By: j_jza80
- 4th August 2015 at 22:43Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Why is the term 'unskilled labour' being assumed here? The few I have heard interviewed included a dentist and an electronics engineer.
Which begs the question; why aren't they using the proper channels? Surely highly skilled people have no issue getting working Visas? And why should they get priority over people from all over the world who go through the considerable effort of the legitimate visa system?
We went through all this years ago when the Asians were kicked out of Uganda. They have by and large integrated into our society, and are economic drivers, not a cost on the state.
The prison system statistics based on ethnicity and religion suggest all is not as well as it seems...
The main problem is sustainability. We are not capable of feeding everyone who lives here as it is, we are destroying our environment and increasing the numbers of people living here will only make things worse. What is the limit to our population? 75 million? 100 million? 150 million? because unless we start indiscriminately deporting people, that is what will happen eventually going by current trends.
As to your question on the population limit - we are well beyond the number where we could ever feed ourselves, just as we were in 1939. However I would refer you to the quote from the Migration Observatory in Post #21?
"We cannot base major policy decisions on a finger-in-the-air decision to aim for one round number or another. Policy needs to be based on evidence. At this stage there simply isn't enough to even debate what is at stake."
By: j_jza80
- 4th August 2015 at 23:09Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
That's a good article. I fully acknowledge the vital role in which migrants play in our country, with of course the added benefits of multiculturalism (and the range of different foods it has brought here :D )
But the signs are all around that we are already badly overcrowded. The roads in this country are a nightmare, property is unaffordable to most and our public services can't cope. What is the answer? Build all over our countryside? No thought is being given to the sustainability of these huge increases in our population. When we already suffer one of the highest population densities in the world, why should we have to take more? France especially has a much lower population density than us, why can't they give these people homes?
Eventually, we will sink under the weight of our own generosity.
By: Moggy C
- 4th August 2015 at 23:14Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
So how are you suggesting we reduce the population?
Might it not be better to have young, strong men who can build houses and roads rather than geriatrics who moan about these problems on fora and do nothing constructive?
By: j_jza80
- 4th August 2015 at 23:21Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
No, i'm suggesting we start projecting and planning our future population size, factor in the indigenous birthrate as much as possible, and have a strict immigration quota in future based on sustainable figures, skills shortages etc. I fully get your point about migrants being skilled, and we should welcome them when we have need of those skills. But I'm afraid we already have a surplus of unskilled people here, we don't need to be bolstering their ranks.
I would not suggest for a second that we start deporting people. Well, as you mentioned before, I would be happy to take citizenship away from immigrants who actively dislike our country, and giving it to someone who wants to come here and better themselves and the country.
Those geriatrics have done their part. Well, some have :D
Now, that may not apply specifically to the situation in the UK - but I wonder if our population would be rising if we relied solely on the indigenous (3rd generation and older) population to propagate it. I suspect not.
We must be careful not to make assumptions about those in Calais waiting for their chance. They are intelligent enough to get out of the situation they are in - there is every chance that a good proportion of those people would add something to the country, rather than take. I am hugely wary of the line the press wish us to believe.
By: John Green
- 5th August 2015 at 10:19Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Extending statement to absurdity is a pretty weak discussion tactic. You can usually do a (little) bit better.
A lot of their countries are currently battlegrounds. It's pretty hard to show entrepreneurial or professional flair under such circumstances.
Moggy
'battlegrounds' are precisely where they need to be. That is where their skills as doctors, surgeons, and engineers are best deployed, in the service of the country that educated them and now needs their energies.
By: Meddle
- 5th August 2015 at 10:49Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
That is where their skills as doctors, surgeons, and engineers are best deployed, in the service of the country that educated them and now needs their energies.
With all the energies in the world I'm not sure you would be able to do too stellar a job whilst half-starved, with no resources to work with and no pay, in a corrupt society where tribal feudalism is passed off as governance. An engineer needs materials, plans, some form of management whilst a doctor needs sanitary conditions, medicines and some form of management. You are suggesting that the Calais mob simply **** off back to their home country (I doubt there is a return network to heist them back over the borders they just crossed) in a bold philanthropic move. Very noble but somehow I cannot see you in that position, toiling away in the bush whilst dodging blows from a blunt machete.
By: j_jza80
- 5th August 2015 at 11:27Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Here's a different slant on the issue; What would you do in their position? (That's not aimed specifically at you Moggy, but everyone contributing to this thread)
Not all of these migrants are from war zones. Some are escaping famine, many others just looking for opportunities because none exist at home.
Does that mean we have an obligation to accept everyone who comes here? How many of these guys, who purposefully destroy their passports and mutilate (for want of a better word) their own finger tips to avoid being traced are criminals and extremists? Perhaps even war criminals.
I'm not saying that all, or even a majority of these migrants are any of those things, but surely this is why we must not allow people to just turn up and expect entry.
By: John Green
- 5th August 2015 at 11:58Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
With all the energies in the world I'm not sure you would be able to do too stellar a job whilst half-starved, with no resources to work with and no pay, in a corrupt society where tribal feudalism is passed off as governance. An engineer needs materials, plans, some form of management whilst a doctor needs sanitary conditions, medicines and some form of management. You are suggesting that the Calais mob simply **** off back to their home country (I doubt there is a return network to heist them back over the borders they just crossed) in a bold philanthropic move. Very noble but somehow I cannot see you in that position, toiling away in the bush whilst dodging blows from a blunt machete.
Yes, I now see the error of my ways. All is now clear. We must dismantle the frontiers. Sweep the barriers to one side. Put out the 'welcome' mats. Pull 'em in, kicking and screaming while stuffing benefit cash down their throats. Room for all aboard the Great British Bonanza. That will immediately take care of the many problems you mention.
Apart from the question of who pays for all this indulgence there's not a lot to worry about - is there ?
Just the question of total numbers which, I note, everyone so far has ducked
By: Bruce
- 5th August 2015 at 11:59Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Does that mean we have an obligation to accept everyone who comes here? How many of these guys, who purposefully destroy their passports and mutilate (for want of a better word) their own finger tips to avoid being traced are criminals and extremists? Perhaps even war criminals.
I'm not saying that all, or even a majority of these migrants are any of those things, but surely this is why we must not allow people to just turn up and expect entry.
That, of course is the rub.
Desperation leads people to do things that they wouldn't contemplate in different situations.
The major issue to me is that people are crossing multiple countries specifically to come to the UK. There should be a worldwide mechanism for dealing with those who, for reasons of hardship, war or abuse, wish to move from their country of birth. There is, of course, so one ask to ask why such people wish to circumvent it.
As I said, I have no issue with people coming tot his country who want to better themselves, or wish to bring something to our society. IF they wish to come to the UK purely because they have heard we have golden pavements, then that is another thing entirely.
By: Lincoln 7
- 5th August 2015 at 13:28Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
May I suggest to all those on here, who think these migrants SHOULD be allowed in, that they take in just one migrant into their OWN family, feed them, give them money to spend, and treat them as if they were family. C'mon, hold up your hand, and lets see how many would do this.Oh, and without any help from the Government.
Jim
Lincoln .7
By: TonyT
- 5th August 2015 at 14:42Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I would employ a fleet of Trojan trucks, I would mix the vehicles in the queues where they attempt to board in Calais and when they have a good load of immigrants onboard I would swing them around and drive them to the furthest point from Calais in France and offload them.
By: Bruce
- 5th August 2015 at 14:51Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
That, and that almost alone, is the prime inducement.
Well John,
That is what the press would have us believe. Its an easy position to take as well - trying to barge in via the tunnel, and then going to ground for a few months, before popping up and demanding welfare.
However, if (and I have no idea of the veracity of this), they are telecoms engineers, doctors and dentists, or at least some of them are, what would be the benefit to them of doing so?
There is more to all of this than meets the eye, and more than we are being told as well.
With regard to numbers - there is no need to set a limit as such - but that isn't the same as open borders. Each case must be decided on its merits, and again, I don't entirely understand the reasons for trying to gain entry via the tunnel, if at least some of them have a reasonable case to make.
Anyone have any data to hand regarding how many successful applications have been made by people who have initially gained entry illegally? How many are deported? Of those who have been admitted, how many are living on welfare payments? How many have jobs? Oh, and how many are living here illegally, and do NOT have access to welfare?
Unless we have that, our discussions do no more than feed stereotypes, and separate us along political divides.
By: Bruce
- 5th August 2015 at 14:53Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
May I suggest to all those on here, who think these migrants SHOULD be allowed in, that they take in just one migrant into their OWN family, feed them, give them money to spend, and treat them as if they were family. C'mon, hold up your hand, and lets see how many would do this.Oh, and without any help from the Government.
Jim
Lincoln .7
Jim, Again, we make huge assumptions about people we know nothing about. Not every person coming to this country is looking for handouts, though clearly some are.
Posts: 16,832
By: Moggy C - 4th August 2015 at 22:38 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Extending statement to absurdity is a pretty weak discussion tactic. You can usually do a (little) bit better.
A lot of their countries are currently battlegrounds. It's pretty hard to show entrepreneurial or professional flair under such circumstances.
Moggy
Posts: 1,542
By: j_jza80 - 4th August 2015 at 22:43 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Which begs the question; why aren't they using the proper channels? Surely highly skilled people have no issue getting working Visas? And why should they get priority over people from all over the world who go through the considerable effort of the legitimate visa system?
The prison system statistics based on ethnicity and religion suggest all is not as well as it seems...
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCgQFjABahUKEwj2gYTUsJDHAhWUB9sKHRFsD74&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.parliament.uk%2Fbriefing-papers%2Fsn04334.pdf&ei=ui_BVfa8BJSP7AaR2L3wCw&usg=AFQjCNFc5woMqfEk6pJKE2rqLrXlLM5oYg&sig2=IXQnty-OIyV62gB2tclrqQ&bvm=bv.99261572,d.ZGU
The main problem is sustainability. We are not capable of feeding everyone who lives here as it is, we are destroying our environment and increasing the numbers of people living here will only make things worse. What is the limit to our population? 75 million? 100 million? 150 million? because unless we start indiscriminately deporting people, that is what will happen eventually going by current trends.
Posts: 16,832
By: Moggy C - 4th August 2015 at 22:53 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Some light reading for you.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2012/12/ugandan-asians-are-part-of-britains-secret-weapon-for-success/
As to your question on the population limit - we are well beyond the number where we could ever feed ourselves, just as we were in 1939. However I would refer you to the quote from the Migration Observatory in Post #21?
Moggy
Posts: 1,542
By: j_jza80 - 4th August 2015 at 23:09 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
That's a good article. I fully acknowledge the vital role in which migrants play in our country, with of course the added benefits of multiculturalism (and the range of different foods it has brought here :D )
But the signs are all around that we are already badly overcrowded. The roads in this country are a nightmare, property is unaffordable to most and our public services can't cope. What is the answer? Build all over our countryside? No thought is being given to the sustainability of these huge increases in our population. When we already suffer one of the highest population densities in the world, why should we have to take more? France especially has a much lower population density than us, why can't they give these people homes?
Eventually, we will sink under the weight of our own generosity.
Posts: 16,832
By: Moggy C - 4th August 2015 at 23:14 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
So how are you suggesting we reduce the population?
Might it not be better to have young, strong men who can build houses and roads rather than geriatrics who moan about these problems on fora and do nothing constructive?
Moggy
Posts: 1,542
By: j_jza80 - 4th August 2015 at 23:21 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
No, i'm suggesting we start projecting and planning our future population size, factor in the indigenous birthrate as much as possible, and have a strict immigration quota in future based on sustainable figures, skills shortages etc. I fully get your point about migrants being skilled, and we should welcome them when we have need of those skills. But I'm afraid we already have a surplus of unskilled people here, we don't need to be bolstering their ranks.
I would not suggest for a second that we start deporting people. Well, as you mentioned before, I would be happy to take citizenship away from immigrants who actively dislike our country, and giving it to someone who wants to come here and better themselves and the country.
Those geriatrics have done their part. Well, some have :D
Posts: 16,832
By: Moggy C - 5th August 2015 at 00:13 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Thank you. It was nothing :)
Moggy
Posts: 1,613
By: Meddle - 5th August 2015 at 10:05 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
You've only just noticed this trend within the General Discussion clique? Time to pop down to Spec Savers, Moggy.
Posts: 8,464
By: Bruce - 5th August 2015 at 10:17 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Here's an article referencing population decline in Europe - not projected, but actual decline.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2013/10/31/how-the-worlds-populations-are-changing-in-one-map/
Now, that may not apply specifically to the situation in the UK - but I wonder if our population would be rising if we relied solely on the indigenous (3rd generation and older) population to propagate it. I suspect not.
We must be careful not to make assumptions about those in Calais waiting for their chance. They are intelligent enough to get out of the situation they are in - there is every chance that a good proportion of those people would add something to the country, rather than take. I am hugely wary of the line the press wish us to believe.
Posts: 6,535
By: John Green - 5th August 2015 at 10:19 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
'battlegrounds' are precisely where they need to be. That is where their skills as doctors, surgeons, and engineers are best deployed, in the service of the country that educated them and now needs their energies.
Posts: 1,613
By: Meddle - 5th August 2015 at 10:49 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
With all the energies in the world I'm not sure you would be able to do too stellar a job whilst half-starved, with no resources to work with and no pay, in a corrupt society where tribal feudalism is passed off as governance. An engineer needs materials, plans, some form of management whilst a doctor needs sanitary conditions, medicines and some form of management. You are suggesting that the Calais mob simply **** off back to their home country (I doubt there is a return network to heist them back over the borders they just crossed) in a bold philanthropic move. Very noble but somehow I cannot see you in that position, toiling away in the bush whilst dodging blows from a blunt machete.
Posts: 16,832
By: Moggy C - 5th August 2015 at 11:01 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Whilst risking some awful death because their parents believed in the wrong imaginary friend.
Moggy
Posts: 1,542
By: j_jza80 - 5th August 2015 at 11:27 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Here's a different slant on the issue; What would you do in their position? (That's not aimed specifically at you Moggy, but everyone contributing to this thread)
Not all of these migrants are from war zones. Some are escaping famine, many others just looking for opportunities because none exist at home.
Does that mean we have an obligation to accept everyone who comes here? How many of these guys, who purposefully destroy their passports and mutilate (for want of a better word) their own finger tips to avoid being traced are criminals and extremists? Perhaps even war criminals.
I'm not saying that all, or even a majority of these migrants are any of those things, but surely this is why we must not allow people to just turn up and expect entry.
Posts: 6,535
By: John Green - 5th August 2015 at 11:58 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Yes, I now see the error of my ways. All is now clear. We must dismantle the frontiers. Sweep the barriers to one side. Put out the 'welcome' mats. Pull 'em in, kicking and screaming while stuffing benefit cash down their throats. Room for all aboard the Great British Bonanza. That will immediately take care of the many problems you mention.
Apart from the question of who pays for all this indulgence there's not a lot to worry about - is there ?
Just the question of total numbers which, I note, everyone so far has ducked
Posts: 8,464
By: Bruce - 5th August 2015 at 11:59 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
That, of course is the rub.
Desperation leads people to do things that they wouldn't contemplate in different situations.
The major issue to me is that people are crossing multiple countries specifically to come to the UK. There should be a worldwide mechanism for dealing with those who, for reasons of hardship, war or abuse, wish to move from their country of birth. There is, of course, so one ask to ask why such people wish to circumvent it.
As I said, I have no issue with people coming tot his country who want to better themselves, or wish to bring something to our society. IF they wish to come to the UK purely because they have heard we have golden pavements, then that is another thing entirely.
Posts: 6,535
By: John Green - 5th August 2015 at 13:22 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
There's nothing like 'a sinner that repenteth' - not quite the quote i'm looking for but, it will, in the circumstances do.
"because they've heard we have golden pavements"
That, and that almost alone, is the prime inducement.
So Bruce, whats the answer ? Limited numbers, in which case how many ? Or, a permanently open door ?
Posts: 8,306
By: Lincoln 7 - 5th August 2015 at 13:28 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
May I suggest to all those on here, who think these migrants SHOULD be allowed in, that they take in just one migrant into their OWN family, feed them, give them money to spend, and treat them as if they were family. C'mon, hold up your hand, and lets see how many would do this.Oh, and without any help from the Government.
Jim
Lincoln .7
Posts: 8,983
By: TonyT - 5th August 2015 at 14:42 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I would employ a fleet of Trojan trucks, I would mix the vehicles in the queues where they attempt to board in Calais and when they have a good load of immigrants onboard I would swing them around and drive them to the furthest point from Calais in France and offload them.
Posts: 8,464
By: Bruce - 5th August 2015 at 14:51 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Well John,
That is what the press would have us believe. Its an easy position to take as well - trying to barge in via the tunnel, and then going to ground for a few months, before popping up and demanding welfare.
However, if (and I have no idea of the veracity of this), they are telecoms engineers, doctors and dentists, or at least some of them are, what would be the benefit to them of doing so?
There is more to all of this than meets the eye, and more than we are being told as well.
With regard to numbers - there is no need to set a limit as such - but that isn't the same as open borders. Each case must be decided on its merits, and again, I don't entirely understand the reasons for trying to gain entry via the tunnel, if at least some of them have a reasonable case to make.
Anyone have any data to hand regarding how many successful applications have been made by people who have initially gained entry illegally? How many are deported? Of those who have been admitted, how many are living on welfare payments? How many have jobs? Oh, and how many are living here illegally, and do NOT have access to welfare?
Unless we have that, our discussions do no more than feed stereotypes, and separate us along political divides.
Posts: 8,464
By: Bruce - 5th August 2015 at 14:53 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Jim, Again, we make huge assumptions about people we know nothing about. Not every person coming to this country is looking for handouts, though clearly some are.