Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Germany until very recently didn't even grant 2nd generation turks proper citizenship and anectdotally racism is less entrenched, institutionalised and far less evident in the general population in the UK than anywhere else in europe, we also seem to have the highets per capita asylum seekers of the major EU nations according to your figures Sean. I suspect that a larger proportion of Asylum seekers are ultimately intent on coming to the UK than elsewhere in the EU - i'm purtting no value/politics on this it just seems fairly likely to me.

To clarify - I come from one of the minor EU nations - one that has traditionally been a nation of emigrants


But they bitch like a motherf***** when it comes to immigrants


I hate my countrypeople infinitely more than I get annoyed by some Brits complaining about immigration


But the point is it's always the same argument - "it's not fair! why are they coming HERE??? Why can't they stay where they are or go somewhere else - we seem to be getting most of them"

But the point is it's always the same argument - "it's not fair! why are they coming HERE??? Why can't they stay where they are or go somewhere else - we seem to be getting most of them"


Absolutely true Sean, but I think in the case of the UK, we do get a lot. I don't think this is a bad thing at all, just a fact.


I've kind of lost the thread of what the current debate is now.

Yeah the UK get's a lot for sure


But if the debate (the wider one, not the one on here) is to be useful it's no good radio phone ins and "mates" and newspapers talking about being swamped. Smaller countries will feel the effects more, and the UK is a long way from being the most "swamped" (on average, per capita, per GDP or whatever)

Sean - get your heart out of your head (and post) so we have these debates based on fact sometimes - you get so emotive about these things and start bandying around "Daily Mail', and semi-accusaitions of little englander just because your figures are 'challenged'. Is it really an honest debate is it to accuse poeple of small mindeness and prejudice when all other are doing is pointing out some other ways of looking at the 'facts'?
Personally, I think trying to be objective and non-selective about the reality isn't a bad start on all these potentiall thorny issues. Certainly the idiots on the right have a valuable weapon in their armoury and get some traction when they say that 'liberals' and the 'liberal establishment' won't debate these issues properly.....and I'd rather not give the BNP any debating ground to stand on howver tenous.

Not sure I follow your post quids...


I haven't band-ied around the Daily Mail at all - where have you got this from?


As for little Englander, I' m sure I said - just a couple of posts previously that I despise my own country's attidtude to this more than I do the UK's


And most of what I have posted is based on what facts I can find - which aren't as up to date as I would like


How have I been emotive? I have said there is a wider discourse where people (far emotive than I) are spitting blood on a radio phone in saying "it's not right" how the UK is only country taking this many - when "this many" depends on how you look at it.


And the UK isn't alone in this so I'm not overly happy about being accused of bandying around semi-accusations and Daily Mail isms

"But the point is it's always the same argument - "it's not fair! why are they coming HERE??? Why can't they stay where they are or go somewhere else - we seem to be getting most of them"...


When I'd just posted that objectively given your stats per capita didn't measure the most. You're debating on the EDF not aginst Talk Radio...or I suspect many Daily Mail..you can challenge liberal consensus views whilst still being a liberal and without being one of 'them'

But I'm not saying the phrase


"But the point is it's always the same argument - "it's not fair! why are they coming HERE??? Why can't they stay where they are or go somewhere else - we seem to be getting most of them"...


is exclusive to any country - I'm saying it's the same everywhere I have listened to the debate. Be that minor or major EU countries. Or the US. So by definition it's that comlaint/phrase quoted above which is emotive - not anything I have said?

But cn you not see that when you post a deliberately emotive 'prejudiced' statement connected to 'most' after someone has pointed out that factually the 'most' might be true for the UK.... at some level the poster may feel that you are linking that statement with their post? Am i being over sensitive? (seems unlikely :))

"But cn you not see that when you post a deliberately emotive 'prejudiced' statement"


Maybe I'm being slow tonight - but you (or Moos or someone) will have to point out which statement that was deliberately emotive prejudiced


When I paraphrased "most of them" it was just that - the paraphrase of legions of indignant callers. But even if UK is getting the "most" refugees, i would argue that that isn't something to get upset about if the UK is big enough to deal with the most - that's all


I haven't meant to be emotive on this one - I just wish other people (and I mean the wider debate not you quids) would take a breath and stop being SOOOO upset when they phone in to complain. "The most" just doesn't seem to be the most important measure to me


An island of 4 million people getting proportionately more people than an island of nearly 60 million people seems to have merit - and I still disagree more with the island of 4 million complaining.


I just wish people would stop complaining - it isn't really the thing that blights their lives

I have to say I've kind of l skipped cursorily through the last forty posts or so but and I say but, this country is far better than .. Oh bollocks, better than Spain.... Aaah fuck it, have to work tommoroe dammit. (tommoroe being the plural of all our days)

SeanMacGabhann wrote:-

An island of 4 million people getting proportionately more people than an island of nearly 60 million people seems to have merit - and I still disagree more with the island of 4 million complaining.


This little island has 60 million a tad more crowded than most other european countries why do we need more populace when we seem unable to house the ones we have already?

I don't think anyone was suggesting that the UK accepted immigration because it needed more population? That's an argument from the 50s and 60s. A straw man, no less.


I can see three principle forms of modern immigration: free movement of labour within the EU, asylum seekers/refugees and economic migration.


The disappearance of the Polish plumbers over the last year has demonstrated that the free movement of labour wasn't economic migration but supply and demand. Great for our country, bad news for local shirkers who charged obnoxious rates for shoddy services.


Asylum seekers and refugees are about a duty of care to our fellow man that the UK carries slightly more heavily than some countries because we once colonised half the world, and still reap the benefits.


Economic migration is 'illegal' into the UK, and thus these individuals are outside the purview of the social services, and don't receive benefits.


In practice some of the third group masquerade as some of the second, and the systems we have in place to weed them out are inefficient.

Huguenot Wrote:

The disappearance of the Polish plumbers over the last year has demonstrated that the free movement of labour wasn't economic migration but supply and demand. Great for our country, bad news for local shirkers who charged obnoxious rates for shoddy services.


The demand for Plumbers for The UK is, on average, no more or no less, than before the Polish Plumbers arrived.


The demand was from The Employers in their Industry who could pay them much less per hour than the equivalent Guys who were doing those jobs before them.


Now the wages have increased in Poland to achieve a state of nearer parity to the British wage there is no further incentive for the Polish Guys to remain here.


What evidence do you have that the Polish workers, in general, did a a better job than the Guys that they substituted from those same jobs?


Also what evidence do you have that Guys doing those same Plumbing jobs previously, "charged obnoxious rates for shoddy services " ??

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • What was he doing on the stage at Glastonbury? Or on the stage at the other concert in Finsbury Park? Grinning like a Cheshire cat whilst pissed and stoned 20 somethings on the promise of free internet sung-- Oh Jeremy Corbyn---  What were his policies for Northern mining towns with no jobs or infrastructure? Free Internet and university places for youngsters. What were his other manifesto pledges? Why all the ambiguity over Brexit?  I didn't like Thatcher, Blair or May or Tony but I respected them as politicians because they stood by what they believed in. I respect all politicians across the board that stick to their principles. Corbyn didn't and its why he got  annihilated at the polls. A socialist, anti imperialist and anti capitalist that said he voted for an imperialist and pro capitalist cabal. He refused to say how he'd vote over and over again until the last knockings. He did so to appease the Islington elite and middle class students he was courting. The same people that were screaming that Brexit was racist. At the same time the EU were holding black and Asian immigrants in refugee camps overseas but not a word on that! Corbyn created and courted a student union protest movement that screamed at and shouted down anyone not on the left . They claimed Starmer and the centre right of labour were tories. He didn't get elected  because he, his movement and policies were unelectable, twice. He turned out not to have the convictions of his politics and died on his own sword.    Reform won't win an election. All the idiots that voted for them to keep out Labour actually enabled Labour. They'll be back voting tory next time.    Farage wouldn't be able to make his millions if he was in power. He's a very devious shyster but I very much doubt he'd actually want the responsibility that governance requires.
    • The purge of hard left members that were part of Corbyn's, Mcdonnel's and Lansmans momentum that purged the party of right wing and centrist members. That's politics. It's what Blair did to win, its what Starmer had to do to win. This country doesn't vote in extreme left or right governments. That's partly why Corbyn lost  We're pretty much a centrist bunch.  It doesn't make it false either. It's an opinion based on the voting patterns, demography and statistics. Can you explain then why former mining constituencies that despise the tories voted for them or abstained rather than vote for Corbyns Labour?  What is the truth then? But he never got elected!!! Why? He should have been binned off there and then. Why he was allowed to hang about is an outrage. I hold him party responsible for the shit show that we've had to endure since. 
    • Depends on what the Barista says doesnt it? There was no physical confrontation with the driver, OP thinks she is being targetted when she isnt. These guys work min wage under strict schedules so give them a break unless they damage your stuff
    • CPR Dave, attendance records are available on Southwark's website. Maggie Browning has attended 100% of meetings. Jon Hartley has attended 65%.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...