Migration & Immigration

Author
Discussion

mickmcpaddy

1,445 posts

105 months

Friday 19th January 2018
quotequote all
No ones answered my question either so I'll ask it again.

All those hundreds of thousands of so called economic migrants have made it all the way across the many Countries Europe. They have travelled across Turkey, Greece, Bulgaria, Italy, Germany, Belgium, France to name but a few. So how come if they are so valuable why haven't they been head hunted along the way, why has each and every Country shuffled them along to the next one until they reach the end of the line in Calais? Especially so where benefits to the Economy cant come soon enough for the likes of Greece and Italy etc.

It can only be one of two reasons, either all those Countries are profoundly stupid and want to drive themselves into the ground or they are a drain on any economy they join and none of the Countries mentioned want that because they have enough problems already.

So which is it, feel free to add another reason if you think there is one.

RacerMDR

5,498 posts

210 months

Friday 19th January 2018
quotequote all
mickmcpaddy said:
..............they are a drain on any economy they join and none of the Countries mentioned want that because they have enough problems already.

.
I'll answer my view - which is your second option.

Plus the increased crime as others have stated, the total disrespect for the country they end up in, the lack of respect for women and education...

in short - we have enough problems, let's not import other nations problems until we have our own house in order. Even then, it needs to be managed in a much better way than we have seen.

Cheap labour argument doesn't stand up - as there are plenty of unemployed people already in the country.

So it comes down to, how nice do we want to be? How much do we want to fk our country up because we are bleeding hearts?

It must be hard for the men and women that have fought wars on the lie of ultimately protecting our green and pleasant land, only to return and see it destroyed by this problem.

del mar

2,838 posts

199 months

Friday 19th January 2018
quotequote all
TooMany2cvs said:
del mar said:
If they are ne benefits at all why do we want them ?
Can that not be applied to internal migration, too?

Why should people from Belfast just be able to move to Birmingham on a whim, but people from Dublin not? Or from Llandudno or Inverness?
English people can move around England, we pay their benefits in Newcastle if they move to Birmingham we still pay. Just as Afghans can move around Afghanistan.

I on the other hand would probably not be allowed to move to Afghanistan



del mar

2,838 posts

199 months

Friday 19th January 2018
quotequote all
Mrr T said:
del mar said:
1st and 2nd generation immigrants should not be allowed to claim benefits and should have to contribute towards schooling and health, if they don't / cant then why do we want them ?
So you want them to pay tax to pay for your healthcare and benefits but not be able to claim them!

You really are a greedy b££££££.
People shouldn't be able to move here and claims benefits, why on earth would we want to allow that ?

Hence by later generations they will have been contributing enough to be able to join the system.

TooMany2cvs

29,008 posts

126 months

Friday 19th January 2018
quotequote all
mickmcpaddy said:
All those hundreds of thousands of so called economic migrants...
No, they aren't "so-called economic migrants".

An economic migrant is somebody who has moved countries to be financially better off.
A refugee is somebody who has been granted asylum, having moved countries to escape death/torture.
An asylum seeker is somebody who has applied for asylum, but that application hasn't yet been decided.

Some of the people trying to get from France to the UK may well be economic migrants - while some of them will eventually be recognised as refugees.
If and when they get to the UK and enter the asylum system (which they've chosen not to do in France or other countries en-route), then they will be asylum seekers. Many of them will be kept in detention while their claim is assessed. If not, they'll be housed in a hostel or B&B. They certainly don't have any right to work, and they will only receive an absolute bare minimum from the government - £37/week.
Some of them may eventually be granted asylum, and be recognised as refugees.
If they don't enter the asylum system, then they will simply be in the UK illegally, as they (currently) are in France.
If their asylum application is rejected, and they do not leave the country, then they will also be here illegally.

One thing's for sure, they have virtually zero change of being granted any kind of visa to remain in the UK on any grounds other than asylum. They may not be deported immediately, but that doesn't mean they have any kind of legal right to stay.

anonymous-user

54 months

Friday 19th January 2018
quotequote all
JagLover said:
You, and the great and good, wish to impose a different policy, but it is doubtful if any policy can survive in the long term without the support of the people. Brexit should have showed you that.
Why do you come out with this inane claptrap as if you're some kind of mind reader? Who/what are "the great and the good" anyway?

Death penalty? Always had the "support of the people" - abolished and kept abolished despite being revisited.

RacerMDR

5,498 posts

210 months

Friday 19th January 2018
quotequote all
has anyone seen pictures of Afghanistan from the 60s I think..........looked like a lovely place back then.

T6 vanman

3,066 posts

99 months

Friday 19th January 2018
quotequote all
mx5nut said:
Mrr T said:
del mar said:
1st and 2nd generation immigrants should not be allowed to claim benefits and should have to contribute towards schooling and health, if they don't / cant then why do we want them ?
So you want them to pay tax to pay for your healthcare and benefits but not be able to claim them!

You really are a greedy b££££££.
It becomes easier when you don't see them as people.
No we want them to pay (Or largely contribute) to their own maintenance in their new country,

The statistical fact is that a UK national migrating will be a contributor to their new country, where as statistically incoming migrants aren't.

TooMany2cvs

29,008 posts

126 months

Friday 19th January 2018
quotequote all
del mar said:
TooMany2cvs said:
Why should people from Belfast just be able to move to Birmingham on a whim, but people from Dublin not? Or from Llandudno or Inverness?
English people can move around England
You do know that only one of the five cities I named is in England, right?

del mar

2,838 posts

199 months

Friday 19th January 2018
quotequote all
TooMany2cvs said:
del mar said:
TooMany2cvs said:
Why should people from Belfast just be able to move to Birmingham on a whim, but people from Dublin not? Or from Llandudno or Inverness?
English people can move around England
You do know that only one of the five cities I named is in England, right?
You are a little pedantic this afternoon...





del mar

2,838 posts

199 months

Friday 19th January 2018
quotequote all
RacerMDR said:
has anyone seen pictures of Afghanistan from the 60s I think..........looked like a lovely place back then.
The pictures always show the women as having hair and legs, and then all of a sudden they made the "free decision" to cover themselves in black sheets !



markcoznottz

7,155 posts

224 months

Friday 19th January 2018
quotequote all
W124 said:
anonymous said:
[redacted]
That's what's happened. Untrammeled immigration, political suicide for any party, goes on absolutely unaffected by politics. They have no choice. Witness the huge argument about numbers between George Osborne and Teresa May, when she was at the Home Office. Osborne just absolutely ignored her. Because, a. she is a ghastly woman and, b. we have to keep immigration where it is even to keep treading water as we are.

It's a bit much for some on here to grasp. We don't allow immigration, we massively encourage it at all costs. Not because we are kind, but because we are precisely the opposite.
Immigration boosts GDP, its a can kicking exercise. Also an employer friendly thing too. Not so much in it for the average joe though...

TooMany2cvs

29,008 posts

126 months

Friday 19th January 2018
quotequote all
del mar said:
RacerMDR said:
has anyone seen pictures of Afghanistan from the 60s I think..........looked like a lovely place back then.
The pictures always show the women as having hair and legs, and then all of a sudden they made the "free decision" to cover themselves in black sheets !
I don't think the Taliban gave them a lot of choice, y'know.

del mar

2,838 posts

199 months

Friday 19th January 2018
quotequote all
markcoznottz said:
Immigration boosts GDP, its a can kicking exercise. Also an employer friendly thing too. Not so much in it for the average joe though...
Is the boost in GDP from immigration, greater than the cost of it to society ?

W124

1,525 posts

138 months

Friday 19th January 2018
quotequote all
That entirely depends on your perspective. It relates to the why of immigration. It is beneficial to the bottom line and the next quarter.

del mar

2,838 posts

199 months

Friday 19th January 2018
quotequote all
TooMany2cvs said:
I don't think the Taliban gave them a lot of choice, y'know.
We all know Islamic dress is freedom of choice, and we are all supportive of women's rights .....

del mar

2,838 posts

199 months

Friday 19th January 2018
quotequote all
W124 said:
That entirely depends on your perspective. It relates to the why of immigration. It is beneficial to the bottom line and the next quarter.
I can see how on paper it may be a benefit to the top line, but not the bottom.

You said that we can't seperate the wheat from the chaff. Agreed but we appear to take in too much chaff.

What do you think would happen if we just stopped immigration ?


W124

1,525 posts

138 months

Friday 19th January 2018
quotequote all
Chaos would reign for a bit. Wages would rise.

You have to ask why, why have successive gouvernments (including this one) let loads of people in, when it is massively against their short term political interest?

Edited by W124 on Friday 19th January 18:26

markcoznottz

7,155 posts

224 months

Friday 19th January 2018
quotequote all
W124 said:
Chaos would reign for a bit. Wages would rise.

You have to ask why, why have successive gouvernments (including this one) let loads of people in, when it is massively against their short term political interest?

Edited by W124 on Friday 19th January 18:26
I'm not sure most of them even want to win the election nowadays, it's all about getting a housing portfolio, networking, then a nice seat on a board somewhere, beats working for a living.

W124

1,525 posts

138 months

Friday 19th January 2018
quotequote all
Quite.