Net migration to UK - new record high

[saabster14]

hyphen said:

There is just a little bit of a difference between immigrants fleeing the nazis/Syrians fleeing the current conflict, and the EU federalist dream.

Didn't know the Mail at the time supported the Nazis, but having visited a concentration camp in Germany, it was eye opening about how many well known companies today used slave labour- including some our most loved car brands today.

So if you want people to stop reading the Mail due to its past, you should start by selling that Porsche of yours

Edited by hyphen on Friday 2nd December 11:13

My Porsche is gone


Edit to add: a quick google to see how the daily mail behaved in the '30's is well worth 10 mins.
the owners are still the same family IIRC
really shouldn't judge the mail on the 30's though, that was another era. We should have learned from it though, the same rhetoric is being played out in Hungary, UK and other European nations. Economic woes are being blamed on immigrants. In the 30's the large groups of immigrants were Jewish people. Sad that Humans haven't learned from our own mistakes.

Edited by saabster14 on Friday 2nd December 12:18

[saabster14]

Guybrush said:

I think he's saying the Mail supported Sachs' fleeing the Nazis. But he also suggests the Mail quoting the numbers of immigrants is somehow being against them, which is odd, but then again the left have always used the race card whenever numbers of immigrants are discussed, presumably so as to shut down further discussion.

"Shut down discussion" ????

quite the opposite

[anonymous-user]

hyphen said:

It is public record that the mainstream media 'shut down' any conversation on immigration using liberal bias and the racist card.

BBC Trust report: "...the BBC had been "slow to reflect the weight of concern in the wider community" about issues around the topic and must do more to seek out opinions "which 'people like us' may find unpalatable".

Helen Boaden, the BBC's former news director,admitted the corporation held a "deep liberal bias" in its coverage of immigation when she took up the role in 2004.

Nick Robinson, the BBC's political editor: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/...

That is your interpretation of an historical position regarding the BBC. I am not saying those views you quote are wrong, but the BBC is not the only "mainstream media" and I disagree with your emphatic position on the matter.

I was referring more particularly to the use of the expressions "playing the racist card" and "shutting down debate" on PH with regard to PH topics although it is my view that these expressions are also overused outside of PH.

[hyphen]

Roman Rhodes said:

That is your interpretation of an historical position regarding the BBC. I am not saying those views you quote are wrong, but the BBC is not the only "mainstream media" and I disagree with your emphatic position on the matter.

I was referring more particularly to the use of the expressions "playing the racist card" and "shutting down debate" on PH with regard to PH topics although it is my view that these expressions are also overused outside of PH.

The BBC Political Editor and the execs says something in clear black and white, I quote it...and you class that as an 'interpretation'.You disagree emphatically, yet have nothing substantial to offer in return, i.e. subjective view?

Suspect your mind is not open for true debate, so not much point to go on. Have a nice day

[Digga]

BIANCO said:

Digga said:

TBF any and every immigrant is going to place a demand on resources and infrastructure. That the strain is due to abject, chronic lack of investment, rather than the infux of new immigrants is a debate that cannot satisfactorily be tested. Neither helps.

The problem is that's seems to be the answer for all the problems that mass imagration cause, more investment. They say they are a net positive economically but is that after you have factored in the billions needed in infrastructure to cope with them, probably not.

To me it's like trying to help a drug addict by just giving them more money or better drugs. Not by dealing with where the problem stem's from.

It's a tough one; a chicken and egg situation. Ideally, you;d get infrastructure ready to meet demand, rather than wait for it to be swamped by it. Whilst immigration increases the overload, it's not really their fault that successive decades of UK governments have dodged spending.

[anonymous-user]

hyphen said:

The BBC Political Editor and the execs says something in clear black and white, I quote it...and you class that as an 'interpretation'.You disagree emphatically, yet have nothing substantial to offer in return, i.e. subjective view?

Suspect your mind is not open for true debate, so not much point to go on. Have a nice day

You provided information regarding the BBC ONLY regarding their coverage of immigration:

"Not getting it right"

"slow to catch up with public opinion on immigration"

"a deep liberal bias"

And equate this to "It is public record that the mainstream media 'shut down' any conversation on immigration using liberal bias and the racist card."

Perhaps I should have called your view a distortion, would that have been more acceptable?

You have a nice day too.

[Guybrush]

saabster14 said:

Guybrush said:

I think he's saying the Mail supported Sachs' fleeing the Nazis. But he also suggests the Mail quoting the numbers of immigrants is somehow being against them, which is odd, but then again the left have always used the race card whenever numbers of immigrants are discussed, presumably so as to shut down further discussion.

"Shut down discussion" ????

quite the opposite

Do you think being labelled 'racist' and similar, purely for questioning the unsustainable level of immigration, is going to encourage further discussion? I've a feeling it would not.

[anonymous-user]

I don't see why it would discourage further debate. An accusation of racism may be valid or it may not - up to the individual being accused to respond as they see fit. Of course, 'racist' could be used simply as an insult - but these threads contain all sorts of insults from both sides of the debates.

I really don't see many (any?) on PH arguing for uncontrolled migration from any part of the world. Clearly it is freer within the EU but there are checks and balances. Whether these are implemented correctly is certainly open to question. I too have had experience of being charged for health care in Europe (and having to jump through hoops to get ANY of it back). If we could be charging but aren't then that does need explaining as it seems bizarre! Infrastructure/facilities/services need to be increased in line with population growth. If it isn't happening sufficiently (and I'm not suggesting it is) then surely there are some great commercial opportunities to take advantage of? Whether the position is quite as bad as some make out I'm not sure - we're all guided by our personal experience. I certainly remember many things 'creaking' in the 70's and 80's (18 months to get a driving test!) and it certainly doesn't take me any longer to get a Doctors appointment than it used to a few years back. I'm sure that isn't the case for everyone though.

Better planning by Government and the application of existing rules properly would help - but I don't think there's a perfect solution!

[saabster14]

Guybrush said:

Do you think being labelled 'racist' and similar, purely for questioning the unsustainable level of immigration, is going to encourage further discussion? I've a feeling it would not.

I haven't labelled you anything. I posted about an article about a daily mail article in which the main front page headline was about immigration numbers (again) and pointed out that sharing the same page was a tribute to Andrew Sachs, who has sadly passed away.

The irony being that the daily mail published this article, the very year that Sachs' family had to flee Germany because of the Nazi's.






heres an article from the Washington post about the current rhetoric in sections of the media and how it echoes the rhetoric of sections of the media in the 30's

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/...