Migration & Immigration
Discussion
Zod said:
my post calling bigkeeko what he is got deleted for breaching posting rules. Western countries need to work to help resolve the problems of the countries from which the refugees stem. Until their own countries are reasonably safe and offer at least some hope of a future, it's absurd to expect people to stay there.
Finlandia said:
The Swedish government is a minority government, so 
Rapes and sexual assaults are a problem, now there is a serial gang rape gang on the loose in Malmö.
Handgrenade found in broad daylight on the road in a suburb of Stockholm.
The gone week has seen four dead in gang shootings, few more knife deaths.
Police stations are bombed, police cars are bombed, homes of police officers are shot up.
2017 there was a shooting a day, no other country has nearly as many handgrenade blasts as Sweden.
Today, the so called leader of the country admitted that the army may have to be called in to fight gang crime.
These are all problems caused by too much immigration and poor integration. The first generation immigrants are generally not the ones who cause the problems, the second and third generations are.
Still at least now the cold and snow is coming so it's pretty quiet at the moment.
Nicely ignored by the left. It's depressing to see what's happening to that country. Rapes and sexual assaults are a problem, now there is a serial gang rape gang on the loose in Malmö.
Handgrenade found in broad daylight on the road in a suburb of Stockholm.
The gone week has seen four dead in gang shootings, few more knife deaths.
Police stations are bombed, police cars are bombed, homes of police officers are shot up.
2017 there was a shooting a day, no other country has nearly as many handgrenade blasts as Sweden.
Today, the so called leader of the country admitted that the army may have to be called in to fight gang crime.
These are all problems caused by too much immigration and poor integration. The first generation immigrants are generally not the ones who cause the problems, the second and third generations are.
Still at least now the cold and snow is coming so it's pretty quiet at the moment.
A few need a read of the "The Strange Death of Europe" by Douglas Murray.
If you can't see the issues of allowing net drains into a country by the 100,000s into a system that will pay more the more children you have, all of which are likely to be net drains themselves, then your heads gone.
Do people really think it's only the good guys that are fleeing the bad in their third world countries?
Yes these are humans, but there simply isn't the infrastructure in the better off countries to support the poor population of the world. More should be done in trying to improve these countries.
As for the whole, "well they're here now" argument... 'they' really aren't. The numbers we are seeing now are insignificant compared to what we will see if Europe does accept 'them'.
Take any country - New Zealand is fairly neutral.
If we know that New Zealanders take more financially out of the system than they put in.
They bring cultural and social problems the like of which we have never seen before and have no understanding of how to deal with.
Why do we want New Zealanders ?
Why am I pained as the right wing bad guy for not wanting them ?
If we know that New Zealanders take more financially out of the system than they put in.
They bring cultural and social problems the like of which we have never seen before and have no understanding of how to deal with.
Why do we want New Zealanders ?
Why am I pained as the right wing bad guy for not wanting them ?
Boydie88 said:
Nicely ignored by the left. It's depressing to see what's happening to that country.
A few need a read of the "The Strange Death of Europe" by Douglas Murray.
If you can't see the issues of allowing net drains into a country by the 100,000s into a system that will pay more the more children you have, all of which are likely to be net drains themselves, then your heads gone.
Do people really think it's only the good guys that are fleeing the bad in their third world countries?
Yes these are humans, but there simply isn't the infrastructure in the better off countries to support the poor population of the world. More should be done in trying to improve these countries.
As for the whole, "well they're here now" argument... 'they' really aren't. The numbers we are seeing now are insignificant compared to what we will see if Europe does accept 'them'.
I don't think I've seen any posts suggesting we open the floodgates and let everyone in? A few need a read of the "The Strange Death of Europe" by Douglas Murray.
If you can't see the issues of allowing net drains into a country by the 100,000s into a system that will pay more the more children you have, all of which are likely to be net drains themselves, then your heads gone.
Do people really think it's only the good guys that are fleeing the bad in their third world countries?
Yes these are humans, but there simply isn't the infrastructure in the better off countries to support the poor population of the world. More should be done in trying to improve these countries.
As for the whole, "well they're here now" argument... 'they' really aren't. The numbers we are seeing now are insignificant compared to what we will see if Europe does accept 'them'.
Not seen any support for Merkel's stupid decision to invite them in a while back.
We can cope with taking the current level of refugees (or even a few more) - it's tiny compared to other forms of immigration.
However we need to do a better job of determine genuine refugees from economic migrants - taking more from the camps nearer the conflict zones, perhaps?
Managing legal migration properly would have a fat bigger impact - many types of visas are linked to employment/income. Is enough being done to enforce those conditions and remove those who fail to meet them?
Funkycoldribena said:
mx5nut said:
Hopefully if you or your family are ever in the awful situation of needing to claim asylum elsewhere, it'll be somewhere more compassionate than that.
I'd stop at the first safe place though.Edited by mx5nut on Wednesday 17th January 18:38
mx5nut said:
Funkycoldribena said:
mx5nut said:
Hopefully if you or your family are ever in the awful situation of needing to claim asylum elsewhere, it'll be somewhere more compassionate than that.
I'd stop at the first safe place though.Edited by mx5nut on Wednesday 17th January 18:38
mx5nut said:
Funkycoldribena said:
mx5nut said:
Hopefully if you or your family are ever in the awful situation of needing to claim asylum elsewhere, it'll be somewhere more compassionate than that.
I'd stop at the first safe place though.Edited by mx5nut on Wednesday 17th January 18:38
Would Germany prefer a car mechanic who has spent years in a modern dealership understanding how their cars work, or an afghan peasant who can change the oil in a battered old Russian wreck ?
The Afghan peasant would be far more useful in Turkmenistan where his skills education language and culture are more similar and of more use.
Finlandia said:
mx5nut said:
Suggests the average Swede on the street doesn't share the views of your friends. Will of the people etc.
The Swedish government is a minority government, so Rapes and sexual assaults are a problem, now there is a serial gang rape gang on the loose in Malmö.
Handgrenade found in broad daylight on the road in a suburb of Stockholm.
The gone week has seen four dead in gang shootings, few more knife deaths.
Police stations are bombed, police cars are bombed, homes of police officers are shot up.
2017 there was a shooting a day, no other country has nearly as many handgrenade blasts as Sweden.
Today, the so called leader of the country admitted that the army may have to be called in to fight gang crime.
These are all problems caused by too much immigration and poor integration. The first generation immigrants are generally not the ones who cause the problems, the second and third generations are.
Still at least now the cold and snow is coming so it's pretty quiet at the moment.
For f
k’s sake.
Let’s stop fannying about. Why do we need a constant flow of cheap labour?
It’s because of the colossal increase in dividends taken by shareholders from company profits in relation to the amount reinvested.
The only way of keeping shareholder profits where they are is by decreasing costs. This is done in many ways - not least amongst them reducing labour costs.
Hence mass immigration.
It’s very, very simple.
We do not have mass immigration out of the goodness of our hearts. It’s not because we are bleeding hearts, or kind, or soft. It is the EXACT opposite. The way our economy is configured demands it.
For the love of all that’s holy - think it through!
Jesus! - the level of plain stupidity on this forum sometimes staggers me. It just does my head in.
Bunch of fking idiots.
Edited because you lot are a bunch of dimwits and I’m so pissed off with the lot of you, that my spelling has gone to st.
Idiots.
k’s sake. Let’s stop fannying about. Why do we need a constant flow of cheap labour?
It’s because of the colossal increase in dividends taken by shareholders from company profits in relation to the amount reinvested.
The only way of keeping shareholder profits where they are is by decreasing costs. This is done in many ways - not least amongst them reducing labour costs.
Hence mass immigration.
It’s very, very simple.
We do not have mass immigration out of the goodness of our hearts. It’s not because we are bleeding hearts, or kind, or soft. It is the EXACT opposite. The way our economy is configured demands it.
For the love of all that’s holy - think it through!
Jesus! - the level of plain stupidity on this forum sometimes staggers me. It just does my head in.
Bunch of f
king idiots. Edited because you lot are a bunch of dimwits and I’m so pissed off with the lot of you, that my spelling has gone to s
t. Idiots.
Edited by W124 on Wednesday 17th January 19:58
W124 said:
For fk’s sake.
Let’s stop fannying about. Why do we need a constant flow of cheap labour?
It’s because of the colossal increase in dividends taken by shareholders from company profits in relation to the amount reinvested.
The only way of keeping shareholder profits where they are is by decreasing costs. This is done in many ways - not least amongst them reducing labour costs.
Hence mass immigration.
It’s very, very simple.
We do not have mass immigration out of the goodness of our hearts. It’s not because we are bleeding hearts, or kind, or soft. It is the EXACT opposite. The way our economy is configured demands it.
For the love of all that’s holy - think it through!
Jesus! - the level of plain stupidity on this forum sometimes staggers me. It just does my head in.
Bunch of fking idiots.
Edited because you lot are a bunch of dimwits and I’m so pissed off with the lot of you, that my spelling has gone to st.
Idiots.
so its capitalism to blamek’s sake. Let’s stop fannying about. Why do we need a constant flow of cheap labour?
It’s because of the colossal increase in dividends taken by shareholders from company profits in relation to the amount reinvested.
The only way of keeping shareholder profits where they are is by decreasing costs. This is done in many ways - not least amongst them reducing labour costs.
Hence mass immigration.
It’s very, very simple.
We do not have mass immigration out of the goodness of our hearts. It’s not because we are bleeding hearts, or kind, or soft. It is the EXACT opposite. The way our economy is configured demands it.
For the love of all that’s holy - think it through!
Jesus! - the level of plain stupidity on this forum sometimes staggers me. It just does my head in.
Bunch of f
king idiots. Edited because you lot are a bunch of dimwits and I’m so pissed off with the lot of you, that my spelling has gone to s
t. Idiots.
Edited by W124 on Wednesday 17th January 19:58
andymc said:
W124 said:
For fk’s sake.
Let’s stop fannying about. Why do we need a constant flow of cheap labour?
It’s because of the colossal increase in dividends taken by shareholders from company profits in relation to the amount reinvested.
The only way of keeping shareholder profits where they are is by decreasing costs. This is done in many ways - not least amongst them reducing labour costs.
Hence mass immigration.
It’s very, very simple.
We do not have mass immigration out of the goodness of our hearts. It’s not because we are bleeding hearts, or kind, or soft. It is the EXACT opposite. The way our economy is configured demands it.
For the love of all that’s holy - think it through!
Jesus! - the level of plain stupidity on this forum sometimes staggers me. It just does my head in.
Bunch of fking idiots.
Edited because you lot are a bunch of dimwits and I’m so pissed off with the lot of you, that my spelling has gone to st.
Idiots.
so its capitalism to blamek’s sake. Let’s stop fannying about. Why do we need a constant flow of cheap labour?
It’s because of the colossal increase in dividends taken by shareholders from company profits in relation to the amount reinvested.
The only way of keeping shareholder profits where they are is by decreasing costs. This is done in many ways - not least amongst them reducing labour costs.
Hence mass immigration.
It’s very, very simple.
We do not have mass immigration out of the goodness of our hearts. It’s not because we are bleeding hearts, or kind, or soft. It is the EXACT opposite. The way our economy is configured demands it.
For the love of all that’s holy - think it through!
Jesus! - the level of plain stupidity on this forum sometimes staggers me. It just does my head in.
Bunch of f
king idiots. Edited because you lot are a bunch of dimwits and I’m so pissed off with the lot of you, that my spelling has gone to s
t. Idiots.
Edited by W124 on Wednesday 17th January 19:58
W124 said:
andymc said:
W124 said:
For fk’s sake.
Let’s stop fannying about. Why do we need a constant flow of cheap labour?
It’s because of the colossal increase in dividends taken by shareholders from company profits in relation to the amount reinvested.
The only way of keeping shareholder profits where they are is by decreasing costs. This is done in many ways - not least amongst them reducing labour costs.
Hence mass immigration.
It’s very, very simple.
We do not have mass immigration out of the goodness of our hearts. It’s not because we are bleeding hearts, or kind, or soft. It is the EXACT opposite. The way our economy is configured demands it.
For the love of all that’s holy - think it through!
Jesus! - the level of plain stupidity on this forum sometimes staggers me. It just does my head in.
Bunch of fking idiots.
Edited because you lot are a bunch of dimwits and I’m so pissed off with the lot of you, that my spelling has gone to st.
Idiots.
so its capitalism to blamek’s sake. Let’s stop fannying about. Why do we need a constant flow of cheap labour?
It’s because of the colossal increase in dividends taken by shareholders from company profits in relation to the amount reinvested.
The only way of keeping shareholder profits where they are is by decreasing costs. This is done in many ways - not least amongst them reducing labour costs.
Hence mass immigration.
It’s very, very simple.
We do not have mass immigration out of the goodness of our hearts. It’s not because we are bleeding hearts, or kind, or soft. It is the EXACT opposite. The way our economy is configured demands it.
For the love of all that’s holy - think it through!
Jesus! - the level of plain stupidity on this forum sometimes staggers me. It just does my head in.
Bunch of f
king idiots. Edited because you lot are a bunch of dimwits and I’m so pissed off with the lot of you, that my spelling has gone to s
t. Idiots.
Edited by W124 on Wednesday 17th January 19:58
mx5nut said:
Funkycoldribena said:
How about the people who want them,house them? Say five years?
Let's see how many come forward.
Again, let's hope more compassionate people come forward if you or your family are ever in need.Let's see how many come forward.
Funkycoldribena said:
mx5nut said:
Funkycoldribena said:
How about the people who want them,house them? Say five years?
Let's see how many come forward.
Again, let's hope more compassionate people come forward if you or your family are ever in need.Let's see how many come forward.
I'd argue by allowing the levels of immigration to the failing business that is the UK - my family are much more likely to need emigration.
W124
There is / was some merit in what you say, however we have lost focus as to who and why we bring them in.
Non eu migrants are a financial drain on the UK, which would suggest we are / have brought in the wrong type of migrants. I not sure what the unemployed / taxi drivers do to add to a share price.
A better plan as to who we bring in could be useful, but low skilled poorly educated immigrants who don't speak English are unlikely to be of benefit to any share price.
There is / was some merit in what you say, however we have lost focus as to who and why we bring them in.
Non eu migrants are a financial drain on the UK, which would suggest we are / have brought in the wrong type of migrants. I not sure what the unemployed / taxi drivers do to add to a share price.
A better plan as to who we bring in could be useful, but low skilled poorly educated immigrants who don't speak English are unlikely to be of benefit to any share price.
There's a fundamental problem with this idea that people from "stholes" just move to a nice place and all is good. If that happens, everywhere just becomes a "sthole". I use inverted commas deliberately as it is all relative. Whether the "sthole" is an actual sthole or just not as good as somewhere else is immaterial. The truth is, unless you have a certain level of control, laws if you like, someone with less to lose will always have the advantage over someone with more to lose when it comes to just "taking it".
There's very few places inhabited on earth that dont afford the dwellers a basic standard of living. There are some, I've seen them myself, and it is crap. But surely the incentive should be to improve those areas. This doesn't always need to be using external resources.
Crime, corruption, and the basic human nature of greed / a desire to have more than the next man, will always get in the way of the Utopia of everyone sharing and living in harmony, with as much as they need and no more.
tholes" just move to a nice place and all is good. If that happens, everywhere just becomes a "sthole". I use inverted commas deliberately as it is all relative. Whether the "sthole" is an actual sthole or just not as good as somewhere else is immaterial. The truth is, unless you have a certain level of control, laws if you like, someone with less to lose will always have the advantage over someone with more to lose when it comes to just "taking it".There's very few places inhabited on earth that dont afford the dwellers a basic standard of living. There are some, I've seen them myself, and it is crap. But surely the incentive should be to improve those areas. This doesn't always need to be using external resources.
Crime, corruption, and the basic human nature of greed / a desire to have more than the next man, will always get in the way of the Utopia of everyone sharing and living in harmony, with as much as they need and no more.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff