There's a Lot Wrong with Britain

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
601

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

The British Working Class are complaining about immigration. The only realistic way to stem that immigration is to stop the pressure driving it. Therefore improving conditions in the countries that the people are coming from thereby decreasing the pressure to leave is good for the British Working class.

So, the British must subsidize these countries through “foriegn aid”, maybe even going to war often (gotta get rid of them despots), in order to achieve the same goal as having strict immigration policies? What?

Why not tell these otherwise intelligent, hardworking, liberty-minded people THEY’RE responsible for improving conditions in THEIR home countries. Hey, you’re doing the future citizens of these home countries a favor by keeping their talented people at home.[/quote]

The point is that tougher immigration policies will not solve the issue, all you get is lots of people turning up illegally (like you see in the US.) It also doesn’t solve the issue of the millions of people already in the country.

602

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

The British Working Class are complaining about immigration. The only realistic way to stem that immigration is to stop the pressure driving it. Therefore improving conditions in the countries that the people are coming from thereby decreasing the pressure to leave is good for the British Working class.

So, the British must subsidize these countries through “foriegn aid”, maybe even going to war often (gotta get rid of them despots), in order to achieve the same goal as having strict immigration policies? What?

Why not tell these otherwise intelligent, hardworking, liberty-minded people THEY’RE responsible for improving conditions in THEIR home countries. Hey, you’re doing the future citizens of these home countries a favor by keeping their talented people at home.[/quote]

Who mentioned aid or war. What you need is trade.

603

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

The British Working Class are complaining about immigration. The only realistic way to stem that immigration is to stop the pressure driving it. Therefore improving conditions in the countries that the people are coming from thereby decreasing the pressure to leave is good for the British Working class.

So, the British must subsidize these countries through “foriegn aid”, maybe even going to war often (gotta get rid of them despots), in order to achieve the same goal as having strict immigration policies? What?

Why not tell these otherwise intelligent, hardworking, liberty-minded people THEY’RE responsible for improving conditions in THEIR home countries. Hey, you’re doing the future citizens of these home countries a favor by keeping their talented people at home.

The point is that tougher immigration policies will not solve the issue, all you get is lots of people turning up illegally (like you see in the US.) It also doesn’t solve the issue of the millions of people already in the country.[/quote]

That’s why you throw illegal hiring employers in jail for long periods of time. Perhaps a HUGE fine for the first offence. Also, you throw beraucrats in jail for signing up illegals for entitlement programs. Furthermore, publically funded institutions wouldn’t be allowed to service them. No schools, no medical care. If you tax your citizens you have a MORAL OBLIGATION that services are reserved exclusively for them.

Self deportation, it’s a wonderful thing. Have to face reality, British citizens weren’t born to run in money-generating hamster wheels for the benefit of everyone that can cross a border.

604

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

The British Working Class are complaining about immigration. The only realistic way to stem that immigration is to stop the pressure driving it. Therefore improving conditions in the countries that the people are coming from thereby decreasing the pressure to leave is good for the British Working class.

So, the British must subsidize these countries through “foriegn aid”, maybe even going to war often (gotta get rid of them despots), in order to achieve the same goal as having strict immigration policies? What?

Why not tell these otherwise intelligent, hardworking, liberty-minded people THEY’RE responsible for improving conditions in THEIR home countries. Hey, you’re doing the future citizens of these home countries a favor by keeping their talented people at home.

Who mentioned aid or war. What you need is trade.[/quote]

Great. So in the numerous generations it takes for the wealth from trade to filter down from despots, theocrats, ruling parties, and upper castes, you’re country will have torn itself apart over cultural/policy differences and entitlement bankruptcy.

605

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

The British Working Class are complaining about immigration. The only realistic way to stem that immigration is to stop the pressure driving it. Therefore improving conditions in the countries that the people are coming from thereby decreasing the pressure to leave is good for the British Working class.

So, the British must subsidize these countries through “foriegn aid”, maybe even going to war often (gotta get rid of them despots), in order to achieve the same goal as having strict immigration policies? What?

Why not tell these otherwise intelligent, hardworking, liberty-minded people THEY’RE responsible for improving conditions in THEIR home countries. Hey, you’re doing the future citizens of these home countries a favor by keeping their talented people at home.

The point is that tougher immigration policies will not solve the issue, all you get is lots of people turning up illegally (like you see in the US.) It also doesn’t solve the issue of the millions of people already in the country.

That’s why you throw illegal hiring employers in jail for long periods of time. Perhaps a HUGE fine for the first offence. Also, you throw beraucrats in jail for signing up illegals for entitlement programs. Furthermore, publically funded institutions wouldn’t be allowed to service them. No schools, no medical care. If you tax your citizens you have a MORAL OBLIGATION that services are reserved exlusively for them.

Self deportation, it’s a wonderful thing. Have to face reality, British citizens weren’t born to run in money-generating hamster wheels for the benefit of everyone that can cross a border.[/quote]

See that is what I like about a welfare state:

In the name of uniting all of us it pits one interest group against the other and creates the very conflict on which its perpetuators depend upon.

606

[quote]orion wrote:

[/quote]

This assumes a non-welfare state couldn’t be transformed into a welfare state by a growing demographic of unassimilated immigrants and their poorly adjusted offspring. Along with the vote of displaced native workers. Democracy is the reality. Yes, I know you don’t favor democracy in the first place. However, it’s not going anywhere.

607

[quote]Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:

This assumes a non-welfare state couldn’t be transformed into a welfare state by a growing demographic of unassimilated immigrants and their poorly adjusted offspring. Along with the vote of displaced native workers. Democracy is the reality. Yes, I know you don’t favor democracy in the first place. However, it’s not going anywhere.[/quote]

Of course it is.

The main pillars already slightly buckle, dont you see it?

608

[quote]orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:

This assumes a non-welfare state couldn’t be transformed into a welfare state by a growing demographic of unassimilated immigrants and their poorly adjusted offspring. Along with the vote of displaced native workers. Democracy is the reality. Yes, I know you don’t favor democracy in the first place. However, it’s not going anywhere.

Of course it is.

The main pillars already slightly buckle, dont you see it?

[/quote]

Only in the sense of jumping to full on Democratic Socialism, leading to Tyrannical Solialism. But a free market nation ruled by the non-elected, in which the people have the classic natural rights, excluding the right to vote? No. You really think the hordes of tax consumers would peaceably give up the power of the vote?

609

No. People would rather redistribute wealth and bankrupt each other and their nations, leaving nothing but barren dirt and cardboard shacks as possessions, before they’d give up the vote. All other rights could go the way of the dinosaur, but not the vote. Aint nobody taking away my vote (even if I voted to have the means, the right to arms, needed to safeguard it removed)! After all, they’d still have the power to have a neighbor’s barren dirt re-distributed ‘fairly.’

610

[quote]Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:

This assumes a non-welfare state couldn’t be transformed into a welfare state by a growing demographic of unassimilated immigrants and their poorly adjusted offspring. Along with the vote of displaced native workers. Democracy is the reality. Yes, I know you don’t favor democracy in the first place. However, it’s not going anywhere.

Of course it is.

The main pillars already slightly buckle, dont you see it?

Only in the sense of jumping to full on Democratic Socialism, leading to Tyrannical Solialism. But a free market nation ruled by the non-elected, in which the people have the classic natural rights, excluding the right to vote? No. You really think the hordes of tax consumers would peaceably give up the power of the vote?[/quote]

No, I thing the masculine republic will turn into an effeminate democracy that will in turn develop into a tyranny…

Rinse and repeat.

611

You lot really do love making stuff complicated.

  1. I’m an English citizen born, bred and i have a vote

  2. Illegal Immigrants neither are a citizen, have the right to vote or any rights AT ALL in ENGLAND

So take those 2 points add them together = English citizens get to decide WHO can come, WHO can stay and WHO gets to get the fuck out.

In 10 years we will NOT be part of the EU, i cannot WAIT for that day when they get everyone together and kick them the fuck out of MY country which MY parents, MY grandparents have helped build through PAYING TAXES.

Once the conservatives get into power, they will throw Lisbon out, THEN they will hold another referendum on what England’s role in the EU is and whether we should stay.

I promise you all now, i doubt 30% of England will vote to stay with the EU. Been NOTHING but fucking trouble since we joined.

So if that makes me a racist GRAND i’m a racist for preferring my country ran by ENGLISH people and ENGLISH people deciding the rule of law in this country.

All you crying heart liberals really make me ill, people like you who vote for Labour made this country so crap and turned it into a doormat for looney bin islamists to PUBLICLY proclaim ENGLAND will be bombed soon and we deserve it.

612

[quote]orion wrote:

Yes, and from this you concluded that I share all of LMs beliefs which I dont.
[/quote]

Not all, enough to place you far outside the norm. What you said in the previously mentioned thread:

"That idea is actually pretty old and was part of Roman law-

Since no court could actually order a free man around there were only punishments in money.

Not entirely true, not in a lot of cases, and yes Roman laws changed, but the principle is hardly that radical.

She was the rape victim, she got compensated, she says its enough. "

You’re advocating a system in which justice is for sale. Lifticus advocates lynch law. There is a difference but you are both on the radical fringe.

Take some time off and come up with new material. This one was weak when you first used it, and this is the third time you brought it out in this thread alone.

613

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

The British Working Class are complaining about immigration. The only realistic way to stem that immigration is to stop the pressure driving it. Therefore improving conditions in the countries that the people are coming from thereby decreasing the pressure to leave is good for the British Working class.

So, the British must subsidize these countries through “foriegn aid”, maybe even going to war often (gotta get rid of them despots), in order to achieve the same goal as having strict immigration policies? What?

Why not tell these otherwise intelligent, hardworking, liberty-minded people THEY’RE responsible for improving conditions in THEIR home countries. Hey, you’re doing the future citizens of these home countries a favor by keeping their talented people at home.

Who mentioned aid or war. What you need is trade.[/quote]

When has trade ever gotten rid of a despot? When they feel threatened from outside, despots close their borders, even if it means their on people starve. Robert Mugabe will die in office of old age, and his people will suffer everyday until then. The military junta in Burma is the same, trade or the lack there of never touches them.

614

[quote]TQB wrote:
Sifu wrote:
TQB wrote:
Uncle Gabby wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

It was the Johnny Foreigner comment. Basically you are saying that people from other countries have different rights to those that you have based on nothing more than their race.

If someone wasn’t born in your country, they have no “right” to live in your country.

Objection:

I would take great umbrage if my American children were denied the choice to move to the US if they so wanted, despite the being born in Spain and Sweden respectively. You may wish to note that your logic would exclude many children of American servicemen as well.

Now you usually make sense, even when I don’t agree with you, so I rather think this was a slip of the pen.

TQB

Here I will make it clearer for you. It is perfectly reasonable that a people have the right to set guidlines as to who is part of their group and who gets to live in their homeland. Without that small populations could easily be overrun and dominated by the large ones.

OK Sifu, time for the crunch question.

Do you consider that UK citizen of a different ethnicity than yours form part of the “people” you are referring to? Say, someone whose parents immigrated from the West Indies or India in the Sixties? Or Cockney’s kids, for that matter. [/quote]

All you have done is highlight the problem of inaction. The longer people have been there and become settled the more entrenched they become. I think that at this point in time there is a certain amount that are there to stay.

Probably the easiest way to sort through the mess that Labour has created would be to break it into two groups. Those who came before Thatcher (BT) ended mass immigration in the 70’s and those who came after Major (AM) when NuLabour restarted mass immigration in 97.

In 97 Labour implemented an immigration free for all. In that time they have added about 5 million to the population. That is almost 10 percent added to the overall population in twelve years. Or to look at it another way, Northern Ireland has less than 2 million people, Wales has 2.9 million and Scotland has all of 5 million. So since Labour came to power they have added another Scotland worth of immigrants or more than Wales and Northern Ireland combined.

During this time, unemployment has climbed into the millions and wage growth has been suppressed by all the cheap labour. What that means is there has been no economic need for all those immigrants during that period. Since they were not needed for labor the only other reason why so many immigrants would be taken in is for the purpose of changing the racial, ethnic, cultural makeup of the country. So if it is okay to bring in mass numbers of immigrants in order to change the racial, ethnic, cultural, demographics for the purpose of political gerrymandering, why would there be anything wrong with wanting to undo such a policy?

But I will break it down even further for you because all immigrants are not the same. In one generation the eastern europeans could be assimilated. A lot of the Indians have integrated fairly well. Even the west Indians can assimilate over time. I have worked and socialized with a lot of Jamaicans. So I know that on a cultural level I have a lot more in common with a black Jamaican who is Christian or Rastafarian than a red haired blue eyed muslim whose ancesters were kidnapped from the coastal area where my family comes from by Barbary pirates two hundred years ago.

The muslims are never going to integrate with the rest of the population because integration goes against everything their religion teaches. The muslim population has absolutely exploded. In 2001 there were 1.2 million muslims in the UK, in 2008 there 2.5 million. So right now there are as many muslims in Britain as there are Welsh. To allow that hostile, violent population to continue to grow exponentially is asking for big problems.

You liberals are such hypocrates. It’s bullshit the way you will use race as a weapon to advance your agenda but then throw accusations of racism at anyone who challenges what you are doing. As a rhetorical tactic accusations of racism no longer has the effect it used to. That is why supporting groups like the BNP is rapidly losing it’s stigma.

You liberals really need to read the story about the boy who cried wolf.

615

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Title seven covers discrimination against employees in the workplace. The woman who filed the complaint was not an employee of the B&B. Therefore she was not in her place of work so she did not suffer a case of workplace discrimination.

At no point did I say Title Seven was the relevent law in this case. I was asked to list some laws from the US that relate to hate speach, the implication being that there were none. I listed 3.

Now you have dived in wihout reading the context and started whaling away making a pointless argument (for a change.)[/quote]

Not at all. Freedom of speech laws in the US ofer far more protection to freedom of speech than the UK. What has happened to the B&B couple would not happen in the US. The first 1st amendment case to be decided by the US Supreme court involved a case where a man complained that he had been offended and he wanted his offender silenced. The supreme court ruled that if giving offense were to be the standard for limiting free speech would go too far, because anyone could claim they were offended anything someone else has said.

That is why America is the greatest country in the world, because we are free to say what we want without fear of offending someone.

616

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
300andabove wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
300andabove wrote:
Uncle Gabby wrote:
OK so you are totally comfortable with your overtly racist views. At least you are honest about it.

He hasn’t said anything racist, he just doesn’t like immigration. He has a right to not like immigration.

Thank you and WTF ?

Because i don’t want English people to be a minority in their OWN COUNTRY i’m racist ???

You sure your from Manchester ???

If you were i dunno how your not AGREEING with me…

I work and hang with people who are not of English descent, that doesn’t mean i still cannot be proud of my country and wish to have it not turned into so politically correct we can’t even celebrate Christmas without being hounded for it.

It was the Johnny Foreigner comment. Basically you are saying that people from other countries have different rights to those that you have based on nothing more than their race.

What the ???

No based on where they were born. That’s the MAIN reason for the rise of BNP in Manchester, families are being pushed off the housing list to give them to asylum seekers and others, due to goverment bylaws.

So to re-iterate ENGLISH born people are NOT GETTING HOMES so they can be given to NON- ENGLISH people because of our idiotic governments non existent immigration policies and roll out the red carpet to bend over for the idiotic EU.

If thats racist then mate your logic is severely screwy. Since when is it racist to look after your OWN countrymen first, guests second ???

Your last statement is the very definition of racism, treating people differently based on where they are from.

Cock your statement is the very definition of stupidity. It is your stupid attitude that is causing all the trouble in Britain. Your views are contradictory of one another. You are a hypocrite who picks and chooses ideology to suit your purpose and you think we are to stupid to see what you are doing.

When it suits your purpose we are all individuals and should be treated as such. But when it doesn’t suit your purpose it’s wrong to treat people differently because they are all the same.

ie A few pages back we discussed the Pakistani tube bombers. Then you indignantly chastised me that your mates back at Uni were Pakistanis who were perfectly wonderful blokes and it is wrong to treast Pakistanis as being all the same. Now you want to go after above300 and chastise him that is is wrong to not treat people as being all the same.

Your love of revising history explains why you side with the holocaust deniers.

You stated that all Pakistanis should be thrown out of Britain because they are terrorists who hate Britain. I pointed out how stupid your argument was.[/quote]

No I did not. The problem is we don’t know who is who. What we do know their religion teaches hatred of and violence towards others. Whether or not all of them or only a handful answer their religions calls to violence is not the issue. The issue is they are guests in someone elses homeland, it is not fair that they repay their hosts with the violence that their religion encourages. It is not fair that my family and friends have to have their lives put in jeapordy anytime we get on public transport just so they can practice their bullshit religion.

We shouldn’t have to play needles in haystacks with them. If the so-called moderates had any real decency that would take critical look at the life of mohammad and do the right thing. That way it would be a lot easier to figure out who is who. But because they don’t do the right thing they make it harder for everyone else. That is why it is perfectly alright to treat them as one.

Edit: I defy you to show where I have ever engaged in holocaust denial. I have friends who lost their entire family in the holocaust. I’ve been to Dachau. I don’t doubt the holocaust at all. If anything I think the estimate of six million daed Jews might be an underestimate.

617

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
300andabove wrote:
Yep look what they did in Northern Ireland, even when the Catholics were outnumbering the Protestants they still managed to get enough of them in to swing the vote.

Cockney seriously you are NOT seeing what people who live in the UK see.

Already there are skin head people popping up and asian nutter groups. Police are ruunning out of ways to deal with all the freaking nutter clerics telling US IN THE UK we are all going to die WHILE GETTING AID FROM THE UK.

We won’t need any 9/11 it’s already starting to pop and crackle over here with all the heat in the air. All it needs now is a spark and there will be mass riots going on.

You have just as much access to info as Sifu I FREAKING LIVE HERE. Right in the middle of North Manchester i think i have a better idea to be quite honest !

Where abouts in North Manchester? I used to live in Fallowfield so I know all about racial tensions in Manchester from walking through Rusholme during Eid.

If you think the racial tension is anything new just look at the Oldham Riots in 2001 or the Brixton Riots in 1981. Christ, you want to talk rioting in the Manchester area you can go back to the Peterloo riots in 1819.

I don’t want anyone to think that I believe the UK is some kind of utopia of racial harmony however the reason that we have boiling tensions at the moment is far more to do with higher levels of unemployment than anything else.

This is a classic case of Cock rationalizing to support his cognitive dissonance. What is happening today in Britain is a lot more than just people being pissed off over the economy. They had good reasons to be angry even before the economy tanked. The collapse of the economy has merely laid bare all that has been going on ever since Labour got back in power.

Back in 1981 I had friends who participated in the riots. What is going on today is not the same.

So your friends were as easily manipulated by the NF and BNP stirring up shit as you are. Figures.

The BNP was founded in 1982 after the riots. My friends from the youth center were white and black. After the riot some of them came into the youth center wearing multiple watches that they aquired in the riot and were looking to sell. I got the distinct impression that they were not motivated by politics but by the opportunity for some ultra-violence and looting.

I misread your post, I thought you were referring to the Oldham riots. And of course the people taking place in riots are mainly motivated by a chance to kick heads an nick things.[/quote]

There was a whole series of riots in the early 80’s. I wasn’t anywhere near the later Brixton or Oldham riots.

618

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
300andabove wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
I spent all of last year in the UK so I am not that out of touch (was in London not Manchester)

Are you comfortable voting for the BNP given their links to the European Nazi party, facist terrorist groups and holocaust denial etc? I can fully understand your issues with the Tories and Labour but voting for a total scumbag like Griffen would not be something that I could countenance.

I have met the local BNP MP

He is sound out being right wing is going to draw alot of nut jobs, but for me i’d rather put one of them in than put some fucking wanker who only comes to Manchester during voting week.

It’s not just the un-employed that are voting for them, Manchester is seriously losing it’s identity. So they want what the normal English people want.

Less Johnny Foreigner PLEASE.

As my dad says, i never knew when i sent aid to Somalia, they’d come all the way to the UK to thank me and stay here permanently

OK so you are totally comfortable with your overtly racist views. At least you are honest about it.

Fuck you and your calling people racists. Who the hell are you to be judging people? You buggered off to a staunch Roman Catholic, Christian country where you don’t have to worry about being stuck in a sharia state. You have no right to be calling people racists just because they don’t want to their family to have to live under sharia law.

There is no other people on this planet who would be happy to have massive numbers of foreigners move into their homeland that their family has lived in for generations and displace them.

NuLabour has flooded areas like Manchester with immigrants while acting like the people who have lived there for generations don’t exist. It is not racist for people who are being displaced like that to say “hey what about us”.

I hardly ran off to Mexico to get away from Islam. I moved here because there were good economic opportunities and I could create a good life for my family here.

It hardly matters why you went there. What matters is you are now safely far away from Britain living a new life in a country that is staunchly Roman Catholic, populated by people who remember their ancestors conquest by the Conquistadors who are quite unlikely to surrender to Islam without a fight. Your wife and daughter are safely away from Britain, if it becomes a sharia state they won’t be affected.

300andabove is living right in the middle of it all. If Britain does become islamist he is fucked. Despite that you have the unmitigated gall to call him a racist just because he doesn’t want to have to leave his home to find a place where he isn’t an outsider and the majority of people share his values and beliefs.

Cock you are a complete hypocrate calling a man a racist because he doesn’t want to live in a situation that you yourself don’t have to live in. Britain is full of hypocrates like you. A lot of them are politicians and some of them are my relatives.

They live in lilly white affluent communities where the limited contact they do have with immigrants is either their Indian doctor or the kabob shop on the high street. When they briefly venture outside the gates of their estate they think how wonderfully multi-cultural their comunity is.

You and they are living lives that are far removed from the great unwashed like 300andabove who are living in the “enrichment” zones, but that does not stop you from casting derision on those who have to suffer the real life consequences of all your idealism.

Minor point Sifu but most of the people here in Mexico are more closely related to the Conquistadors than the Native populations. [/quote]

Minor point Cockney, Mexico is our next door neighbor. There are a lot of Mexicans living here. I know there are Spanish Mexicans but there are also a lot who consider themselves Aztecan. There are also a trend amongst Mexicans in the US to change from the more conservative Roman Catholicism to more liberal forms of Christianity. You are fairly safe from Islam down there.

[quote]
Also, you have a funny idea of the kind of places I lived in the UK. I lived in Fallowfield Manchester right in the corner between Rusholme and Moss Side. And in London I lived in Croydon, then spent a number of years living in Turnpike Lane (which is a mainly Turkish Community).[/quote]

My point still holds true in referrence to a lot of the politicians who are most supportive of multi-culturalism. They and their family’s don’t have to live with the consequences of their policy and their idealism.

619

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
orion wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Uncle Gabby wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Uncle Gabby wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

It was the Johnny Foreigner comment. Basically you are saying that people from other countries have different rights to those that you have based on nothing more than their race.

If someone wasn’t born in your country, they have no “right” to live in your country.

If someone wasn’t born into an aristocratic family they have no right to work in certain possesions or to own land.

All that is happening is class war all over again. People naturally want to define themselves as a discrete group by keeping others on the outside.

I know that the label “Marxist” gets thrown around too much in this forum, but what you just said is some Marxist bullshit if ever I’ve seen it. The people whose blood and sweat build a nation have the right to make the laws of that nation. As part of those laws, they can decide what people and how many can come into their nation, and what tests those people have to pass to become citizens of that nation. You obviously subscribe to the wacko idea that borders are immoral. If that’s the case, you can just say it and I won’t waste anymore time trying to have an intelligent discussion with you.

I believe that arbitrarily drawn lines on maps are a bit ridiculous. I understand that they are at the moment a necessary evil however the way to deal with immigration is not to shut the doors tight and hope the problem goes away it is to work out what the force is that is driving the movement of people and work on the issue at its source.

Let us say that they live in countries I might call “medieval shitholes”.

How is that “our” problem and why should we deal with ideas that made their countries medieval shitholes?

Because it is in our best interests.[/quote]

No it’s not. Or best interests is to quarantine them in their shitholes until they sort out their society so that it is compatable with the rest of us.

620

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

The British Working Class are complaining about immigration. The only realistic way to stem that immigration is to stop the pressure driving it. Therefore improving conditions in the countries that the people are coming from thereby decreasing the pressure to leave is good for the British Working class.

So, the British must subsidize these countries through “foriegn aid”, maybe even going to war often (gotta get rid of them despots), in order to achieve the same goal as having strict immigration policies? What?

Why not tell these otherwise intelligent, hardworking, liberty-minded people THEY’RE responsible for improving conditions in THEIR home countries. Hey, you’re doing the future citizens of these home countries a favor by keeping their talented people at home.

The point is that tougher immigration policies will not solve the issue, all you get is lots of people turning up illegally (like you see in the US.) It also doesn’t solve the issue of the millions of people already in the country.[/quote]

You are on drugs. Of course changing policy can affect what is happening. If people are there illegally they can be removed. They also can be denied access to a whole range of social services. Just taking away the preferential treatment in housing for immigrants would do lot to slow the flood.