Migration & Immigration

[sidicks]

mx5nut said:

Something we've always been able to do, of course. But that doesn't sell papers like getting the usual suspects scared of their own shadows

Who are these ‘usual suspects’?
Who are in the ‘me me me’ generation?

[The Dangerous Elk]

mx5nut said:

I wonder if any of them ever leave the house. Must be terrifying every time they open the front door!

Says the electrician who posts at all times of the day, every day !.....strange job times you have MX5

[anonymous-user]

RacerMDR said:

Atomic12C said:

Any comment on immigration must be a daily mail reader?

I've never bought a copy of the Daily Mail in my life and I wish to see better immigration controls.
I have plenty of left-wing friends who think the same.

+1 - never read it, bought it, or even looked at it. I'd be for a very very strong block on immigration until we sort out the business that is the UK - then decide.

People hiding behind the racism card etc is just weak arguing. We should have some sort of law, much in the same way if a person invokes 'Godwin Law' they immediately lose the argument.

I am not racist in anyway. I do however not want the UK or England particularly to have further financial, crime or integration problems such as we see in Sweden.

I do however hate religion, all of it - so i'm an Atheist for sure.......last time I looked there wasn't any laws against that.

And what about the many on here who hide behind the 'you're playing the racism card' and 'you're shutting down debate' cards? There seems no shortage of posts here demonstrating a very narrow view of society and lack of empathy for anyone different. You're having your say and you can call it what you like - it's still ugly and rather dispiriting that many of the sad old attitudes of 30 - 40 years ago are prevalent.

"I'm not racist in anyway".

That isn't a card by the way - feel free to carry on!

[Not-The-Messiah]

mx5nut said:

We are asked every 5 years. Anti immigration parties have always remained at the fringe of British politics because it's just not a big deal for most of us (despite the best efforts of the media!)

Almost every anti immigration party have almost always been one policy party's. To vote for such you are prepared to sacrifice everything else Education, Defence, the economy and so on just for this one policy. Knowing this and looking at the actual numbers who have voted for such party's like the BNP shows you how important it is to some.

Its not a big deal to immigrants themselves and people who don't feel or experience the negative impact but for lots of others it is a big deal they just never have been able to do anything about it in a sensible way without throwing a vote away to a nutcase racist party.

[ATG]

amusingduck said:

mx5nut said:

The Don of Croy said:

What you have missed/avoided/cleverly side-stepped is the question of scale - is mass immigration a real issue and will it get worse? Or should we accept that the World has changed, and we need adapt to the new reality. And why did nobody ask us first? (Because they knew the answer).

We are asked every 5 years. Anti immigration parties have always remained at the fringe of British politics because it's just not a big deal for most of us (despite the best efforts of the media!)

I would ask you to source your claims, but we all know that's unlikely to happen.

So instead i'll disprove your claim for you (your claim being 'it's just not a big deal for most of us').

Immigration is one of the ‘most important issues’ facing the British public
Immigration consistently ranks among the top five issues in recent history. As of August 2016, it was the issue picked most often by respondents (34%). The other top five issues that respondents picked that month were the EU/Europe (31%), the National Health Service (31%), the economy (30%), housing (22%), and defence/international terrorism (19%). Figure 1 tracks the percentage of respondents naming race relations or immigration as one of the most important issues facing Britain, relative to the other five most frequently named issues as of August 2016. These other issues are presented as six-month moving averages to make the chart easier to visually interpret.

Immigration is unpopular, with approximately three quarters of the British public favouring reduced levels
Existing evidence clearly shows high levels of opposition to immigration in the UK. In recent surveys, majorities of respondents think that there are too many migrants, that fewer migrants should be let in to the country, and that legal restrictions on immigration should be tighter.

Figure 2 shows that a large majority in the 2013 British Social Attitudes survey endorsed reducing immigration. Over 56% chose ‘reduced a lot’, while 77% chose either ‘reduced a lot’ or ‘reduced a little’. The same question yielded similar results on the British Social Attitudes survey in 2008, adding confidence that these are reliable estimates."

http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources...

So why doesn't the govt "do something"? Because they realise that the public's attitude is irrational and that the cost of "doing something" effective would be money pissed down the drain. But they don't have the balls to try to lead the debate and change public opinion.

Instead they pay idiotic lip service to the public's prejudice. They rebrand "Border Force", give them silly new hats and make idiotic commitments to reduce immigration while making no effort to fulfil them. This failure to fulfil comitments gives the public the misperception that the system is out of control. It isn't out of control. There's simply hasn't been any attempt at change. But the misperception reinforces the public's existing prejudices, and down we spiral.

[anonymous-user]

ATG said:

So why doesn't the govt "do something"? Because they realise that the public's attitude is irrational and that the cost of "doing something" effective would be money pissed down the drain. But they don't have the balls to try to lead the debate and change public opinion.

Instead they pay idiotic lip service to the public's prejudice. They rebrand "Border Force", give them silly new hats and make idiotic commitments to reduce immigration while making no effort to fulfil them. This failure to fulfil comitments gives the public the misperception that the system is out of control. It isn't out of control. There's simply hasn't been any attempt at change. But the misperception reinforces the public's existing prejudices, and down we spiral.

Spot on.

[anonymous-user]

TooMany2cvs said:

Boosted LS1 said:

We have had rubbish border control for eons

Uh-huh. Lemme guess - Europe's fault?

Boosted LS1 said:

IIrc labour had an open door policy.

You don't.

Boosted LS1 said:

No doubt to get their share of the vote up.

Roughly what proportion of recent migrants to the UK do you think get to vote?

Clue: https://www.gov.uk/elections-in-the-uk

Edited by TooMany2cvs on Thursday 18th January 14:14

A reasonably balanced report from the Migrants Rights Network on migrants and voting patterns - their estimate for the 2015 election was just under 4m migrants ( foreign-born UK residents according to categorisation used within the 2001/2011 Censuses) would be eligible to vote.

https://www.barrowcadbury.org.uk/wp-content/upload...

The overall voting patterns seem to show a preference for the labour party, which is also mirrored in the voting patterns of BAME voters, most
of whom are, apparently, first or second generation migrants .

It is not outside the realms of possibility that the previous Labour government was aware of this type of voter pattern when pushing for mass immigration, or it may have been for them a happy byproduct.

[TooMany2cvs]

wsurfa said:

...their estimate for the 2015 election was just under 4m migrants ( foreign-born UK residents according to categorisation used within the 2001/2011 Censuses) would be eligible to vote.

Ah, yes. "Foreign-born UK residents". That includes people like my ex-business partner, born in Germany when his father was posted there in the British Army... Always been a British national, as are both of his parents. It also includes Boris Johnson.

In 2015, the estimate was 13.5% (8.7m) of the population were foreign-born, and 8.9% (more than 5m) foreign citizens.
http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources...

So those figures give around...well... not very many foreign citizens who are eligible to vote. <400K or so...

[anonymous-user]

TooMany2cvs said:

wsurfa said:

...their estimate for the 2015 election was just under 4m migrants ( foreign-born UK residents according to categorisation used within the 2001/2011 Censuses) would be eligible to vote.

Ah, yes. "Foreign-born UK residents". That includes people like my ex-business partner, born in Germany when his father was posted there in the British Army... Always been a British national, as are both of his parents. It also includes Boris Johnson.

In 2015, the estimate was 13.5% (8.7m) of the population were foreign-born, and 8.9% (more than 5m) foreign citizens.
http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources...

So those figures give around...well... not very many foreign citizens who are eligible to vote. <400K or so...

You could always read the relatively unbiased paper, which also makes the point that the "Boris'" make up a relatively small proportion.

They, in conjunction with the trust that helped publish the report, were making the point about the large impact the migrant population could have on the 2015 election. However horse & water and all that.

[TooMany2cvs]

wsurfa said:

TooMany2cvs said:

wsurfa said:

...their estimate for the 2015 election was just under 4m migrants ( foreign-born UK residents according to categorisation used within the 2001/2011 Censuses) would be eligible to vote.

Ah, yes. "Foreign-born UK residents". That includes people like my ex-business partner, born in Germany when his father was posted there in the British Army... Always been a British national, as are both of his parents. It also includes Boris Johnson.

In 2015, the estimate was 13.5% (8.7m) of the population were foreign-born, and 8.9% (more than 5m) foreign citizens.
http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources...

So those figures give around...well... not very many foreign citizens who are eligible to vote. <400K or so...

You could always read the relatively unbiased paper, which also makes the point that the "Boris'" make up a relatively small proportion.

Mmm. Foreign-born UK nationals make up about 90% of the foreign-born-but-eligible-to-vote, it'd seem.

Oh, wait... You're regarding people who've taken UK nationality as somehow less British than people born with it, aren't you?

[anonymous-user]

TooMany2cvs said:

wsurfa said:

TooMany2cvs said:

wsurfa said:

...their estimate for the 2015 election was just under 4m migrants ( foreign-born UK residents according to categorisation used within the 2001/2011 Censuses) would be eligible to vote.

Ah, yes. "Foreign-born UK residents". That includes people like my ex-business partner, born in Germany when his father was posted there in the British Army... Always been a British national, as are both of his parents. It also includes Boris Johnson.

In 2015, the estimate was 13.5% (8.7m) of the population were foreign-born, and 8.9% (more than 5m) foreign citizens.
http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources...

So those figures give around...well... not very many foreign citizens who are eligible to vote. <400K or so...

You could always read the relatively unbiased paper, which also makes the point that the "Boris'" make up a relatively small proportion.

Mmm. Foreign-born UK nationals make up about 90% of the foreign-born-but-eligible-to-vote, it'd seem.

Oh, wait... You're regarding people who've taken UK nationality as somehow less British than people born with it, aren't you?

Would you like some more windmills for tilting at?

It's a perfectly well written paper discussing the potential impact of migrant voters on the 2015 election whether or not you agree with the political position of the authors and/or sponsors.

Edit:Typo

[TooMany2cvs]

wsurfa said:

It's a perfectly well written paper discussing the potential impact of migrant voters on the 2015 election whether or not you agree with the political position of the authors and/or sponsors.

And you miss my point completely.

Let me be clearer: Very, very few foreign nationals can vote here.
Almost all of the foreign-born voters are British people.

[The Dangerous Elk]

TooMany2cvs said:

wsurfa said:

It's a perfectly well written paper discussing the potential impact of migrant voters on the 2015 election whether or not you agree with the political position of the authors and/or sponsors.

And you miss my point completely.

Let me be clearer: Very, very few foreign nationals can vote here.
Almost all of the foreign-born voters are British people.

And you miss the point as well, in a concentrated area it makes a large impact socially both at a GE and more so (atm) with Local elections.

[TooMany2cvs]

The Dangerous Elk said:

TooMany2cvs said:

wsurfa said:

It's a perfectly well written paper discussing the potential impact of migrant voters on the 2015 election whether or not you agree with the political position of the authors and/or sponsors.

And you miss my point completely.

Let me be clearer: Very, very few foreign nationals can vote here.
Almost all of the foreign-born voters are British people.

And you miss the point as well, in a concentrated area it makes a large impact socially both at a GE and more so (atm) with Local elections.

Does being surrounded by people who can't vote make you vote differently, then?

[mx5nut]

The Dangerous Elk said:

mx5nut said:

I wonder if any of them ever leave the house. Must be terrifying every time they open the front door!

Says the electrician who posts at all times of the day, every day !.....strange job times you have MX5

I'd sneer at your job too, but you seem a little shy about divulging it.

Sure does give you plenty of PH time though!

[The Dangerous Elk]

TooMany2cvs said:

Does being surrounded by people who can't vote make you vote differently, then?

Why would it, get the cage ready Parrot in the post.

[The Dangerous Elk]

mx5nut said:

The Dangerous Elk said:

mx5nut said:

I wonder if any of them ever leave the house. Must be terrifying every time they open the front door!

Says the electrician who posts at all times of the day, every day !.....strange job times you have MX5

I'd sneer at your job too, but you seem a little shy about divulging it.

Sure does give you plenty of PH time though!

Who sneered top troll, I didn't.
Just a facts are they not, an electrician (good respectable job) and posting all day every day, just facts.

[markcoznottz]

TooMany2cvs said:

wsurfa said:

TooMany2cvs said:

wsurfa said:

...their estimate for the 2015 election was just under 4m migrants ( foreign-born UK residents according to categorisation used within the 2001/2011 Censuses) would be eligible to vote.

Ah, yes. "Foreign-born UK residents". That includes people like my ex-business partner, born in Germany when his father was posted there in the British Army... Always been a British national, as are both of his parents. It also includes Boris Johnson.

In 2015, the estimate was 13.5% (8.7m) of the population were foreign-born, and 8.9% (more than 5m) foreign citizens.
http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources...

So those figures give around...well... not very many foreign citizens who are eligible to vote. <400K or so...

You could always read the relatively unbiased paper, which also makes the point that the "Boris'" make up a relatively small proportion.

Mmm. Foreign-born UK nationals make up about 90% of the foreign-born-but-eligible-to-vote, it'd seem.

Oh, wait... You're regarding people who've taken UK nationality as somehow less British than people born with it, aren't you?

Be careful though, there are predominantly Muslim primary schools in Birmingham where if kids are asked if they feel British, not a single one would raise their hand.

[mickmcpaddy]

If immigrants are such an asset to other Countries and they contribute more as a whole than they take out, then why are France doing their best to offload all the Calais migrants onto us? Surely their economy needs all the help it can get.

Same for other Countries, quite a few struggling ones are putting up big fences.

[The Dangerous Elk]

mickmcpaddy said:

If immigrants are such an asset to other Countries and they contribute more as a whole than they take out, then why are France doing their best to offload all the Calais migrants onto us? Surely their economy needs all the help it can get.

Same for other Countries, quite a few struggling ones are putting up big fences.

Maybe they think France is a stHole ?