FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Immigratants , Refugees, Asylum seekers, should they EVER be limited ?
Immigratants , Refugees, Asylum seekers, should they EVER be limited ?
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
| |||
| |||
"So when a British citizen moves to Dubai to a great job are they not economic migrants? " Didn't answer the original question. Jim | |||
"So when a British citizen moves to Dubai to a great job are they not economic migrants? " come on now Kevin, stick to the OP, | |||
"So when a British citizen moves to Dubai to a great job are they not economic migrants? come on now Kevin, stick to the OP, " Thanks Jock but I'll decide when and how to answer a post.... | |||
"So when a British citizen moves to Dubai to a great job are they not economic migrants? come on now Kevin, stick to the OP, Thanks Jock but I'll decide when and how to answer a post...." I was calling you by your name, no need to be racist as it is uncalled for. | |||
"So when a British citizen moves to Dubai to a great job are they not economic migrants? come on now Kevin, stick to the OP, Thanks Jock but I'll decide when and how to answer a post.... I was calling you by your name, no need to be racist as it is uncalled for." Racist?.....are the Scots a race? | |||
"Germany had an open door policy, but that was because of a labour shortage, if Angela Merkel is to be believed We don't have a labour shortage, therefore we don't need to import workers from other countries. " We do have a labour shortage in many areas though BUT that's a totally different debate to this thread. | |||
"Ok we have had the "Jungle" sitiuation on going for a hell of a long time now, in one guise or another, human beings trying to get to the UK one way or another. It's a whole mixed bag of immigratants / Refugees trying to come here for one reason or another, admittedly the vast majority to make a better life. There is obviously a major financial hit that comes with this if we operate an open house policy as they first and foremost need housing when we are already at crisis point for housing as it is. They also add pressure to a supposedly cash strapped NHS, local Councils for school places, extra expenditure for translation as many don't speak English. They can also add to our security risk as many have no documentation at all, no idea where they come from, what their history is and what their intentions are really once they are welcomed to the UK. People say we should show compassion and let them all in and furnish their needs. So take the say 10,000 at the Jungle, we let them all come in, word would spread like lightening around the world that we now have an open door policy. So 100,000 more start their journey, get welcomed with open arms and that then triggers 1,000,000 more, and so on and on it would go, that is what would happend, I don't think any logical thinking person would argue against that. The UK is something like 27th on the world PPP index per capita, and the massive influx of people who come with nothing would drive us far down the list. The extra expenditure that this would require would then drive us up the index of national debt to GDP where we are nearly at 90% at around 18th highest in the world. We should show compassion people say, I get that, I really do BUT where do we draw a line ? Do we draw a line and if we do what peramitters are used if they are all claiming their from war torn countries ? Who gets compassion to come and who gets no compassion and gets turned away? or do we let EVERYONE come until our Country becomes as poor and destitute as where they came from to start with ?" good post andy but compassion is not the answer. The UK should continue to take only refugees from the camps on the borders of the countries at war, this ensures that the correct procedures are followed and cuts down / prevents corruption and makes it more difficult for the people trying to charge cash to smuggle them across. Only refugees from the camps should be allowed to enter the UK this ensures a fair system to everyone, not the ones with cash, or the young fit adults who are unwilling to fight for their country but willing to cross many countries to get to the UK | |||
"Germany had an open door policy, but that was because of a labour shortage, if Angela Merkel is to be believed. Immigration is always used by politicians when this happens, but the situation is different in the UK. We don't have a labour shortage, therefore we don't need to import workers from other countries. There must be a way of sorting them out, economic migrants and those escaping war zones. Obviously the former should not be allowed to set foot on British soil. The trouble is that so far our govt has proven to be incapable of telling them appart. " Merkel is now paying the price politically for her stupid open door, let them all come in, everybody welcome approach. She has taken a hammering from the anti immigration AFD party, and I think she is in big trouble at next year's big election in Germany. She has tried to back track on her silly behaviour and re introduced border controls to Germany, but the damage has already been done. | |||
| |||
"I suppose it depends if the EU citizens that are currently working in the UK are sent back or not, if not then we carry on as we are regarding employment, but if they are then we certainly will need immigrants to cover a large number of those jobs. If anyone doubts that you can look back to a fortnight ago when government ministers stated that we will turn to the commonwealth if necessary to fill any job vacancies. So that would be less Poles and Slovakians but more immigrants from Africa and Asia..... " I don't really know what thread you are responding too but it certainly isn't this one  | |||
"I suppose it depends if the EU citizens that are currently working in the UK are sent back or not, if not then we carry on as we are regarding employment, but if they are then we certainly will need immigrants to cover a large number of those jobs. If anyone doubts that you can look back to a fortnight ago when government ministers stated that we will turn to the commonwealth if necessary to fill any job vacancies. So that would be less Poles and Slovakians but more immigrants from Africa and Asia..... I don't really know what thread you are responding too but it certainly isn't this one "I think immigration and employment of immigrants is linked....... | |||
"I suppose it depends if the EU citizens that are currently working in the UK are sent back or not, if not then we carry on as we are regarding employment, but if they are then we certainly will need immigrants to cover a large number of those jobs. If anyone doubts that you can look back to a fortnight ago when government ministers stated that we will turn to the commonwealth if necessary to fill any job vacancies. So that would be less Poles and Slovakians but more immigrants from Africa and Asia..... I don't really know what thread you are responding too but it certainly isn't this one
I think immigration and employment of immigrants is linked......."Yes but that is not what this post is about. Its about people thinking we should be more compassionate and let more and more refugees come here and where if at all we should draw the line. | |||
 | |||
| |||
"So when a British citizen moves to Dubai to a great job are they not economic migrants? " No they become traitors.  | |||
"So when a British citizen moves to Dubai to a great job are they not economic migrants? No they become traitors. "So you are a traitor if you move to another country to earn as much as you can in as short a time as you can?....you really are a strange person. | |||
| |||
 | |||
| |||
"This is an island, and the natives here have always fought back. We might not have always won, but boudicca is proof of the Great British fighting spirit. The future is ours! "Someone can't distinguish between invasion and immigration. He's not the only one of course. Should there be curbs on immigration? Just one. Have they got a job. | |||
"This is an island, and the natives here have always fought back. We might not have always won, but boudicca is proof of the Great British fighting spirit. The future is ours! "Seriously mate.....you really do have some wacky views on this country, no scrap that.....you have some wacky views on life in general. | |||
| |||
"So when a British citizen moves to Dubai to a great job are they not economic migrants? " The difference being that British people working abroad have a skill that is in short supply and bring benefits to the local economy . | |||
| |||
| |||
"This is an island, and the natives here have always fought back. We might not have always won, but boudicca is proof of the Great British fighting spirit. The future is ours!
Seriously mate.....you really do have some wacky views on this country, no scrap that.....you have some wacky views on life in general.
"Wacky? - Look I was bowled over when the people of this nation voted to leave the EU. For once we showed the bleading heart liberals that we can speak for ourselves, and that is what we did. I was desperate for them to do it, but didn't think they would somehow. From now on I will not be taking any notice of things like opinion polls, or the political commentators on the TV. They think they can manipulate us, in this case they couldn't do fuck em, We won, against the odds, happy days! | |||
| |||
"Ok lets try and make this simpler then. People we're stating we should be more compassionate and let more refugees into the UK. If we had an open door policy for "refugees" to be a compassionate nation the vast majority if not all would come with nothing and would require everything. If we didn't have an open door policy then we cannot be compassionate can we ? , can't be having one rule for one and another rule for the others if a refugee is a refugee ? So I'm asking the people who think we should be doing more, and there's quite a few on these forums that have stated many times we should be more compassionate and let more come here, should we just have an open door policy for all refugees from "war zones" current / past like Syria Afghanistan / Iraq / African nations etc etc etc ? Surley to be a compassionate nation every refugee should be treated equally. So if we did what many on here want and open the flood gates for refugees, more and more would make the trip. The question is simple, when is enough enough or do we remain a compassionate nation and neverclose the door to refugees ? " you know they won't answer that because they can't without looking the hypocrite | |||
"Ok lets try and make this simpler then. People we're stating we should be more compassionate and let more refugees into the UK. If we had an open door policy for "refugees" to be a compassionate nation the vast majority if not all would come with nothing and would require everything. If we didn't have an open door policy then we cannot be compassionate can we ? , can't be having one rule for one and another rule for the others if a refugee is a refugee ? So I'm asking the people who think we should be doing more, and there's quite a few on these forums that have stated many times we should be more compassionate and let more come here, should we just have an open door policy for all refugees from "war zones" current / past like Syria Afghanistan / Iraq / African nations etc etc etc ? Surley to be a compassionate nation every refugee should be treated equally. So if we did what many on here want and open the flood gates for refugees, more and more would make the trip. The question is simple, when is enough enough or do we remain a compassionate nation and neverclose the door to refugees ? you know they won't answer that because they can't without looking the hypocrite" I'll answer....there isn't and never has been unrestricted immigration into the UK, so it will continue in much the same way as it does today, we shall remain a compassionate country as we have been for many years, when the need is there we will, and should, step in and allow entry for those in need, in much the same way as the vast majority of Western nations. | |||
| |||
"Ok lets try and make this simpler then. People we're stating we should be more compassionate and let more refugees into the UK. If we had an open door policy for "refugees" to be a compassionate nation the vast majority if not all would come with nothing and would require everything. If we didn't have an open door policy then we cannot be compassionate can we ? , can't be having one rule for one and another rule for the others if a refugee is a refugee ? So I'm asking the people who think we should be doing more, and there's quite a few on these forums that have stated many times we should be more compassionate and let more come here, should we just have an open door policy for all refugees from "war zones" current / past like Syria Afghanistan / Iraq / African nations etc etc etc ? Surley to be a compassionate nation every refugee should be treated equally. So if we did what many on here want and open the flood gates for refugees, more and more would make the trip. The question is simple, when is enough enough or do we remain a compassionate nation and neverclose the door to refugees ? you know they won't answer that because they can't without looking the hypocrite I'll answer....there isn't and never has been unrestricted immigration into the UK, so it will continue in much the same way as it does today, we shall remain a compassionate country as we have been for many years, when the need is there we will, and should, step in and allow entry for those in need, in much the same way as the vast majority of Western nations. " The question was, I believe, about refugees, not immigration per se, and should there be a restriction on the numbers of refugees we take in? But with regards to immigration, you say there has never and will never be unrestricted immigration. That implies that there is a limit on the numbers that can come to the UK. What is that number? But what if, say, 20,000,000 citizens from other EU countries wanted to come here tomorrow.... would this be allowed, or is there a limit? | |||
"Ok lets try and make this simpler then. People we're stating we should be more compassionate and let more refugees into the UK. If we had an open door policy for "refugees" to be a compassionate nation the vast majority if not all would come with nothing and would require everything. If we didn't have an open door policy then we cannot be compassionate can we ? , can't be having one rule for one and another rule for the others if a refugee is a refugee ? So I'm asking the people who think we should be doing more, and there's quite a few on these forums that have stated many times we should be more compassionate and let more come here, should we just have an open door policy for all refugees from "war zones" current / past like Syria Afghanistan / Iraq / African nations etc etc etc ? Surley to be a compassionate nation every refugee should be treated equally. So if we did what many on here want and open the flood gates for refugees, more and more would make the trip. The question is simple, when is enough enough or do we remain a compassionate nation and neverclose the door to refugees ? you know they won't answer that because they can't without looking the hypocrite I'll answer....there isn't and never has been unrestricted immigration into the UK, so it will continue in much the same way as it does today, we shall remain a compassionate country as we have been for many years, when the need is there we will, and should, step in and allow entry for those in need, in much the same way as the vast majority of Western nations. The question was, I believe, about refugees, not immigration per se, and should there be a restriction on the numbers of refugees we take in? But with regards to immigration, you say there has never and will never be unrestricted immigration. That implies that there is a limit on the numbers that can come to the UK. What is that number? But what if, say, 20,000,000 citizens from other EU countries wanted to come here tomorrow.... would this be allowed, or is there a limit? " Best part of a million Brits live elsewhere in the EU, what if 500,000 more Brits decided to live in Spain or Portugal next week? | |||
"Ok lets try and make this simpler then. People we're stating we should be more compassionate and let more refugees into the UK. If we had an open door policy for "refugees" to be a compassionate nation the vast majority if not all would come with nothing and would require everything. If we didn't have an open door policy then we cannot be compassionate can we ? , can't be having one rule for one and another rule for the others if a refugee is a refugee ? So I'm asking the people who think we should be doing more, and there's quite a few on these forums that have stated many times we should be more compassionate and let more come here, should we just have an open door policy for all refugees from "war zones" current / past like Syria Afghanistan / Iraq / African nations etc etc etc ? Surley to be a compassionate nation every refugee should be treated equally. So if we did what many on here want and open the flood gates for refugees, more and more would make the trip. The question is simple, when is enough enough or do we remain a compassionate nation and neverclose the door to refugees ? you know they won't answer that because they can't without looking the hypocrite I'll answer....there isn't and never has been unrestricted immigration into the UK, so it will continue in much the same way as it does today, we shall remain a compassionate country as we have been for many years, when the need is there we will, and should, step in and allow entry for those in need, in much the same way as the vast majority of Western nations. The question was, I believe, about refugees, not immigration per se, and should there be a restriction on the numbers of refugees we take in? But with regards to immigration, you say there has never and will never be unrestricted immigration. That implies that there is a limit on the numbers that can come to the UK. What is that number? But what if, say, 20,000,000 citizens from other EU countries wanted to come here tomorrow.... would this be allowed, or is there a limit? Best part of a million Brits live elsewhere in the EU, what if 500,000 more Brits decided to live in Spain or Portugal next week? " The thread is not about people leaving the UK, it's about entry into the UK - specifically refugees, but you chose to talk about general immigration. So you can't answer either of two simple questions then - Should there be a restriction on the numbers of refugees we take in? You say "there isn't and never has been unrestricted immigration into the UK" - implying that immigration is restricted, and therefore the numbers are restricted. - But what if, say, 20,000,000 citizens from other EU countries wanted to come here tomorrow.... would this be allowed, or is there a limit? | |||
| |||
| |||
"I think going by the replies and or lack of them points clearly to one glaring fact. We can't simply say we should be more compassionate and bring in refugees wholesale because we cannot afford to do so without detrimental effects to the UK. So given that we are spending far more than we take as a Country mounting our debt higher and higher, should we effectivley close our borders too them ?" Close the borders, shut the door, batten down the hatches and gaffa tape the letter box shut. So many are playing this down, and throwing insults at anyone who is against immigation / assylum or the intake of these particular refugees. THAT is why so many on here are reluctant to answer your original question. I'm not bothered what a load of dullard PC liberals say or think about me, so here we are. This problem was caused because people in France told these so called "refugees" that they were not wanted over there. There were even rumour, don't know if they were true, that some French people were giving them money to help them on there way to Calais. It is a situation without a solution, as allowing them to come here will only encourage more to make the same journey, which involves people traffickers and much danger. If we must take a number of refugees, then we should be offering those stuck in camps in Syria etc the chance to come here directly. Other nations should do the same thing, it is time to cut off the gravy train that is people trafficking. Some evil people are making a lot of money, and no doubt are making a lot of false promises. | |||
"I think going by the replies and or lack of them points clearly to one glaring fact. We can't simply say we should be more compassionate and bring in refugees wholesale because we cannot afford to do so without detrimental effects to the UK. So given that we are spending far more than we take as a Country mounting our debt higher and higher, should we effectivley close our borders too them ? Close the borders, shut the door, batten down the hatches and gaffa tape the letter box shut. So many are playing this down, and throwing insults at anyone who is against immigation / assylum or the intake of these particular refugees. THAT is why so many on here are reluctant to answer your original question. I'm not bothered what a load of dullard PC liberals say or think about me, so here we are. This problem was caused because people in France told these so called "refugees" that they were not wanted over there. There were even rumour, don't know if they were true, that some French people were giving them money to help them on there way to Calais. It is a situation without a solution, as allowing them to come here will only encourage more to make the same journey, which involves people traffickers and much danger. If we must take a number of refugees, then we should be offering those stuck in camps in Syria etc the chance to come here directly. Other nations should do the same thing, it is time to cut off the gravy train that is people trafficking. Some evil people are making a lot of money, and no doubt are making a lot of false promises." Have to agree with most of what you say not sure that the French have been giving them money though. | |||
"I think going by the replies and or lack of them points clearly to one glaring fact. We can't simply say we should be more compassionate and bring in refugees wholesale because we cannot afford to do so without detrimental effects to the UK. So given that we are spending far more than we take as a Country mounting our debt higher and higher, should we effectivley close our borders too them ? Close the borders, shut the door, batten down the hatches and gaffa tape the letter box shut. So many are playing this down, and throwing insults at anyone who is against immigation / assylum or the intake of these particular refugees. THAT is why so many on here are reluctant to answer your original question. I'm not bothered what a load of dullard PC liberals say or think about me, so here we are. This problem was caused because people in France told these so called "refugees" that they were not wanted over there. There were even rumour, don't know if they were true, that some French people were giving them money to help them on there way to Calais. It is a situation without a solution, as allowing them to come here will only encourage more to make the same journey, which involves people traffickers and much danger. If we must take a number of refugees, then we should be offering those stuck in camps in Syria etc the chance to come here directly. Other nations should do the same thing, it is time to cut off the gravy train that is people trafficking. Some evil people are making a lot of money, and no doubt are making a lot of false promises. Have to agree with most of what you say not sure that the French have been giving them money though. "I'm not so sure about that one either, it's an old rumour I heard years ago when the camp in Calaid was called Sangat? | |||
| |||
"Over 100,000 Brits live in Dubai, with 80% of them working there. " The more important statistic is how many Britains go abroad and claim benefits . I would suspect tbat no foreign countries play benefits to UK citizens , yet we pay endless benefits to non UK residents . In the addition to these benefits , they also use our Health Service and put an enormous stain on schools and housing . | |||
"I suppose it depends if the EU citizens that are currently working in the UK are sent back or not, if not then we carry on as we are regarding employment, but if they are then we certainly will need immigrants to cover a large number of those jobs. If anyone doubts that you can look back to a fortnight ago when government ministers stated that we will turn to the commonwealth if necessary to fill any job vacancies. So that would be less Poles and Slovakians but more immigrants from Africa and Asia..... I don't really know what thread you are responding too but it certainly isn't this one
I think immigration and employment of immigrants is linked.......
Yes but that is not what this post is about.
Its about people thinking we should be more compassionate and let more and more refugees come here and where if at all we should draw the line."I think the lack of compassion accusation has more to do with how people talk about migrants or immigrants than what we should actually do. We can be both compassionate and tough at the same time. I'm reluctantly inclined to agree with you that simply allowing all people trying to enter this country in would, more than likely, increase the numbers attempting to come here, although I would dispute the exponential you've chosen. However we should allow those who already have a strong link with the UK or an existing legal right to be here in and we should do this without dragging our feet. I also believe that we should do more to help out in the refugee camps closer to the source of the problem. We are doing proportionately more than many but, if we ever want to get on top of this problem, we need to do more, including actually taking more refugees than we currently take directly from the camps. The real problem is the ones currently on Europe and especially France, who don't already have strong ties with the UK or an existing legal right to be here. While legally they are the problem of the first safe country they come to I don't believe it's either right or proper that we make Turkey, Greece, Italy and Spain (some of the poorest countries in Europe) shoulder all the effort. So I think we should also take some of them also. Not an open door but a compassionate and pragmatic approach, together with the rest of Europe and the world, to share the burden and solve the problem. | |||
"So when a British citizen moves to Dubai to a great job are they not economic migrants? The difference being that British people working abroad have a skill that is in short supply and bring benefits to the local economy . " The implication behind that is that migrants to this country have no skills and bring no benefit to the local economy. Which is, of course, totally untrue. | |||
"Ok lets try and make this simpler then. People we're stating we should be more compassionate and let more refugees into the UK. If we had an open door policy for "refugees" to be a compassionate nation the vast majority if not all would come with nothing and would require everything. If we didn't have an open door policy then we cannot be compassionate can we ? , can't be having one rule for one and another rule for the others if a refugee is a refugee ? So I'm asking the people who think we should be doing more, and there's quite a few on these forums that have stated many times we should be more compassionate and let more come here, should we just have an open door policy for all refugees from "war zones" current / past like Syria Afghanistan / Iraq / African nations etc etc etc ? Surley to be a compassionate nation every refugee should be treated equally. So if we did what many on here want and open the flood gates for refugees, more and more would make the trip. The question is simple, when is enough enough or do we remain a compassionate nation and neverclose the door to refugees ? you know they won't answer that because they can't without looking the hypocrite I'll answer....there isn't and never has been unrestricted immigration into the UK, so it will continue in much the same way as it does today, we shall remain a compassionate country as we have been for many years, when the need is there we will, and should, step in and allow entry for those in need, in much the same way as the vast majority of Western nations. The question was, I believe, about refugees, not immigration per se, and should there be a restriction on the numbers of refugees we take in? But with regards to immigration, you say there has never and will never be unrestricted immigration. That implies that there is a limit on the numbers that can come to the UK. What is that number? But what if, say, 20,000,000 citizens from other EU countries wanted to come here tomorrow.... would this be allowed, or is there a limit? " Well 20,000,000 EU citizens moving here would be a problem, as would 20,000,000 million English moving to Scotland or Ireland, or 20,000,000 million people from the north moving to London. But we don't worry about it because it's never going to actually happen. Another, equally improbable scenario, but far more serious, would be if no EU citizens wanted to come and live and work here. That would be the end of freshly picked fruit and veg, not to mention the NHS and hundreds, possibly thousands, of businesses that rely on them both as customers and employees. | |||
"Over 100,000 Brits live in Dubai, with 80% of them working there. The more important statistic is how many Britains go abroad and claim benefits . I would suspect that no foreign countries play benefits to UK citizens , yet we pay endless benefits to non UK residents . In the addition to these benefits , they also use our Health Service and put an enormous stain on schools and housing . " Are you saying that when British people go abroad they don't ever live in houses, ever use the local health services, ever take advantage of any benefits such as schools, libraries or parks, and than none has ever claimed any benefits while living, working, retiring or even dying abroad? I'm pretty sure that a quick google will prove that wrong. But then a quick google would also show that, on average, migrants to Britain are less likely to claim benefits here than people born here, are less likely to apply for council houses than people born here, are less likely to use health or social services than people who are born here, are less likely to have children in our schools than people who are born here. In fact one of the only things they do more of on average than people who are born here is paying taxes. But don't let reality and the facts influence your opinion. | |||
| |||
"Refugees and asylum seekers, we should be compassionate and take our share. Economic migrants? Bring them all over regardless of their skills. The only qualification they need is have they got a job. This country is full? Is it shite. You can fit the population of the planet on the Isle of Wight. There is not a single example in history where immigration (as opposed to invasion, I had better point out there is a distinction though perhaps not to the racists) is bad for a country overall. Go on, name one you fuckers? There are examples of problems, localised, temporary, that countries have had but they are failures of planning. All that fuss about the poles. What's the fuss now. They came, found jobs, worked hard, boosted out economy, most then went home. Some stayed, integrated, and have formed beneficial trade ties to Poland. I notice the 60,000,000 Romanians and Bulgarians Farage promised would be on that first plane over didn't materialise. There was a bemused one on that first plane wasn't there? And going back, the Indians and Pakistanis, the Irish, the West Indians, the Jews persecuted by the Nazis, how far back do you want to go? The Huguenots? Were any of them ultimately not overall a fucking great thing for us culturally and economically? Let them come, make them welcome and set up a system to register and monitor them. Tell migrants they can't have benefits for x amount of time and if they can't find a job then they must return to their country long before any benefits become payable. It's very easy to understand why immigration is good. The people who migrate are usually motivated, resourceful and young. They tend not to be 60 year olds with health problems who will drain the NHS. " You know that all makes a lot of sense  a very balanced view of only people would try and get on.
Also the fact that they should be told that there are no benefits to be had, a lot not the main people who complain are not willing to work for a living.
But ther is a problem in this country is that a lot of companies do not directly employ foreign workers but use them on zero hours contracts and so make them work for shite money.
This is what causes a lot of the animosity with people saying that they are undercut as far as wages go | |||
"Refugees and asylum seekers, we should be compassionate and take our share. Economic migrants? Bring them all over regardless of their skills. The only qualification they need is have they got a job. This country is full? Is it shite. You can fit the population of the planet on the Isle of Wight. There is not a single example in history where immigration (as opposed to invasion, I had better point out there is a distinction though perhaps not to the racists) is bad for a country overall. Go on, name one you fuckers? There are examples of problems, localised, temporary, that countries have had but they are failures of planning. All that fuss about the poles. What's the fuss now. They came, found jobs, worked hard, boosted out economy, most then went home. Some stayed, integrated, and have formed beneficial trade ties to Poland. I notice the 60,000,000 Romanians and Bulgarians Farage promised would be on that first plane over didn't materialise. There was a bemused one on that first plane wasn't there? And going back, the Indians and Pakistanis, the Irish, the West Indians, the Jews persecuted by the Nazis, how far back do you want to go? The Huguenots? Were any of them ultimately not overall a fucking great thing for us culturally and economically? Let them come, make them welcome and set up a system to register and monitor them. Tell migrants they can't have benefits for x amount of time and if they can't find a job then they must return to their country long before any benefits become payable. It's very easy to understand why immigration is good. The people who migrate are usually motivated, resourceful and young. They tend not to be 60 year olds with health problems who will drain the NHS. " good post.. | |||
| |||
"So when a British citizen moves to Dubai to a great job are they not economic migrants? The difference being that British people working abroad have a skill that is in short supply and bring benefits to the local economy . " Rather like the points based system that many countries use to sensibly control immigration. In which case the individuals can apply from anywhere. But what about "genuine" refugees? The biggest problem as I see it is that there has been little/no attempt on their part...or on the part of the several countries they have passed through to classify them in any way on their way to the jungle. This is totally beyond the control of our government but other countries, particularly France just seem to be set on passing them through. It is only pressure from a Calais that has forced the French government to finally start to spread them out and register them properly whilst accepting that Francecis a "safe" country. We seem to be the only country following the UN guidelines in providing funding to border camps and filtering refugees from that point. . Only when you answer this question can you then think about numbers that are sustainable. | |||
"60 year olds who have contributed to the NHS all their working lives, as opposed to migrant ponces who just arrive here and get it gratis. Sympathy is a word in the dictionary, somewhere between shit and syphilis. Charity begins at home..." . First sensible post in the politics thread. | |||
| |||
"How was it sensible? The doofus didn't even understand I was saying we don't get 60 year old migrants that drain the NHS, but young, healthy hard working migrants who put money into the system to pay for the healthcare 60 year old UK citizens who have contributed all their lives to AND ARE FULLY ENTITLED TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF. Young,healthy hard working migrants,you are having a fu#€ing laugh aren't you,they do not exist,dipstick !!!! " | |||
"How was it sensible? The doofus didn't even understand I was saying we don't get 60 year old migrants that drain the NHS, but young, healthy hard working migrants who put money into the system to pay for the healthcare 60 year old UK citizens who have contributed all their lives to AND ARE FULLY ENTITLED TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF. " Migrants often have more than one job as most have come here to better their lot, they pay their taxes, and their taxes are no different than any British born citizen, it all goes into the pot to help the UK to operate and hopefully thrive. | |||
| |||
| |||
"How was it sensible? The doofus didn't even understand I was saying we don't get 60 year old migrants that drain the NHS, but young, healthy hard working migrants who put money into the system to pay for the healthcare 60 year old UK citizens who have contributed all their lives to AND ARE FULLY ENTITLED TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF. Young,healthy hard working migrants,you are having a fu#€ing laugh aren't you,they do not exist,dipstick !!!! " We should have a sweep as to how long it will take for you to get a ban. | |||
| |||
"How was it sensible? The doofus didn't even understand I was saying we don't get 60 year old migrants that drain the NHS, but young, healthy hard working migrants who put money into the system to pay for the healthcare 60 year old UK citizens who have contributed all their lives to AND ARE FULLY ENTITLED TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF. Young,healthy hard working migrants,you are having a fu#€ing laugh aren't you,they do not exist,dipstick !!!! We should have a sweep as to how long it will take for you to get a ban." If you cant behave like an adult - don't come to this forum. Personal attacks are against site rules | |||
