were born inside the UK. It says absolutely nothing about the distribution of women born outside the UK who gave birth in the UK. For all you know they could be British nationals born abroad who returned to live here.

Anyway, now you're trying to nit pick over 0.1% of national capacity. Worry about the 99.2%!

.

No the biggest increase was from immigration 260k to 250k births

I was pointing out where the increase in birth rate was coming from... But again another counter argument by you while complaining vigorously about people's mislead statistics!"

Well what you said was 75% from UK born, 25% from outside the UK. Now suddenly you've changed them?

I knew I shouldn't have trusted your numbers

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

Now you complain about giving misleading stats... Why not say a thousand years?

Well what was the population in 1900 in England then and we'll take the hundred year average.

Can we then assume the next 70 based on that 100 year average for planning purposes?

There's a maximum sustainable figure for any country based on space and resources!

My original point was were close or already over it,I added the sentence "without a major overhaul of infrastructure".... You as always counter this with completely misleading counter arguments like, we have to replace existing... If your expanding your not just replacing your replacing and putting new in!

We'll agree to disagree, and see how it turns out in thirty years time "

Typical, you want to go back to 1015 when there's no reasonable record of the population. Let's start with the Domesday book....

You could try using averages over the last 100 years to estimate population growth if you felt like it. It'd be a bit like trying to estimate how many people will go to your son's 18th birthday party based on how many used to pop around to visit you on a Sunday afternoon 19 years ago.

Pointless.

The whole thing you've closed your eyes to is that you need to work on relevant assumptions and a starting point that's reasonable accurate, not just make up any old numbers.

When you replace infrastructure it's normal to build in extra capacity. Call it replace and provide for future demand too if you like, but it makes no difference to the discussion. Putting in the same old insufficient capacity is usually just a waste of time and resources.

I think you're actually saying the same as me but it wouldn't do to admit that would it?

I give up now because you're not getting it (that works both ways btw). Enjoy the last word..... 'I told you so' comes the ghostly voice.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *at69driveMan
over a year ago

Hertford


"Myth Five: Health tourism is a big problem for the UK

.

.

A 2013 Guardian report highlighted new government commissioned research that “flies in the face of assertions by Jeremy Hunt, the health secretary, that the tourists cost the health service money.”

The study found that more people leave the UK seeking medical treatment abroad than arrive in this country to receive care.

Moreover, the study found that medical tourism is a lucrative source of income for the NHS (and the wider economy), with the 18 hospitals deemed the top destinations for overseas patients earning £42m in 2010.

In addition, in 2013 Guardian columnist Zoe Williams reported that there were more than 20 private Polish medical centres in London, as well as in Manchester, Reading, Bristol and Glasgow. After speaking to Polish people using these clinics, Williams explains they are used for a variety of reasons including the perception the NHS provides a poor service, because of long NHS wait times, the belief Polish nurses are better trained than UK nurses and because of the language barrier.

“Many Polish immigrants will go to some lengths to avoid NHS ‘tourism’, up to and including paying for their care”, writes Williams.

"
. I don't think I would be paying too much attention to reports from the Guardian.. The reality is that every health tourist costs the UK tax payer money and in addition deprives UK citizens of medical help which they are entitled too.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *at69driveMan
over a year ago

Hertford


"Myth Two: Immigrants take jobs away from British people and reduce wages

.

.

First, note how this popular myth directly contradicts Myth Three.

In 2009 the Guardian reported “Claims that migrants ‘take our jobs’ and ‘cut our pay’ are misplaced and wrong, according to research published today by the Institute for Public Policy Research.”

The study found no evidence that migration from Eastern Europe since 2004 had had any substantial negative impact on either jobs or wage levels.

Little seems to have changed six years later.

In its 2015 General Election briefing, the Centre for Economic Performance at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) observed “There is still no evidence of an overall negative impact of immigration on jobs” and “wages” and that “any negative impacts on wages of less skilled groups are small.”

Answering the question of whether immigration negatively effects jobs or wages, Jonathan Portes, the Director of the National Institute of Economic and Social Research, notes “The short answer seems to be: not much.” Portes continues: “It’s fairly obvious that wages are generally higher and jobs easier to come by in areas of high immigration like London, while many low migration areas have relatively depressed labour markets.”

How could this be? Portes explains: “People who say this… usually don’t actually know or understand basic economics. More immigrant workers do increase the supply of labour.

But, because immigrants earn money, spend money, set up businesses and so on, they also increase the demand for labour. And it’s true that, if an immigrant takes a job, then a British worker can’t take that job – but it doesn’t meant he or she won’t find another one that may have been created, directly or indirectly, as a result of immigration.”

"
. Any immigrant taking a job in the UK must by default deprive a UK citizen of a job. Most other countries have far tighter control on immigration . Why is the UK an exception... ? Why should tax payers subsidise uncontrolled immigration .

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *at69driveMan
over a year ago

Hertford


"Myth One: Immigration is a taboo subject, everybody is afraid to talk about immigration

.

.

“One common gripe is that ‘no one is allowed to talk about immigration’”, writes Michael Rundell. “This will come as a surprise to anyone who scans the front pages of the Sun, Mail or Express, which rarely fail to feature a shouty headline about scrounging migrants or health tourists.”

In reality, as commentator Mehdi Hasan argued in 2011, “There is no conspiracy of silence on immigration. We talk about little else.”

A 2014 report by the British Futures thinktank agrees: “Immigration is the issue that everyone is talking about. Repeated surveys show it is neck-and-neck with the economy as number one issue for the public now, and will be, come the general election.”

As Hasan notes “The very first question of the first televised leader’s debate in British political history [in 2010] was on the subject of immigration.” Immigration was also one of the central discussion topics during the 2015 ITV leadership debate.

The public’s interest is likely energised by continuous public statements by our leaders. In 2011 Prime Minister David Cameron said “This time last year, we said we would listen to people’s concerns and get immigration under control. Today I can confidently say that we are getting there.”

In the same year, in a speech in Munich, Cameron argued that immigrants “speak the language of their new home.”

In 2007, in his first conference speech as Prime Minister, Gordon Brown promised “British jobs for British workers.”

In 2004 the then Prime Minister Tony Blair said the public’s concern about immigration “are real concerns; they are not figments of racist imagination; and they have to be tackled precisely in order to sustain a balanced and sensible argument about migration.”

"
. The reality is that you are not allowed to talk about immigration . Talk about immigration at your workplace and you are likelyto lose your job. In the public sector it would probably lead to instant dismisal. .

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *at69driveMan
over a year ago

Hertford


"Myth Four: Immigrants are a strain on public services, such as hospitals and schools

.

.

A 2014 study by the Centre for Research and Analysis of Migration at University College London found European immigrants to the UK have paid more in taxes than they received in benefits, helping to relieve the fiscal burden on UK-born workers and contributing to the financing of public services.

“A key concern in the public debate on migration is whether immigrants contribute their fair share to the tax and welfare systems”, notes co-author Professor Christian Dustmann. “Our new analysis draws a positive picture of the overall fiscal contribution made by recent immigrant cohorts, particularly of immigrants arriving from the EU.”

Portes notes that while there can be local pressures on public services, as these services are funded by taxation, and as EU migrants tend to pay more into the system than they take out, “overall, stopping EU migration would cost public services more in lost tax revenue than it would save in reduced demand.”

In addition, it is important to remember foreign nationals play a key role in the NHS. According to recent figures from the Health and Social Care Information Centre, 11 percent of NHS staff are not British. This figure rises to 26 percent for doctors.

As the British Medical Association has noted, without non-British staff “many NHS services would struggle to provide effective care to their patients.”

When it comes to schools, the influence of immigration can be surprising, argues Portes: “Despite the pressures of a growing population and a very large number of children for whom English is not the first language, London schools significantly outperform the rest of the country, especially for more disadvantaged children.

And recent research suggests that the presence of children from Eastern Europe actually improved the educational attainment of kids here already.”

See also Myth Three.

"
. Common sense would suggest that immigrants can be nothing but a strain on the health service , schools and health service . I can only assume that you have never had to live in areas affected by mass immigration. Why should the tax payer subsidise housing the health service and education for immigrants . No other country does this .

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *L RogueMan
over a year ago

London


"There we go, got that off my chest

"

Nice one!

Blaming immigration as a major drain on the country is such a weak cop out. Now, tax avoidance by the wealthy...let's talk about that.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *at69driveMan
over a year ago

Hertford


"Myth Seven: Immigrants commit more crime than British people

.

.

“Crime in neighbourhoods that have experienced mass immigration from eastern Europe over the past 10 years has fallen significantly, according to research that challenges a widely held view over the impact of foreigners in the UK”, noted the Guardian about a 2013 report published by LSE.

“Rates of burglary, vandalism and car theft all dropped following the arrival of migrants from Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary and seven other countries after they joined the European Union in 2004.”

The Guardian story quoted Brian Bell, a research fellow at LSE: "The view that foreigners commit more crime is not true. The truth is that immigrants are just like natives: if they have a good job and a good income they don't commit crime."

These findings echo a 2008 report prepared for the Association of Chief Police Officers, which found offending rates among eastern European immigrants were in line with the rate of offending in the general population.

A senior source with in-depth knowledge of the report explained: "Any rise has been broadly proportionate to the number of people from those communities coming into this country. People are saying crime is rising because of this influx. Given 1 million people have come in, that doesn't make sense as crime is significantly down."

"
. I don't have the exact figures but it is totally unacceptable for immigrants to committ any crime ..If they committ a crime they should be subject to immediate deportation .

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *akedninjaMan
over a year ago

edinburgh


"Ok, I don't normally go this deep in a post but I feel I need to share my thoughts.

The media are a joke, they are telling lies and spreading malicious scaremongering bulshit across the whole of the UK, they tell us that we are in the middle of an immigration melt down, that thousands upon thousands of immigrants are crossing our borders every day, and taking our jobs and taking our benefits, which is it? Are they taking our jobs and paying tax into the country, so that British born layabouts can buy their big TVs and tracksuits, or are they all calming the £36ish that is the maximum they can claim per week, and not the £20k that everyone thinks they are getting, and social media is just as bad, you have pages like Britain first, shouting from the roof tops about immigrants getting houses, driving lessons, cars, and free everything, if I lived in a war torn country and I saw the posts telling me that I'd be on the first boat here, the reality is that people do not leave their lives and homes just to live on easy street, and living in Britain as an immigrant is not easy street, they have to face the barrage of abuse, that is stirred up by the press, Polish people have the right to live and work in Britain, but the amount of times I have heard people say to work colleagues "did you get here in a container?" It shows your ignorance.

Go and have a look out if your window, have a look now, are there hordes of Eastern Europeans, running down the street raping and pillaging? No? Well there you go, I am the son of immigrants, my father was practically begged to come here, and my mother came from Ireland, so I know first hand of the suspicion of people thinking your family are terrorists, my father worked hard, and got abused by the very people he came here to help in rebuilding of a country almost destroyed by war, only the country's have changed, the sentiment stays the same.

Final thought, if people are coming to this country, and they can't speak English, and they are taking your job, you need to have a look at your life, because if a non English speaking foreigner is better at the job than you, that says more about your skills as a person than it does about the state of the country, stop blaming everyone else because you failed at life"
hear!hear! i salute you! finally someone else aside from myself has taken up the torch for truth and justice! keep up the good work buddy

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *akedninjaMan
over a year ago

edinburgh


"Sometimes perception is as important as reality but it 'seems', from media reports of actual convictions that a disproportionate number of offences, especially offences of serious violence, are committed by immigrants to the UK."
nothing is as it seems nor is it otherwise

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *akedninjaMan
over a year ago

edinburgh


"Myth Seven: Immigrants commit more crime than British people

.

.

“Crime in neighbourhoods that have experienced mass immigration from eastern Europe over the past 10 years has fallen significantly, according to research that challenges a widely held view over the impact of foreigners in the UK”, noted the Guardian about a 2013 report published by LSE.

“Rates of burglary, vandalism and car theft all dropped following the arrival of migrants from Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary and seven other countries after they joined the European Union in 2004.”

The Guardian story quoted Brian Bell, a research fellow at LSE: "The view that foreigners commit more crime is not true. The truth is that immigrants are just like natives: if they have a good job and a good income they don't commit crime."

These findings echo a 2008 report prepared for the Association of Chief Police Officers, which found offending rates among eastern European immigrants were in line with the rate of offending in the general population.

A senior source with in-depth knowledge of the report explained: "Any rise has been broadly proportionate to the number of people from those communities coming into this country. People are saying crime is rising because of this influx. Given 1 million people have come in, that doesn't make sense as crime is significantly down."

. I don't have the exact figures but it is totally unacceptable for immigrants to committ any crime ..If they committ a crime they should be subject to immediate deportation . "
it should be totally unacceptable for anyone to commit any crimes in the first place and if anyone commits a crime they should do what they did 100's of years ago and send them packing to australia or america

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *akedninjaMan
over a year ago

edinburgh

they took our "jerbs!"

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

YouTube "Stuart Lee ... Paul Nuttals UKIP"

You won't be disappointed....

Bloody Poles coming over here and fixing everything with their hard work ethic!

Bloody fish evolving lungs and coming onto land... OUR land!!!!... Finned cnuts... Send em back

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston


"Given 1 million people have come in, that doesn't make sense as crime is significantly down."

In the interests of accuracy the above statement need amending to:

Given 1 million people have come in, that doesn't make sense as recorded crime is significantly down...

And now lets all have a little think about the slow-motion scandal that is unfolding across the country as force by force the police face serious charges of refusing to investigate or record rapes, child abuse and assaults. I for one wonder what the next scandal to become public and played down will be?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago

North West

With regards to the really big issue currently facing Europe and this country.

We as a nation are directly responsible for the emergence of Daesh terrorism in Iraq, Libya and Syria. Our elected Government wilfully created a power vacuum in Iraq and Liby and has supported anti Assad fighters in Syria.

You may not have voted for the last, or this government and you may not have agreed with those govt actions (many of us on here probably did not) but in a modern democracy like ours the fact is that our nation (us collectively) carry that responsibility in law.

So the question is... Having been responsible already for the mass murder of tens of thousands of innocent people in the Middle East and ignored it because it did not happen on our doorstep. Are we now also going to double fuck the people who have fortunately escaped the murderous Daesh thugs and tell them to fuck off home because we are afraid that their presence might somehow upset the cozy little applecart of our complacent middle England lifestyle?

My opinion is that the actions of this and previous governments in creating the fertile ground for the Daesh to flourish is shameful. But it would be even more shameful if we as ordinary people were not prepared to hold out the hand of friendship to the people who we have already fucked over. If nothing lose but to show that we as people are not like the politicians who acted in such a shameful way.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *nleashedCrakenMan
over a year ago

Widnes


"There we go, got that off my chest

Nice one!

Blaming immigration as a major drain on the country is such a weak cop out. Now, tax avoidance by the wealthy...let's talk about that. "

We have on many threads, why don't you start another one on Tax Avoidance and how you suggest it's stopped. Remember you said Tax Avoidance (which is perfectly legal) not tax evasion (which is totally illegal). But be careful but it often turns out that those who say they oppose tax avoidance have actually avoided paying some tax themselves at one and in some ways

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I'd have to agree that the press are scaremongering. A lot of people here will also be the descendants of immigrants. I know I am!

Immigration is actually good for our country on the whole. "

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *nleashedCrakenMan
over a year ago

Widnes


"With regards to the really big issue currently facing Europe and this country.

We as a nation are directly responsible for the emergence of Daesh terrorism in Iraq, Libya and Syria. Our elected Government wilfully created a power vacuum in Iraq and Liby and has supported anti Assad fighters in Syria.

You may not have voted for the last, or this government and you may not have agreed with those govt actions (many of us on here probably did not) but in a modern democracy like ours the fact is that our nation (us collectively) carry that responsibility in law.

So the question is... Having been responsible already for the mass murder of tens of thousands of innocent people in the Middle East and ignored it because it did not happen on our doorstep. Are we now also going to double fuck the people who have fortunately escaped the murderous Daesh thugs and tell them to fuck off home because we are afraid that their presence might somehow upset the cozy little applecart of our complacent middle England lifestyle?

My opinion is that the actions of this and previous governments in creating the fertile ground for the Daesh to flourish is shameful. But it would be even more shameful if we as ordinary people were not prepared to hold out the hand of friendship to the people who we have already fucked over. If nothing lose but to show that we as people are not like the politicians who acted in such a shameful way."

I've found this whole thread both extremely interesting but at the same time extremely depressing.

There is no doubt in my mind that immigration on balance has been a positive for the UK. I also believe that we do have a duty to people in countries that we have no intervened in who are now suffering because the intervention did not work out as planned. However I also know that letting large amounts of immigrants into this country in an uncontrolled manner does cause social dis cohesion, especially if they tend to group together. To try and pretend that large numbers of Poles and other East Europeans suddenly arriving here, whilst being of overall benefit, did not cause problems in some areas is to simply bury your head in the sand. I'm also worried about the possible security implications of letting in millions of people especially from the middle east. If I was ISIS I would see this as the best possible way of getting it's people right into the heart and soft under belly of Europe.

It's a very sad, worrying and quite possibly dangerous situation we've found ourselves in. There is know simple and right answer.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *nleashedCrakenMan
over a year ago

Widnes


"I'd have to agree that the press are scaremongering. A lot of people here will also be the descendants of immigrants. I know I am!

Immigration is actually good for our country on the whole.

"

Most people are the defendants of immigrants. Even the queen is. (German on her fathers side I believe).

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *urgyeMan
over a year ago

southampton and ealing

Most people are not defenders of immigrants, hence it being the number 1 worry of the electorate. I can only assume most in favour of mass immigration do not live in or near areas that have been blighted by it. I do and have seen my environment be changed to the extent I am now a stranger in my own area, so don't tell me that is good for me. And areas around me have gone completely, try Wembley, Hounslow or Southall ( now less than 5% white ). Most of London has gone, hence the Welfare bill for London is greater than the National Defence budget. Take a trip to South London and see what I mean, Woolwich, Arsenal, Plumstead. Those who say foreigners are better than us are racists of the worst kind.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"With regards to the really big issue currently facing Europe and this country.

We as a nation are directly responsible for the emergence of Daesh terrorism in Iraq, Libya and Syria. Our elected Government wilfully created a power vacuum in Iraq and Liby and has supported anti Assad fighters in Syria.

You may not have voted for the last, or this government and you may not have agreed with those govt actions (many of us on here probably did not) but in a modern democracy like ours the fact is that our nation (us collectively) carry that responsibility in law.

So the question is... Having been responsible already for the mass murder of tens of thousands of innocent people in the Middle East and ignored it because it did not happen on our doorstep. Are we now also going to double fuck the people who have fortunately escaped the murderous Daesh thugs and tell them to fuck off home because we are afraid that their presence might somehow upset the cozy little applecart of our complacent middle England lifestyle?

My opinion is that the actions of this and previous governments in creating the fertile ground for the Daesh to flourish is shameful. But it would be even more shameful if we as ordinary people were not prepared to hold out the hand of friendship to the people who we have already fucked over. If nothing lose but to show that we as people are not like the politicians who acted in such a shameful way."
.

If you believe that the UK government deliberately caused a power vacuum as you say, then the real question is who when where and why?.

what your insinuating is that the UK deliberately murdered 10s of thousands of people in Iraq and Afghanistan, so in reality were dealing with a war crime!.

By the way I may go along with some of that insinuation but still the question is why?

Who benefited and how did we get there!, these questions lead to a very very dark alleyway.

If however we did it with the best intentions, we have no moral ambiguity to help them, we've already done our best, maybe some would argue that we could be doing more now to rid the middle East of isis, some will argue that Saudi Arabia and Jordan and Turkey are quite capable of doing this themselves! Again that would ask questions as to why they aren't.

Every way you look at it, it's ugly and its ugly because WE need it to be ugly..... Yeah you can ease your conscience, as I told man 4 you, let those immigrants in sleep well in your big comfy bed, with your heating on after your nice fresh shower!

But let's be clear..... Were solving nothing but your inability to sleep well with the thought of human suffering!

Worldwide defence budget is around what 3 trillion dollars?... Factor in nuclear weapons and you could possibly double that!.

Sometime soon were going to have to come to a collective to throw off the last 300 years of shackles, or were not going to maker it another 50 to have any immigration

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I am honestly shocked that anyone could think that the open door immigration policy this country has been subjected to in recent years has been anything other than harmful disgrace

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Europe needs to stop the Schengen agreement which allows open borders.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I'd have to agree that the press are scaremongering. A lot of people here will also be the descendants of immigrants. I know I am!

Immigration is actually good for our country on the whole.

Most people are the defendants of immigrants. Even the queen is. (German on her fathers side I believe)."

European descent.. Not African etc

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *icolehertsCouple
over a year ago

Milton Keynes

One of the problems with "immigration" illegal or otherwise is the economic drag effect that "new comers" will have on the country !

They will often be high initial users of social welfare,be that, housing,welfare,schooling for children,NHS care etc.

Eventually the long term benefits will work there way through the system but this will take time as it has shown with the Asian and Afro Caribbean immigration of the 50s/60s but the government do not want to explain this and admit that the short term effects are generally financially negative in the short term, lack of housing, school overcrowding, NHS lists etc as this appears racist and negative.

I think a more pro active, honest long term discussion has to be had about immigration particularly before the in/out referendum in 2017.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"With regards to the really big issue currently facing Europe and this country.

We as a nation are directly responsible for the emergence of Daesh terrorism in Iraq, Libya and Syria. Our elected Government wilfully created a power vacuum in Iraq and Liby and has supported anti Assad fighters in Syria.

You may not have voted for the last, or this government and you may not have agreed with those govt actions (many of us on here probably did not) but in a modern democracy like ours the fact is that our nation (us collectively) carry that responsibility in law.

So the question is... Having been responsible already for the mass murder of tens of thousands of innocent people in the Middle East and ignored it because it did not happen on our doorstep. Are we now also going to double fuck the people who have fortunately escaped the murderous Daesh thugs and tell them to fuck off home because we are afraid that their presence might somehow upset the cozy little applecart of our complacent middle England lifestyle?

My opinion is that the actions of this and previous governments in creating the fertile ground for the Daesh to flourish is shameful. But it would be even more shameful if we as ordinary people were not prepared to hold out the hand of friendship to the people who we have already fucked over. If nothing lose but to show that we as people are not like the politicians who acted in such a shameful way..

If you believe that the UK government deliberately caused a power vacuum as you say, then the real question is who when where and why?.

what your insinuating is that the UK deliberately murdered 10s of thousands of people in Iraq and Afghanistan, so in reality were dealing with a war crime!.

By the way I may go along with some of that insinuation but still the question is why?

Who benefited and how did we get there!, these questions lead to a very very dark alleyway.

If however we did it with the best intentions, we have no moral ambiguity to help them, we've already done our best, maybe some would argue that we could be doing more now to rid the middle East of isis, some will argue that Saudi Arabia and Jordan and Turkey are quite capable of doing this themselves! Again that would ask questions as to why they aren't.

Every way you look at it, it's ugly and its ugly because WE need it to be ugly..... Yeah you can ease your conscience, as I told man 4 you, let those immigrants in sleep well in your big comfy bed, with your heating on after your nice fresh shower!

But let's be clear..... Were solving nothing but your inability to sleep well with the thought of human suffering!

Worldwide defence budget is around what 3 trillion dollars?... Factor in nuclear weapons and you could possibly double that!.

Sometime soon were going to have to come to a collective to throw off the last 300 years of shackles, or were not going to maker it another 50 to have any immigration"

My conscience is fine thanks and has no need of easing. You're reference to easing it before was a smoke screen, totally irrelevant and has nothing to do with this post or what we were discussing at the time.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Hang on we work damm hard and can't afford dentist glasses even the bloody rent some weeks but you never see a skint immergrant ..."

You'd better open your eyes, your ears and your mind then. When did you last speak to an immergrant [sic]?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago

North West


"Europe needs to stop the Schengen agreement which allows open borders.

"

The future is a world without borders. Not in our lifetime maybe but we are born human beings, all with an equal right to inhabit the planet.

Many people on here complain about the rich and argue the unjustness of our society because of the wealth gap. Imagine if your idea of luxury was having clean water to drink, whilst you are also aware that people in a country far away are dropping bombs on you whilst their wives and children are being given money by their government, for doing nothing.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"With regards to the really big issue currently facing Europe and this country.

We as a nation are directly responsible for the emergence of Daesh terrorism in Iraq, Libya and Syria. Our elected Government wilfully created a power vacuum in Iraq and Liby and has supported anti Assad fighters in Syria.

You may not have voted for the last, or this government and you may not have agreed with those govt actions (many of us on here probably did not) but in a modern democracy like ours the fact is that our nation (us collectively) carry that responsibility in law.

So the question is... Having been responsible already for the mass murder of tens of thousands of innocent people in the Middle East and ignored it because it did not happen on our doorstep. Are we now also going to double fuck the people who have fortunately escaped the murderous Daesh thugs and tell them to fuck off home because we are afraid that their presence might somehow upset the cozy little applecart of our complacent middle England lifestyle?

My opinion is that the actions of this and previous governments in creating the fertile ground for the Daesh to flourish is shameful. But it would be even more shameful if we as ordinary people were not prepared to hold out the hand of friendship to the people who we have already fucked over. If nothing lose but to show that we as people are not like the politicians who acted in such a shameful way..

If you believe that the UK government deliberately caused a power vacuum as you say, then the real question is who when where and why?.

what your insinuating is that the UK deliberately murdered 10s of thousands of people in Iraq and Afghanistan, so in reality were dealing with a war crime!.

By the way I may go along with some of that insinuation but still the question is why?

Who benefited and how did we get there!, these questions lead to a very very dark alleyway.

If however we did it with the best intentions, we have no moral ambiguity to help them, we've already done our best, maybe some would argue that we could be doing more now to rid the middle East of isis, some will argue that Saudi Arabia and Jordan and Turkey are quite capable of doing this themselves! Again that would ask questions as to why they aren't.

Every way you look at it, it's ugly and its ugly because WE need it to be ugly..... Yeah you can ease your conscience, as I told man 4 you, let those immigrants in sleep well in your big comfy bed, with your heating on after your nice fresh shower!

But let's be clear..... Were solving nothing but your inability to sleep well with the thought of human suffering!

Worldwide defence budget is around what 3 trillion dollars?... Factor in nuclear weapons and you could possibly double that!.

Sometime soon were going to have to come to a collective to throw off the last 300 years of shackles, or were not going to maker it another 50 to have any immigration

My conscience is fine thanks and has no need of easing. You're reference to easing it before was a smoke screen, totally irrelevant and has nothing to do with this post or what we were discussing at the time."
.

No it has everything to do with African poverty and middle Eastern unrest!..

Do you honestly think Africa is the "fuck up" it is today through random chance!

Do you honestly think the middle East is a power vacuum from lack of vision!!

Do you honestly think this country and your life would be this wealthy from any other means but by stealing resources from the third world!

Do you see any embargo on Saudi Arabia, do you see any news articles on the arrest and deportation of 1 million immigrants from Saudi Arabia, do you see any news stories that they don't even adopt the international legal law of refugees status!

Do you know why you can own and drive a car as cheaply as you can?

Or why you can take a flight to Spain for £50, why you can buy clothes from primark for £2.

If you really really don't know what we've done to control world resources of oil for the last 80 years then I'll agree your conscience doesn't need easing but I'll say your reading of history is to say the least, poor

If however your aware of just how we've controlled it and you've benefited from it, then your just as responsible as Tony Blair!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"With regards to the really big issue currently facing Europe and this country.

We as a nation are directly responsible for the emergence of Daesh terrorism in Iraq, Libya and Syria. Our elected Government wilfully created a power vacuum in Iraq and Liby and has supported anti Assad fighters in Syria.

You may not have voted for the last, or this government and you may not have agreed with those govt actions (many of us on here probably did not) but in a modern democracy like ours the fact is that our nation (us collectively) carry that responsibility in law.

So the question is... Having been responsible already for the mass murder of tens of thousands of innocent people in the Middle East and ignored it because it did not happen on our doorstep. Are we now also going to double fuck the people who have fortunately escaped the murderous Daesh thugs and tell them to fuck off home because we are afraid that their presence might somehow upset the cozy little applecart of our complacent middle England lifestyle?

My opinion is that the actions of this and previous governments in creating the fertile ground for the Daesh to flourish is shameful. But it would be even more shameful if we as ordinary people were not prepared to hold out the hand of friendship to the people who we have already fucked over. If nothing lose but to show that we as people are not like the politicians who acted in such a shameful way..

If you believe that the UK government deliberately caused a power vacuum as you say, then the real question is who when where and why?.

what your insinuating is that the UK deliberately murdered 10s of thousands of people in Iraq and Afghanistan, so in reality were dealing with a war crime!.

By the way I may go along with some of that insinuation but still the question is why?

Who benefited and how did we get there!, these questions lead to a very very dark alleyway.

If however we did it with the best intentions, we have no moral ambiguity to help them, we've already done our best, maybe some would argue that we could be doing more now to rid the middle East of isis, some will argue that Saudi Arabia and Jordan and Turkey are quite capable of doing this themselves! Again that would ask questions as to why they aren't.

Every way you look at it, it's ugly and its ugly because WE need it to be ugly..... Yeah you can ease your conscience, as I told man 4 you, let those immigrants in sleep well in your big comfy bed, with your heating on after your nice fresh shower!

But let's be clear..... Were solving nothing but your inability to sleep well with the thought of human suffering!

Worldwide defence budget is around what 3 trillion dollars?... Factor in nuclear weapons and you could possibly double that!.

Sometime soon were going to have to come to a collective to throw off the last 300 years of shackles, or were not going to maker it another 50 to have any immigration

My conscience is fine thanks and has no need of easing. You're reference to easing it before was a smoke screen, totally irrelevant and has nothing to do with this post or what we were discussing at the time..

No it has everything to do with African poverty and middle Eastern unrest!..

Do you honestly think Africa is the "fuck up" it is today through random chance!

Do you honestly think the middle East is a power vacuum from lack of vision!!

Do you honestly think this country and your life would be this wealthy from any other means but by stealing resources from the third world!

Do you see any embargo on Saudi Arabia, do you see any news articles on the arrest and deportation of 1 million immigrants from Saudi Arabia, do you see any news stories that they don't even adopt the international legal law of refugees status!

Do you know why you can own and drive a car as cheaply as you can?

Or why you can take a flight to Spain for £50, why you can buy clothes from primark for £2.

If you really really don't know what we've done to control world resources of oil for the last 80 years then I'll agree your conscience doesn't need easing but I'll say your reading of history is to say the least, poor

If however your aware of just how we've controlled it and you've benefited from it, then your just as responsible as Tony Blair!"

So you say, but that's just your opinion and still my conscience has absolutely nothing to do with this and this has nothing to do with what we were discussing. Some of this may or may not be true but my belief in your statements is mininimised because you keep coming up with sweeping statements and claims of facts that don't stand up. Just repeating a whole load more of the same doesn't affect my conscience at all. Insulting my reading of history doesn't add any credibility to what you are saying - you always head for the same old ad hominem stuff and it does nothing for the quality of your reasoning.

As I told you, if you're going to make sweeping statements about immigration and population density, please try to quote factual numbers. That had nothing to do with the rest of this tirade on everything else in the world that upsets you.

On a separate note, I support some of your views and agree with some of your analysis but I'm quite happy for you to wear the hair shirt of history and take the blame for all the evils of people in the past that none of us either knew or could influence. Meanwhile, all I said to you is that it ruins your arguments if they show up to based on inaccuracies.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"With regards to the really big issue currently facing Europe and this country.

We as a nation are directly responsible for the emergence of Daesh terrorism in Iraq, Libya and Syria. Our elected Government wilfully created a power vacuum in Iraq and Liby and has supported anti Assad fighters in Syria.

You may not have voted for the last, or this government and you may not have agreed with those govt actions (many of us on here probably did not) but in a modern democracy like ours the fact is that our nation (us collectively) carry that responsibility in law.

So the question is... Having been responsible already for the mass murder of tens of thousands of innocent people in the Middle East and ignored it because it did not happen on our doorstep. Are we now also going to double fuck the people who have fortunately escaped the murderous Daesh thugs and tell them to fuck off home because we are afraid that their presence might somehow upset the cozy little applecart of our complacent middle England lifestyle?

My opinion is that the actions of this and previous governments in creating the fertile ground for the Daesh to flourish is shameful. But it would be even more shameful if we as ordinary people were not prepared to hold out the hand of friendship to the people who we have already fucked over. If nothing lose but to show that we as people are not like the politicians who acted in such a shameful way..

If you believe that the UK government deliberately caused a power vacuum as you say, then the real question is who when where and why?.

what your insinuating is that the UK deliberately murdered 10s of thousands of people in Iraq and Afghanistan, so in reality were dealing with a war crime!.

By the way I may go along with some of that insinuation but still the question is why?

Who benefited and how did we get there!, these questions lead to a very very dark alleyway.

If however we did it with the best intentions, we have no moral ambiguity to help them, we've already done our best, maybe some would argue that we could be doing more now to rid the middle East of isis, some will argue that Saudi Arabia and Jordan and Turkey are quite capable of doing this themselves! Again that would ask questions as to why they aren't.

Every way you look at it, it's ugly and its ugly because WE need it to be ugly..... Yeah you can ease your conscience, as I told man 4 you, let those immigrants in sleep well in your big comfy bed, with your heating on after your nice fresh shower!

But let's be clear..... Were solving nothing but your inability to sleep well with the thought of human suffering!

Worldwide defence budget is around what 3 trillion dollars?... Factor in nuclear weapons and you could possibly double that!.

Sometime soon were going to have to come to a collective to throw off the last 300 years of shackles, or were not going to maker it another 50 to have any immigration

My conscience is fine thanks and has no need of easing. You're reference to easing it before was a smoke screen, totally irrelevant and has nothing to do with this post or what we were discussing at the time..

No it has everything to do with African poverty and middle Eastern unrest!..

Do you honestly think Africa is the "fuck up" it is today through random chance!

Do you honestly think the middle East is a power vacuum from lack of vision!!

Do you honestly think this country and your life would be this wealthy from any other means but by stealing resources from the third world!

Do you see any embargo on Saudi Arabia, do you see any news articles on the arrest and deportation of 1 million immigrants from Saudi Arabia, do you see any news stories that they don't even adopt the international legal law of refugees status!

Do you know why you can own and drive a car as cheaply as you can?

Or why you can take a flight to Spain for £50, why you can buy clothes from primark for £2.

If you really really don't know what we've done to control world resources of oil for the last 80 years then I'll agree your conscience doesn't need easing but I'll say your reading of history is to say the least, poor

If however your aware of just how we've controlled it and you've benefited from it, then your just as responsible as Tony Blair!

So you say, but that's just your opinion and still my conscience has absolutely nothing to do with this and this has nothing to do with what we were discussing. Some of this may or may not be true but my belief in your statements is mininimised because you keep coming up with sweeping statements and claims of facts that don't stand up. Just repeating a whole load more of the same doesn't affect my conscience at all. Insulting my reading of history doesn't add any credibility to what you are saying - you always head for the same old ad hominem stuff and it does nothing for the quality of your reasoning.

As I told you, if you're going to make sweeping statements about immigration and population density, please try to quote factual numbers. That had nothing to do with the rest of this tirade on everything else in the world that upsets you.

On a separate note, I support some of your views and agree with some of your analysis but I'm quite happy for you to wear the hair shirt of history and take the blame for all the evils of people in the past that none of us either knew or could influence. Meanwhile, all I said to you is that it ruins your arguments if they show up to based on inaccuracies."
.

Come on, stop being a cop out.

What the fuck was slavery except a method of one nation getting wealthy of another, do you think they abolished slavery and just gave it all up!

We've been abusing the third world for hundreds of years so you and I and everyone else on here can have a damn good life!

To try to deny that our lifestyles have no bearing on what goes on in the third world is, quite frankly shocking!

So when I say ease your conscience, it's a metaphor for the west... Not you personally..

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"With regards to the really big issue currently facing Europe and this country.

We as a nation are directly responsible for the emergence of Daesh terrorism in Iraq, Libya and Syria. Our elected Government wilfully created a power vacuum in Iraq and Liby and has supported anti Assad fighters in Syria.

You may not have voted for the last, or this government and you may not have agreed with those govt actions (many of us on here probably did not) but in a modern democracy like ours the fact is that our nation (us collectively) carry that responsibility in law.

So the question is... Having been responsible already for the mass murder of tens of thousands of innocent people in the Middle East and ignored it because it did not happen on our doorstep. Are we now also going to double fuck the people who have fortunately escaped the murderous Daesh thugs and tell them to fuck off home because we are afraid that their presence might somehow upset the cozy little applecart of our complacent middle England lifestyle?

My opinion is that the actions of this and previous governments in creating the fertile ground for the Daesh to flourish is shameful. But it would be even more shameful if we as ordinary people were not prepared to hold out the hand of friendship to the people who we have already fucked over. If nothing lose but to show that we as people are not like the politicians who acted in such a shameful way..

If you believe that the UK government deliberately caused a power vacuum as you say, then the real question is who when where and why?.

what your insinuating is that the UK deliberately murdered 10s of thousands of people in Iraq and Afghanistan, so in reality were dealing with a war crime!.

By the way I may go along with some of that insinuation but still the question is why?

Who benefited and how did we get there!, these questions lead to a very very dark alleyway.

If however we did it with the best intentions, we have no moral ambiguity to help them, we've already done our best, maybe some would argue that we could be doing more now to rid the middle East of isis, some will argue that Saudi Arabia and Jordan and Turkey are quite capable of doing this themselves! Again that would ask questions as to why they aren't.

Every way you look at it, it's ugly and its ugly because WE need it to be ugly..... Yeah you can ease your conscience, as I told man 4 you, let those immigrants in sleep well in your big comfy bed, with your heating on after your nice fresh shower!

But let's be clear..... Were solving nothing but your inability to sleep well with the thought of human suffering!

Worldwide defence budget is around what 3 trillion dollars?... Factor in nuclear weapons and you could possibly double that!.

Sometime soon were going to have to come to a collective to throw off the last 300 years of shackles, or were not going to maker it another 50 to have any immigration

My conscience is fine thanks and has no need of easing. You're reference to easing it before was a smoke screen, totally irrelevant and has nothing to do with this post or what we were discussing at the time..

No it has everything to do with African poverty and middle Eastern unrest!..

Do you honestly think Africa is the "fuck up" it is today through random chance!

Do you honestly think the middle East is a power vacuum from lack of vision!!

Do you honestly think this country and your life would be this wealthy from any other means but by stealing resources from the third world!

Do you see any embargo on Saudi Arabia, do you see any news articles on the arrest and deportation of 1 million immigrants from Saudi Arabia, do you see any news stories that they don't even adopt the international legal law of refugees status!

Do you know why you can own and drive a car as cheaply as you can?

Or why you can take a flight to Spain for £50, why you can buy clothes from primark for £2.

If you really really don't know what we've done to control world resources of oil for the last 80 years then I'll agree your conscience doesn't need easing but I'll say your reading of history is to say the least, poor

If however your aware of just how we've controlled it and you've benefited from it, then your just as responsible as Tony Blair!

So you say, but that's just your opinion and still my conscience has absolutely nothing to do with this and this has nothing to do with what we were discussing. Some of this may or may not be true but my belief in your statements is mininimised because you keep coming up with sweeping statements and claims of facts that don't stand up. Just repeating a whole load more of the same doesn't affect my conscience at all. Insulting my reading of history doesn't add any credibility to what you are saying - you always head for the same old ad hominem stuff and it does nothing for the quality of your reasoning.

As I told you, if you're going to make sweeping statements about immigration and population density, please try to quote factual numbers. That had nothing to do with the rest of this tirade on everything else in the world that upsets you.

On a separate note, I support some of your views and agree with some of your analysis but I'm quite happy for you to wear the hair shirt of history and take the blame for all the evils of people in the past that none of us either knew or could influence. Meanwhile, all I said to you is that it ruins your arguments if they show up to based on inaccuracies..

Come on, stop being a cop out.

What the fuck was slavery except a method of one nation getting wealthy of another, do you think they abolished slavery and just gave it all up!

We've been abusing the third world for hundreds of years so you and I and everyone else on here can have a damn good life!

To try to deny that our lifestyles have no bearing on what goes on in the third world is, quite frankly shocking!

So when I say ease your conscience, it's a metaphor for the west... Not you personally..

"

Well that's alright then if it's a metaphor .... Carry on!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Id add but I'll be accused of making long and tedious posts!

Oh yes I forgot it's the age of sound bite policies.

Everybody wants to appear a liberal and everybody wants to appear morally higher than the rest!.

Quite frankly, saving a few thousand poor immigrants drowning in the med is in my bizarre mind fucking pointless, when we're killing millions behind the tv coverage to continue the status quo.

It's so liberal to say immigration is good, but in reality it's just another fucking resource theft, your just stealing they're young fit willing to work for nothing citizens..... Unless were going to start taking in Africa's hiv masses? Or Poland's mentally ill or Slovakia's old folk??, you know if your not benefiting them, your actually benefiting yourself?

So to me the question is do you really want change! Because change involves we the west giving up some of our luxuries and that means you! (Metaphor for everybody)

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"You know I'm sick to fucking death of actually telling people where the fucking problem is!.

It's not fucking Africans

It's not fucking Chinese

It's fucking guess what... first world arseholes!

70% of the world's resources is consumed in guess where!

70% consumed by 25% of the population?.

Now don't worry your fat fucking arse, don't write a letter to me or your mp, because quite frankly myself or your mp couldn't give two shits about your fat fucking lazy sloth lifestyle and your great big ego over of who's the nicest fat fucking lazy European with your car and your antibiotics and your big fucking pension!

ASK YOURSELF WHAT HAVE YOU DONE TO CURE ANYTHING YOU MOAN ABOUT!

Now I'm just guessing... But I reckon it's fuck all(excuse my language)

"

Built a country that people are killing themselves to gmdt into you prick!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Ok, I don't normally go this deep in a post but I feel I need to share my thoughts.

The media are a joke, they are telling lies and spreading malicious scaremongering bulshit across the whole of the UK, they tell us that we are in the middle of an immigration melt down, that thousands upon thousands of immigrants are crossing our borders every day, and taking our jobs and taking our benefits, which is it? Are they taking our jobs and paying tax into the country, so that British born layabouts can buy their big TVs and tracksuits, or are they all calming the £36ish that is the maximum they can claim per week, and not the £20k that everyone thinks they are getting, and social media is just as bad, you have pages like Britain first, shouting from the roof tops about immigrants getting houses, driving lessons, cars, and free everything, if I lived in a war torn country and I saw the posts telling me that I'd be on the first boat here, the reality is that people do not leave their lives and homes just to live on easy street, and living in Britain as an immigrant is not easy street, they have to face the barrage of abuse, that is stirred up by the press, Polish people have the right to live and work in Britain, but the amount of times I have heard people say to work colleagues "did you get here in a container?" It shows your ignorance.

Go and have a look out if your window, have a look now, are there hordes of Eastern Europeans, running down the street raping and pillaging? No? Well there you go, I am the son of immigrants, my father was practically begged to come here, and my mother came from Ireland, so I know first hand of the suspicion of people thinking your family are terrorists, my father worked hard, and got abused by the very people he came here to help in rebuilding of a country almost destroyed by war, only the country's have changed, the sentiment stays the same.

Final thought, if people are coming to this country, and they can't speak English, and they are taking your job, you need to have a look at your life, because if a non English speaking foreigner is better at the job than you, that says more about your skills as a person than it does about the state of the country, stop blaming everyone else because you failed at life"

And your life is such a success that you have to resort to wanking on here. What a load of bollocks

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *-ManMan
over a year ago

Kark

No one seems to be talking about the root cause of the Immigrant influx, maybe, and this is just a thought, if they weren't being bombed out of their houses by drones daily or if the rest of the world actually got the finger out and ended ISIS's rule, they might actually prefer to stay in their own country where all their families are.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Hang on we work damm hard and can't afford dentist glasses even the bloody rent some weeks but you never see a skint immergrant "

I suppose you could sell your computer and cancel your internet subscription to save money.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *aneandpaulCouple
over a year ago

cleveleys

True

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Great post this, from people who really believe all immigrants are badly done to and those of us who think they should turn there boat around and fight for there country.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *arry247Couple
over a year ago

Wakefield


"

We are NOT full. Not by a long way.

There's loads of space. What we're short of is resources - schools, homes, hospital beds etc and you can't bring a hospital bed from Ethiopia."

Of course you can bring a hospital bed from Ethiopia, what I suspect you mean by bed is the bed and support system including the hospital, nurses, doctors and drugs etc.

In actual fact both sides of the argument are true.

The UK is full immigrants do take jobs and keep down wages but at the same time other immigrants are needed and increase the economy of the UK.

In some areas there has been a huge local influx of immigrants (some of whom indeed do claim benefits). The infrastructure cannot cope with the influx; there are not enough schools, hospitals doctors dentists, roads or public transport capacity.

Whilst at the same time other areas are crying out for more immigrants to fill places that the UK population cannot or will not fill.

The answer is planned immigration rather than an open door policy.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago

North West


"I am honestly shocked that anyone could think that the open door immigration policy this country has been subjected to in recent years has been anything other than harmful disgrace"

It has actually been very beneficial to the economy.

From a local perspective, we now have a couple really good European mini markets on the corner of a local junction. For the last ten years or so the corner was a strip of 5 derelict shops and vacant (vandalised) flats above. The whole landscape is now new and shiny and the flats are housing people again.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *rishmocha2Couple
over a year ago

Beds


"Ok, I don't normally go this deep in a post but I feel I need to share my thoughts.

The media are a joke, they are telling lies and spreading malicious scaremongering bulshit across the whole of the UK, they tell us that we are in the middle of an immigration melt down, that thousands upon thousands of immigrants are crossing our borders every day, and taking our jobs and taking our benefits, which is it? Are they taking our jobs and paying tax into the country, so that British born layabouts can buy their big TVs and tracksuits, or are they all calming the £36ish that is the maximum they can claim per week, and not the £20k that everyone thinks they are getting, and social media is just as bad, you have pages like Britain first, shouting from the roof tops about immigrants getting houses, driving lessons, cars, and free everything, if I lived in a war torn country and I saw the posts telling me that I'd be on the first boat here, the reality is that people do not leave their lives and homes just to live on easy street, and living in Britain as an immigrant is not easy street, they have to face the barrage of abuse, that is stirred up by the press, Polish people have the right to live and work in Britain, but the amount of times I have heard people say to work colleagues "did you get here in a container?" It shows your ignorance.

Go and have a look out if your window, have a look now, are there hordes of Eastern Europeans, running down the street raping and pillaging? No? Well there you go, I am the son of immigrants, my father was practically begged to come here, and my mother came from Ireland, so I know first hand of the suspicion of people thinking your family are terrorists, my father worked hard, and got abused by the very people he came here to help in rebuilding of a country almost destroyed by war, only the country's have changed, the sentiment stays the same.

Final thought, if people are coming to this country, and they can't speak English, and they are taking your job, you need to have a look at your life, because if a non English speaking foreigner is better at the job than you, that says more about your skills as a person than it does about the state of the country, stop blaming everyone else because you failed at life"

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow


"..................

Final thought, if people are coming to this country, and they can't speak English, and they are taking your job, you need to have a look at your life, because if a non English speaking foreigner is better at the job than you, that says more about your skills as a person than it does about the state of the country, stop blaming everyone else because you failed at life "

All too often it isn't about being able to do a job better, it's about being willing to do a job cheaper.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Ok, I don't normally go this deep in a post but I feel I need to share my thoughts.

The media are a joke, they are telling lies and spreading malicious scaremongering bulshit across the whole of the UK, they tell us that we are in the middle of an immigration melt down, that thousands upon thousands of immigrants are crossing our borders every day, and taking our jobs and taking our benefits, which is it? Are they taking our jobs and paying tax into the country, so that British born layabouts can buy their big TVs and tracksuits, or are they all calming the £36ish that is the maximum they can claim per week, and not the £20k that everyone thinks they are getting, and social media is just as bad, you have pages like Britain first, shouting from the roof tops about immigrants getting houses, driving lessons, cars, and free everything, if I lived in a war torn country and I saw the posts telling me that I'd be on the first boat here, the reality is that people do not leave their lives and homes just to live on easy street, and living in Britain as an immigrant is not easy street, they have to face the barrage of abuse, that is stirred up by the press, Polish people have the right to live and work in Britain, but the amount of times I have heard people say to work colleagues "did you get here in a container?" It shows your ignorance.

Go and have a look out if your window, have a look now, are there hordes of Eastern Europeans, running down the street raping and pillaging? No? Well there you go, I am the son of immigrants, my father was practically begged to come here, and my mother came from Ireland, so I know first hand of the suspicion of people thinking your family are terrorists, my father worked hard, and got abused by the very people he came here to help in rebuilding of a country almost destroyed by war, only the country's have changed, the sentiment stays the same.

Final thought, if people are coming to this country, and they can't speak English, and they are taking your job, you need to have a look at your life, because if a non English speaking foreigner is better at the job than you, that says more about your skills as a person than it does about the state of the country, stop blaming everyone else because you failed at life"

Stop whining and get a grip of yourself.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *awk_eyeMan
over a year ago

east london

Lot of misinformation on here, check out the UK immigration stats published by the Harbour Project via amnesty international. Some people may be surprised at how little effect immigration has on certain issues like the UK job market and welfare etc

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"..................

Final thought, if people are coming to this country, and they can't speak English, and they are taking your job, you need to have a look at your life, because if a non English speaking foreigner is better at the job than you, that says more about your skills as a person than it does about the state of the country, stop blaming everyone else because you failed at life

All too often it isn't about being able to do a job better, it's about being willing to do a job cheaper."

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Lot of misinformation on here, check out the UK immigration stats published by the Harbour Project via amnesty international. Some people may be surprised at how little effect immigration has on certain issues like the UK job market and welfare etc "

Really? Amnesty International support immigration and believe everyone entering Europe has a right to FREE NHS CARE, FREE SCHOOLING, FREE LANGUAGE STUDIES, ACCESS TO BENEFITS, Me as a tax payer would rather give to uk passport holders disabled people having there benefits cut, bedroom tax, not europe or immigrants entering europe, However amnesty international believe our state system is the best in the world. Sorry i have to disagree with them it works for immigrants because no other country has a system like we do, unless you pay for it. Maybe if we withdraw foreign aid from these countries and stop paying Europe to be part of a union that manages us we will let anyone in?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *arry247Couple
over a year ago

Wakefield


"Lot of misinformation on here, check out the UK immigration stats published by the Harbour Project via amnesty international. Some people may be surprised at how little effect immigration has on certain issues like the UK job market and welfare etc "

However it has a great effect on the local job market and welfare it certain areas, that is why both sides of the argument are correct, the specifics make the difference.

For example here in Wakefield, a large bread production company laid off a large number of employed workers in order to employ immigrant workers from agencies.

This did not effect the jobless figures but it did make it more difficult (almost impossible) for UK workers to get a job at the bakery.

It also meant that those employed there no longer had job security as the company only had to send a message to the agency to prevent any particular worker from working any particular shift or from working there again.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *nleashedCrakenMan
over a year ago

Widnes


"Most people are not defenders of immigrants, hence it being the number 1 worry of the electorate. I can only assume most in favour of mass immigration do not live in or near areas that have been blighted by it. I do and have seen my environment be changed to the extent I am now a stranger in my own area, so don't tell me that is good for me. And areas around me have gone completely, try Wembley, Hounslow or Southall ( now less than 5% white ). Most of London has gone, hence the Welfare bill for London is greater than the National Defence budget. Take a trip to South London and see what I mean, Woolwich, Arsenal, Plumstead. Those who say foreigners are better than us are racists of the worst kind."

Auto correct. I meant to say descendents.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Here’s my tuppence worth on the migrant situation. British people for centuries have worked, fought, died for this country, paid taxes, and have made many, many sacrifices to make this country into the wonderful place that it is. It is no wonder that migrants are willing to risk so much to get here. We are told by our successive governments that we are to allow people who have never contributed a penny to the benefit of this country, to share the bounty we have created with them.

All this has led me to the one conclusion. It’s just not worth studying hard, working hard and being a citizen who contributes in a meaningful way to the success and wealth of Britain, because no matter what, some fucker will come along and take away what you've worked hard to achieve and give it for free to someone who hasn't earned it and doesn't deserve it. It's about time we charged an entrance fee.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

They interviewed a guy and he was gonna walk to Germany from Greece, will take days that.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

the pavements are not the best for walking on here

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *dwalu2Couple
over a year ago

Bristol


"Here’s my tuppence worth on the migrant situation. British people for centuries have worked, fought, died for this country, paid taxes, and have made many, many sacrifices to make this country into the wonderful place that it is. It is no wonder that migrants are willing to risk so much to get here. We are told by our successive governments that we are to allow people who have never contributed a penny to the benefit of this country, to share the bounty we have created with them.

All this has led me to the one conclusion. It’s just not worth studying hard, working hard and being a citizen who contributes in a meaningful way to the success and wealth of Britain, because no matter what, some fucker will come along and take away what you've worked hard to achieve and give it for free to someone who hasn't earned it and doesn't deserve it. It's about time we charged an entrance fee.

"

You're wildly overvaluing that at two pence.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire


"Here’s my tuppence worth on the migrant situation. British people for centuries have worked, fought, died for this country, paid taxes, and have made many, many sacrifices to make this country into the wonderful place that it is. It is no wonder that migrants are willing to risk so much to get here. We are told by our successive governments that we are to allow people who have never contributed a penny to the benefit of this country, to share the bounty we have created with them.

All this has led me to the one conclusion. It’s just not worth studying hard, working hard and being a citizen who contributes in a meaningful way to the success and wealth of Britain, because no matter what, some fucker will come along and take away what you've worked hard to achieve and give it for free to someone who hasn't earned it and doesn't deserve it. It's about time we charged an entrance fee.

"

and alongside the British there have been other nationalities who have also fought and died for this country, the 'Empire' as it was and as part of the still present commonwealth historically but they did so under a common flag and serving the monarch of the time..

and people don't 'work' for the country, they work to provide for their own..

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago

North West


"Here’s my tuppence worth on the migrant situation. British people for centuries have worked, fought, died for this country, paid taxes, and have made many, many sacrifices to make this country into the wonderful place that it is. It is no wonder that migrants are willing to risk so much to get here. We are told by our successive governments that we are to allow people who have never contributed a penny to the benefit of this country, to share the bounty we have created with them.

All this has led me to the one conclusion. It’s just not worth studying hard, working hard and being a citizen who contributes in a meaningful way to the success and wealth of Britain, because no matter what, some fucker will come along and take away what you've worked hard to achieve and give it for free to someone who hasn't earned it and doesn't deserve it. It's about time we charged an entrance fee.

"

But you agree that we can bomb their country, incite civil war and make them flee in terror - just as long as they don't come here?

You might not agree with what the previous labour government did and you may not even have voted for them - but they acted in our collective name and that makes us responsible. So if you are willing to create the problem, it is only right that you should come up with a solution.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ythenshawefredMan
over a year ago

stockport


"Here’s my tuppence worth on the migrant situation. British people for centuries have worked, fought, died for this country, paid taxes, and have made many, many sacrifices to make this country into the wonderful place that it is. It is no wonder that migrants are willing to risk so much to get here. We are told by our successive governments that we are to allow people who have never contributed a penny to the benefit of this country, to share the bounty we have created with them.

All this has led me to the one conclusion. It’s just not worth studying hard, working hard and being a citizen who contributes in a meaningful way to the success and wealth of Britain, because no matter what, some fucker will come along and take away what you've worked hard to achieve and give it for free to someone who hasn't earned it and doesn't deserve it. It's about time we charged an entrance fee.

"

Hang on so over the centuries??? That implies that as a British citizen I have the right to sit back and enjoy the fruits of my forefathers labour

Frankly I think homegrown benefit seekers are as much if not more of a problem to the country than ones from overseas

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow


"Here’s my tuppence worth on the migrant situation. British people for centuries have worked, fought, died for this country, paid taxes, and have made many, many sacrifices to make this country into the wonderful place that it is. It is no wonder that migrants are willing to risk so much to get here. ............."

For centuries, British people raped and pillaged and enslaved many parts of the world to make this country the wonderful place it became.

It's no wonder they think we owe them something.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Here’s my tuppence worth on the migrant situation. British people for centuries have worked, fought, died for this country, paid taxes, and have made many, many sacrifices to make this country into the wonderful place that it is. It is no wonder that migrants are willing to risk so much to get here. .............

For centuries, British people raped and pillaged and enslaved many parts of the world to make this country the wonderful place it became.

It's no wonder they think we owe them something."

Don't we give them foreign aid for the raping, pillage and enslavement as you put it? Remove foreign aid and let them all in. Lets see what all the do gooders have to say then!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Here’s my tuppence worth on the migrant situation. British people for centuries have worked, fought, died for this country, paid taxes, and have made many, many sacrifices to make this country into the wonderful place that it is. It is no wonder that migrants are willing to risk so much to get here. .............

For centuries, British people raped and pillaged and enslaved many parts of the world to make this country the wonderful place it became.

It's no wonder they think we owe them something.

Don't we give them foreign aid for the raping, pillage and enslavement as you put it? Remove foreign aid and let them all in. Lets see what all the do gooders have to say then! "

No we don't.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Can't believe some of the vile , discompassionate, bigoted crap on this post, maybe one day you will be in the same position, crying out for help, see how you feel watching your children drowning, dying of hunger etc...

Sheep brainwashed by the media, wake up people!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 27/08/15 11:34:49]

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Here’s my tuppence worth on the migrant situation. British people for centuries have worked, fought, died for this country, paid taxes, and have made many, many sacrifices to make this country into the wonderful place that it is. It is no wonder that migrants are willing to risk so much to get here. We are told by our successive governments that we are to allow people who have never contributed a penny to the benefit of this country, to share the bounty we have created with them.

All this has led me to the one conclusion. It’s just not worth studying hard, working hard and being a citizen who contributes in a meaningful way to the success and wealth of Britain, because no matter what, some fucker will come along and take away what you've worked hard to achieve and give it for free to someone who hasn't earned it and doesn't deserve it. It's about time we charged an entrance fee.

"

It's called compassion, you may need it from somebody one day, imagine you are told NO, and left to die with your family, how would you feel about it then?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston

It is funny how this sort of debate always ends up with the same false argument been spouted the same people...

It is our (white European and American) fault that the Middle East and Africa are in the messes they are in.

This is bullshit.

Fact is the Arab world has always been one of extremes, slavery and savagery. Africa has always been a continent full of tribal allegiances.

A prefect example is Rhodesia/Zimbabwe, in the time of colonial rule it was the breadbasket of Africa, European farmers cultivated and managed the land in such a way it continually produced surpasses. Then like it or not historically native Africans took over brought back tribalism, stripped the white farmers of the land they cultivated and gave it to their tribal followers. Now Zimbabwe is starving in slow motion and if Dr Robert Mugabe is to be believed it is our fault that he and those he gave the land to don't know how to husband it. The same story is repeated across Africa. Be it killing for diamonds in The Congo, oil in Nigeria, religion in the horn of Africa or just for the sake of tribalism as in Rwanda. The Arab world is just as violent but has an added twist of belief (formalised in religious laws) that there is only 1 thing that matters and that is power, and that it must used and seen to be used at all times. This can be seen in the belief that the head of a household has the right to take the life of all in his family and women have to be covered and walk 3 steps behind their husbands, the list goes on and on...

Like it or not the simple fact is that all the above have nothing to do with education, but everything to do with cultural mindsets. So when those who believe all that wish to come here should be left in are discussing this subject they should remember that with all those invaders flooding across the Med and through The Balkans comes the intolerance of their cultures that has bred the violence they seek to escape.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

People can shout about our fault , their own fault, as much as they like, but the fact remains, people need our help, they have done nothing but, like us, try to live their lives and raise families, and now through no fault of their own they are in a serious predicament, it's so simple, help them, richer nations have the means, what have we become people?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago

North West


"It is funny how this sort of debate always ends up with the same false argument been spouted the same people...

It is our (white European and American) fault that the Middle East and Africa are in the messes they are in.

This is bullshit.

Fact is the Arab world has always been one of extremes, slavery and savagery. Africa has always been a continent full of tribal allegiances.

A prefect example is Rhodesia/Zimbabwe, in the time of colonial rule it was the breadbasket of Africa, European farmers cultivated and managed the land in such a way it continually produced surpasses. Then like it or not historically native Africans took over brought back tribalism, stripped the white farmers of the land they cultivated and gave it to their tribal followers. Now Zimbabwe is starving in slow motion and if Dr Robert Mugabe is to be believed it is our fault that he and those he gave the land to don't know how to husband it. The same story is repeated across Africa. Be it killing for diamonds in The Congo, oil in Nigeria, religion in the horn of Africa or just for the sake of tribalism as in Rwanda. The Arab world is just as violent but has an added twist of belief (formalised in religious laws) that there is only 1 thing that matters and that is power, and that it must used and seen to be used at all times. This can be seen in the belief that the head of a household has the right to take the life of all in his family and women have to be covered and walk 3 steps behind their husbands, the list goes on and on...

Like it or not the simple fact is that all the above have nothing to do with education, but everything to do with cultural mindsets. So when those who believe all that wish to come here should be left in are discussing this subject they should remember that with all those invaders flooding across the Med and through The Balkans comes the intolerance of their cultures that has bred the violence they seek to escape."

So you are saying that the strife in Iraq, Syria and Libya and the rise of ISIS is nothing to do with us?

Our governments got rid of Gadaffi and Hussein and have armed the opposition to Assad. That makes us wholly responsible for the biggest exodus of human misery since WW2.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *phroditeWoman
over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland


"

So you are saying that the strife in Iraq, Syria and Libya and the rise of ISIS is nothing to do with us?

Our governments got rid of Gadaffi and Hussein and have armed the opposition to Assad. That makes us wholly responsible for the biggest exodus of human misery since WW2."
We certainly cannot claim innocence or even ignorance here - history does not happen out of nowhere and in isolation

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *G CoupleCouple
over a year ago

Newton Stewart


"People can shout about our fault , their own fault, as much as they like, but the fact remains, people need our help, they have done nothing but, like us, try to live their lives and raise families, and now through no fault of their own they are in a serious predicament, it's so simple, help them, richer nations have the means, what have we become people?"

The UK here, as in all world crises, is always at the forefront of humanitarian aid in many forms.

Where are all the rich Muslim countries in all this, especially those the largely Muslim refugees and migrants are by-passing to get into Europe? Why aren't the refugees making for richer Muslim countries instead of north and western Europe where they must know they are clearly becoming increasingly unwelcome?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The OP is delusional in the extreme. Islamo fascists are invading Europe by the tens of thousands. The UK does not need anymore impossible to integrate, liberal society hating Arabs and Muslims. Who cares how little they may cost/contribute etc. This is a war of European culture against an invasive, alien barbarism.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"People can shout about our fault , their own fault, as much as they like, but the fact remains, people need our help, they have done nothing but, like us, try to live their lives and raise families, and now through no fault of their own they are in a serious predicament, it's so simple, help them, richer nations have the means, what have we become people?

The UK here, as in all world crises, is always at the forefront of humanitarian aid in many forms.

Where are all the rich Muslim countries in all this, especially those the largely Muslim refugees and migrants are by-passing to get into Europe? Why aren't the refugees making for richer Muslim countries instead of north and western Europe where they must know they are clearly becoming increasingly unwelcome?"

Again you start with the " muslim" tag, these are people first, they must have reasons for coming here and into Europe. People are in trouble , help them.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"The OP is delusional in the extreme. Islamo fascists are invading Europe by the tens of thousands. The UK does not need anymore impossible to integrate, liberal society hating Arabs and Muslims. Who cares how little they may cost/contribute etc. This is a war of European culture against an invasive, alien barbarism."

I take it you haven't any muslim friends, or haven't met many muslims in the UK, if you had, you would not talk such ridiculous nonsense.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
back to top