• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Small cap on immigration; Leftards go mad.

Republic_Of_Public

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2009
Messages
2,922
Reaction score
343
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The BBC Radio says there's now a small cap on immigration of migrant workers from outside the EU, limiting them by a few thousand. Predictably there's the usual barrage of abuse about the job market being denied the ready labour pool it needs as fuel, reacting as if the sky'll fall in by cutting things by just a touch. Opposition views say that about any immigration.

Rubbish: http://www.debatepolitics.com/europe/75791-incentives-relocate-jobless-tebbit-revisited.html



Honesty, if the demographic-changing effect of open-door immigration hasn't sorted out the unemployment problems of the 'too white and too lazy' British by now, then it never will.

Further back-handed confirmation that large-scale immigration was only to deliver coolie labour to cheapskate firms, plus 'rub the Right's nose in Diversity' for its own sake!
 
Last edited:

Infinite Chaos

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
18,504
Reaction score
8,591
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
-- Honesty, if the demographic-changing effect of open-door immigration hasn't sorted out the unemployment problems of the 'too white and too lazy' British by now, then it never will.

Further back-handed confirmation that large-scale immigration was only to deliver coolie labour to cheapskate firms, plus 'rub the Right's nose in Diversity' for its own sake!
How are we going to pay for our pensions when there are fewer migrants coming and paying taxes? The argument is not 'too white and too lazy' - but too few workers and too many elderly to be cared for. That's the time-bomb waiting to go off I'm afraid.

I don't have the link at hand but this has come up in documentaries about the growing burden on the working British taxpayer.
 

Republic_Of_Public

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2009
Messages
2,922
Reaction score
343
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
What about all those millions of migrants who have settled here since the real immigration booms since the 60s and 70s? More than enough you'd think.

No, they've actually become part of the problem themselves by virtue of citizenship! So the 'answer' is to swamp the place with even more migrants! Surely to God the randy little tykes have given us a population cornucopia by now? And if not, why continue a failing system?

You bring in more, they settle, they earn, they retire. You bring in even more young ones because everyone here is apparently panda-like and the spiral continues. Immigrants tend to have a higher reproductive rate and the demographic changes have meant places like Slough are now ethnic majority. But they're too busy to work for themselves to care about us, as well as they're crowding an ever-shrinking British job market all the more.


For me the immigration scandal is chiefly about the changes rather than the individuals. And the changes are a fail because they don't corroborate what they're claimed to achieve.

FOR GOD'S SAKE CURB IMMIGRATION PROPERLY - AND IF IT REALLY IS JUST A QUESTION OF 'SKILLS', AS WE WERE TOLD TODAY, THEN LET IN ONLY THE TOP DOCTORS OR ACADEMICS AND SEND THE REST BACK!






What d'ya mean 'soaraway immigration' has failed to flush the nation with pension-fodder?! Migration Watch UK - Migration Trends - How did immigration get out of control? (9.22)

Seven million immigrants can't be good for Britain - Telegraph - That's just recently!


________________

....AND THE LEFT IN PARTICULAR ARE ACTUALLY RATHER RACIST TO SAY THAT IMMIGRANTS ARE ONLY HERE TO PAY OUR BILLS - HYPOCRITICAL TOO WHEN THE LIBERAL TAMPONS THEN HAVE THE NERVE TO THREATEN THE RACE BOARD AGAINST BABIES AT NURSERY FOR NOT LIKING CURRY!!!

http://www.sharetrader.co.nz/showthread.php?6158-Those-racist-babies!&p=211921&viewfull=1
 
Last edited:

Scarecrow Akhbar

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Messages
11,430
Reaction score
2,282
Location
Los Angeles
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Predictably there's the usual barrage of abuse about the job market being denied the ready labour pool it needs as fuel,
Right. I"m sure England has 100% employment.

Looks like the UK is overrun with the same kind of fools that infest the US.
 

Infinite Chaos

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
18,504
Reaction score
8,591
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
What about all those millions of migrants who have settled here since the real immigration booms since the 60s and 70s? More than enough you'd think.
They've added to the UK economy. What's the problem with that? Our music, arts and financial markets have all benefited from exposure and influx from other cultures.

-- Surely to God the randy little tykes --
Careful, your true colours are showing through..

. But they're too busy to work for themselves to care about us, as well as they're crowding an ever-shrinking British job market all the more.--
Again, your colours show through the sheen you've tried to portray in the past - however if you have proof that those who have immigrated haven't paid taxes, national insurance or invested by buying property and contributing to the UK - please post it.

the immigration scandal is chiefly about --
EU rules. We cannot do anything about EU citizens who wish to come here, just as they cannot do anything about our UK workers who go into Europe to work and live.
 

Republic_Of_Public

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2009
Messages
2,922
Reaction score
343
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
They've added to the UK economy. What's the problem with that?

My point exactly. We were told all these immigrants were going to be the golden goose to rescue a Britain economically knackered because of war and then inept or dogmatic politicians. Instead they settled in, worked and retired without actually bailing anyone out in that heroic and selfless way we're told to expect. Just like the 'actual' British! So we're back to square one but with a larger older population to take care of.




Careful, your true colours are showing through..

'Exposed' eh? You've got me quaking.


It's quite true that many immigrants have a higher birth rate per family. The Pakistanis pleasure their aromatic way to produce 4 children per couple per generation. We British, apparently, can only fumble our way to produce just one-and-a-bit each beneath our sheets! No 'sheen' being rubbed off there.

They're not toiling to make sure your auntie Rose doesn't die of cold and hunger in the winter, they work for the reasons everyone else works - to put food on the table and keep a roof over their heads. And perhaps enjoy a bit of luxury too.

They wouldn't think about their duty here being to boost the funds for British OAPS would they? I imagine they'd feel a bit insulted to be told that actually. That flannel's only for our consumption because the reality is that successive governments have INVITED people from overseas to come here and improve their lives (preferably in a job).

(Ought to be 'exposed' more often - it gets the truth out when things are laid straight.)


EU rules.
Hamstring. And with government plans to have people move round the country to find work, even prioriting them on local housing queues (doubtless to the annoyance of those waiting there), it's more proof that where there are limited jobs there'll be a free-for-all if circumstances allow. And that means denuding the jobs for locals, no matter how well-meaning the ideas.
 
Last edited:

Infinite Chaos

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
18,504
Reaction score
8,591
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
My point exactly. We were told all these immigrants were going to be the golden goose to rescue a Britain economically knackered because of war and then inept or dogmatic politicians.
If you're talking about immigration in the 50's that was a British decade of golden economic growth. There weren't enough workers on the British mainland so citizens from the colonies and empire were invited in.

Do you have a link for your version ( these immigrants were going to be the golden goose to rescue a Britain economically knackered)

-- Instead they settled in, worked and retired without actually bailing anyone out in that heroic and selfless way we're told to expect. Just like the 'actual' British! So we're back to square one but with a larger older population to take care of.
As I said before - their employment produced taxes and national insurance contributions to the pot - just as expected. Or do you have a link to demonstrate that their employment or labour did not produce taxes and national insurance?

-- 'Exposed' eh? You've got me quaking.
You do know about generalisations based on race?

. The Pakistanis pleasure their aromatic way to produce 4 children per couple per generation. -- No 'sheen' being rubbed off there.
On the contrary - Alexa has had you down as a National Front / BNP supporter for quite a while. You may not be but your phrasing says much about you. You can't just say "Pakistanis produce 4 children per couple" - it has to be "coloured" by generalisations based on race..

They're not toiling to make sure your auntie Rose doesn't die of cold and hunger in the winter, they work for the reasons everyone else works - to put food on the table and keep a roof over their heads. And perhaps enjoy a bit of luxury too.
Once again - do they NOT produce taxes and national insurance payments? Have they not employed British workers when they set up businesses? Have they not contributed to our industries?

They wouldn't think about their duty here being to boost the funds for British OAPS would they? I imagine they'd feel a bit insulted to be told that actually. That flannel's only for our consumption because the reality is that successive governments have INVITED people from overseas to come here and improve their lives (preferably in a job).
Empty rhetoric

Ought to be 'exposed' more often
Once is enough, I gave you the benefit of the doubt before but you've "come clean" at last. Not that I have a problem with your views, I'd just rather honesty than pretense about your views.

(i.e. if someone is a communist - then I'd rather they didn't pretend to be "left wing" and if someone is a nazi - I'd rather they didn't pretend to be merely "right wing")

And with government plans to have people move round the country to find work -- And that means denuding the jobs for locals, no matter how well-meaning the ideas.
Why are the locals not getting those jobs then? If someone from Newcastle moves under the new scheme to (say) Birmingham because nobody in Birmingham has applied for or is suitable a particular job - either through lack of effort / training / suitability - what's the problem?

If the employer then gave that job to a Pole or an ex-EU migrant you'd the first one on here screaming blue murder.
 

Republic_Of_Public

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2009
Messages
2,922
Reaction score
343
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Do you have a link for your version ( these immigrants were going to be the golden goose to rescue a Britain economically knackered)
Playing cute now are we? We're always being told how immigration's vital for the economy and will save our pensioners, etc. You yourself say things like it, for example above.

Eg: EU migrants 'good for UK economy' - Home News, UK - The Independent

Turning a profit, and all thanks to immigration: http://www.moneyweek.com/news-and-c...ration-bad-news-for-the-uk-labour-market.aspx

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/22/cutting-immigration-economic-issues

http://www2.labour.org.uk/the-conservatives-half-baked-plans-for-immigration-would-damage-


Examples and rebuttals: Economics of Immigration




On the contrary - Alexa has had you down as a National Front / BNP supporter for quite a while. You may not be but your phrasing says much about you.
I couldn't care less what she says, it's not important outside debates between us. She even thinks I'm in the EDL! For some on here, screaming 'BNP, BNP' is all they've got. And it just illuminates your own sweaty imagination to reckon that I'm somehow dropping some kind of 'racial' mask to reckon some people are randier than others. (And what's wrong with being 'aromatic' anyway?! I've seen bedrooms done in the Eastern style and they look lovely. No wonder such environments are condusive!)

Don't pick on the lighthearted phrasing if you can't rebut the argument! That's just cheap!



Or do you have a link to demonstrate that their employment or labour did not produce taxes and national insurance?
Never claimed they didn't. Sidetrack invalid.



Empty rhetoric.
You only say that because you can't rebut it. They did indeed come here on the promise to improve their lot rather than be milked for taxes to boost pensions for those already here. Disprove it or stop cheaply dismissing.



Why are the locals not getting those jobs then?
Some jobs are ringfenced, or as you say unsuitable. Too many youths, through no fault of their own, have been let down by the education system. If they're not rendered artificially thick and locked out, trade jobs can actually also end up going to better-skilled foreigners whose home governments at least cared more for them. (And other jobs still, like the Asda meat job in the news, circumvent discrimination laws to ask for specific language speakers, or just pay wages only a coolie would work for anyway.)

It is good that more people here could have a better go at the jobs if they moved about. However, it's sad to even think that people can copy Auf Weidersehen Pet without actually leaving the country.
 
Last edited:

Infinite Chaos

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
18,504
Reaction score
8,591
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Playing cute now are we?
I was born cute.

-- Examples and rebuttals: Economics of Immigration
Now I see where your posting style and some of your argument comes from. The fact the guy who runs that site cannot make an argument without insulting anyone who has a different view says a lot. Apart from which - the writings his argument is based on (the academic papers of Borjas) doesn't quite back him up is neither here nor there. The other thing his argument is based around is the House of Lords inquiry into "recent levels of mass immigration" (read and understand what that means) has been of little benefit is not an answer to what I asked you (whether "mass" immigration (there wasn't) of peoples were to rebuild Britain following "economic knackering" after the war. (It wasn't - the UK economy was booming and there simply weren't enough workers around)

There, I answered it for you.

-- I couldn't care less what she says, it's not important outside debates between us. She even thinks I'm in the EDL!
You may not be a card carrying member of either but the sheen is wearing thin. You may have a natural home in either of those parties.

-- Don't pick on the lighthearted phrasing if you can't rebut the argument! That's just cheap!
No, you didn't understand my question as your argument was built around a 2007 inquiry and migrationwatch figures and you were referring to immediate post war immigration.

I'm not saying immigration should be regulated, I will also go further and say that the system being proposed should have always been the system run - that people could only migrate if they could offer economic benefit to this country.

And I'll also return to the fact that many have set up major companies or worked in very high position in the public and private sector and all who legally were here and were employed added to the tax / national insurance pool.

-- Never claimed they didn't. Sidetrack invalid.
Q: So what do the taxes and national insurance paid by any current labour force pay for?
A: Pensions, health service etc.

-- You only say that because you can't rebut it. They did indeed come here on the promise to improve their lot rather than be milked for taxes to boost pensions for those already here. Disprove it or stop cheaply dismissing.
Those who arrived in the 50's were both required and told they could improve their lives. The pensions argument came later on from certain quarters. What happened in the 1995+ era was simply the EU rules in place when Poland etc joined the EU.

I corrected you - that's why I said "empty rhetoric" - what I should have said was "empty wrong rhetoric." Thank you for the opportunity to correct myself. :lol:

-- Some jobs are ringfenced, or as you say unsuitable. Too many youths, through no fault of their own, have been let down by the education system. If they're not rendered artificially thick and locked out, trade jobs can actually also end up going to better-skilled foreigners whose home governments at least cared more for them. (And other jobs still, like the Asda meat job in the news, circumvent discrimination laws to ask for specific language speakers, or just pay wages only a coolie would work for anyway.)

It is good that more people here could have a better go at the jobs if they moved about. However, it's sad to even think that people can copy Auf Weidersehen Pet without actually leaving the country.
And... what is wrong with people being encouraged to move around the country for work?

Better off people NOT in council house situations have been doing this for years - moving across the country to find work. Why shouldn't the poorer?

By the way - can you provide proof that jobs in the UK are "ringfenced?" Ringfenced against UK workers? (please provide proof)
 

Camlon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 3, 2009
Messages
2,854
Reaction score
567
Location
Oslo, Norway
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Infinite Chaos: Fact is, there are tons of radical muslims in the UK, and as a group they aren't very productive either. If they are the ones who are going to support the future pensioners, then I will be worried. So it makes no sense that UK should accept them to pay for future pensioners. That's why Conservatives have put in place the cap.

Also another thing to consider. UK is overpopulated. By accepting tons of immigrants, then UK will be overpopulated. Hence UK should try to accept less immigrants so that the population won't increase too much.

But this isn't about the UK economy. That's just an escuse. It's about "helping" the poor people in poor countries. That's why Europe is destroying themselves by taking up tons of unproductive immigrants. However, it's much more efficient to help them where they live. It cost a lot less and won't cause any problems for the host countries. Also immigration is irreversible, hence the argument for a massive demographic change should be solid and be supported by the public.
 
Last edited:

Republic_Of_Public

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2009
Messages
2,922
Reaction score
343
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Immigrants (as a mass) have always been heralded as as some kind of cavalry - extra workers during the boom years and rescue workers otherwise. Productive ones have indeed contributed and mucked in with the rest of us (no NF sympathiser would happily say that). But it underlines my point that this latest guff designed to speak for all times, that immigrants make up the financial deficit in whatever area, is false. They've been here all this time and still the work always seems yet to be done!

As correctly said above, the population's just too big for our island. There are more people to take care of, and with 8 million economically inactive it's madness to keep the doors open when there are so many people here to be trained and put to work. To be quite frank and honest, I don't really care for any reason given for continued mass immigration because the Powers That Be only ever listen to themselves and seem to come out with a brand new excuse every week. For decades promises have been made to cut immigration, only to be jettisoned after an election and immigration rates increased.

Britain's no longer the workshop of the world. We had some capacity for taking on an additional workforce from outside during the limited recovery of the 1950s, but that was a world away. (And even then it wasted the oppertunity to use all those women who had proved themselves as able and reliable heavy workers during the war!) Certainly during my lifetime I've heard nothing but promises that immigration would be our financial rescue, as if all we can do is bum off the world. (And in a way we are as we shamelessly rape the Third World of its best doctors for example.)

All in all, immigration should always have been based on the idea of a small auxillary workforce (or a few refugees if a nearby country is dangerous) coming to fill a surplus of jobs. I agree that in certain circumstances immigrant workers have helped - but too many cooks spoil the broth as demographics are changed, political correctness demands foreign cultures compete with our own and wages are driven down to take advantage of the mass coolie labour.

____________________________

One outweighs the other: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/e...or-immigration-against-scousers-moving-south/

(And I don't mind one bloke insulting the other side, in the blog linked-to previously. After all, I've had leftists belittle me for years for not thinking the 'right' thing. And it does contain a lot of truth, rebutting the sunshine spin we're always fed on immigration, even in the teeth of horrific riots.)

____________________________

It's well known that 'race quotas' exist whereby certain proportions of ethnic minorities have to be taken on by employers. That's ring-fencing enough for me, as well as the well-known Asda meat packing thing in the news. And on top of all that, most new jobs created in Britain are taken by those of foreign extraction.

No fuss from the Leftards when 'institutional racism' is the other way around: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...rce-admits-discriminating-white-recruits.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...glish-speakers-instructions-given-Polish.html

http://www.google.co.uk/search?clie...eign+workers&sourceid=opera&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
 
Last edited:

Infinite Chaos

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
18,504
Reaction score
8,591
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Immigrants (as a mass) have always been heralded as as some kind of cavalry - extra workers during the boom years and rescue workers otherwise.
Only in certain quarters..

-- this latest guff designed to speak for all times, that immigrants make up the financial deficit in whatever area, is false.
Where IS this latest guff “designed to speak for all times” please?

-- it's madness to keep the doors open when there are so many people here to be trained and put to work.
OK, put the domestic workforce to work – but weren’t you bemoaning that this would bring about an internal “Auf Wiedersehn Pet” situation?

the limited recovery of the 1950s,
I can imagine how much it hurt to realise the economy of the 1950s was a major boom. I can’t blame you trying to paint it as a limited recovery… 10 years of major economic growth bettered only by those major countries demolished by war (Germany / France / Italy) because their infrastructure had to grow from zero.

-- (And I don't mind one bloke insulting the other side, in the blog linked-to previously. After all, I've had leftists belittle me for years for not thinking the 'right' thing
Except that much of what he says is completely rubbish. Did you even read his rebuttal of the “we’re all immigrants?” section?

He’s obviously never read any of Professor Steve Jones’s work on DNA or even thought his argument is rubbished by any cursory investigation of the most rudimentary DNA research of 90% of the UK population.

-- It's well known that 'race quotas' exist whereby certain proportions of ethnic minorities have to be taken on by employers
I don’t want well known – I want proof so I can take whoever is doing it to court.

-- as well as the well-known Asda meat packing thing in the news.
And how long did that company keep its policy? The news report you posted clarified that Asda had already taken action – before you huffed and puffed about it on this forum.

Fact is, there are tons of radical muslims in the UK, and as a group they aren't very productive either.
If it's a "fact" you should easily be able to provide proof of the numbers?

If they are the ones who are going to support the future pensioners, then I will be worried. So it makes no sense that UK should accept them to pay for future pensioners.
The current workforce in Britain pays National Insurance and taxes which contribute towards current pension payments. When RoP or I am a pensioner, someone else in the future will be paying for our pensions then - not RoP or myself.

That's why Conservatives have put in place the cap.
The Cons have put a cap in place because it's politically expedient. What they would really like to do is put a cap on EU immigration so they make a symbolic gesture. None of the political parties are allowed to stop EU migrants UNLESS they take us out of the EU first.

By accepting tons of immigrants, then UK will be overpopulated. Hence UK should try to accept less immigrants so that the population won't increase too much.
The numbers of non EU migrants was already limited by the previous Govt when they (finally) brought in the points system. What has happened since is merely symbolic gestures to placate a worried electorate.

--That's why Europe is destroying themselves by taking up tons of unproductive immigrants --
Strange, do you have figures / links to show that immigration is the cause of the credit crunch? or of Italy / France / England being booted out of the World Cup? Or that the economy of any EU country is suffering directly because of immigrants?

Anything?
 

Andalublue

Hello again!
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
27,097
Reaction score
12,352
Location
Granada, España
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Anything?
Nope, not a thing. That isn't how RoP debates. We will get a set of links to Daily Mail opinion columns and immigrant-hate "reports". I never came across Camlon before, so can't predict his response.

The fact is, I think that this "cap" on immigration will turn out to be no bad thing. It will prove completely ineffective because how does one measure any effect? The only way of doing so will be to show that whilst non-EU migration drops to cap levels, unemployment of British nationals and already settled and legal migrants will continue to rise. The far right's response will be to lay their cards on the table and ask for ever-more-severe limits to the cap such that people migrating to Britain with pre-arranged jobs will be denied residence, hence reducing the tax/NI revenue that goes to pay for RoP and the 3 million others drawing benefits.
 

Republic_Of_Public

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2009
Messages
2,922
Reaction score
343
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Now that Infy and Andy have patted each other on the back in their agreement of what a wicked Daily Mail-reading economic parasite I am, let's have a bit of perspective.


First, I'm not trying to downplay the economic recovery of the '50s. It was lovely, especially in conjunction with the newly formed welfare state, running more in the way of its original intention. (No free contraceptives for knoll-bound homosexuals or expensive 'modern art' budgets back then!) Supermac's words that the country 'never had it so good' was rather apt! However, the question still isn't answered that if we needed migrants to rescue our country economically, why not have encouraged those already-experienced women war workers to take up the slack rather than bring more people in?

(And the reasons we're given are supposed to stand for the ages, leastways until the snake oil salesmen come up with latest load of old cobblers. Hence Gordon Brown's par-for-the-course leftist outburst caught on radio mike during the election campaign.

Express.co.uk - Home of the Daily and Sunday Express | UK News :: Labour say we are all racists

Why does Labour give in to racists?|29May10|Socialist Worker

Unite Against Fascism backs Labour racists / FRFI 212 Dec 2009 / Jan 2010

Slander instead of debate... how very apt!)




Except that much of what he says is completely rubbish. Did you even read his rebuttal of the “we’re all immigrants?” section?

He’s obviously never read any of Professor Steve Jones’s work on DNA or even thought his argument is rubbished by any cursory investigation of the most rudimentary DNA research of 90% of the UK population.
A very impassioned and heartfelt whinge. 'Cept, of course, he didn't mention race or DNA once! Well well well, who's being the little pygmy trying to put a 'racial' angle on it now?!




WAYCISM, WAYCISM, WAYCISM! YOU CAN CUT 95% OF IT BY IGNORING LEFT-WING IMAGINATIVE PARANOIA:

Pot and Kettle time, but hypocrisy never stopped Labour: Labour urged to sack councillor for 'racist' Cameron caricature| News | This is London

If 'it's not racist to talk about immigration', why use the slander: Opponents of immigration could be racist, warned advisers a decade ago - Telegraph







A RACISM-FREE ZONE! (No whites permitted here.)



I don’t want well known – I want proof so I can take whoever is doing it to court.
You already had, for one, an example of the police turning down white recruits for race reasons. Labour were the ones who took such madness to overdrive, too bonkers for even the lunatics of the New Euro' Order who ruled their Women Only Shortlists were illegal.


However, they didn't say anything about ethnically cleansing Parliament now.....

Parliament too white to be 'sensible' claims Harman | News

Commons 'too white, straight and male', says Trevor Phillips | Politics | The Guardian - Don't forget the homos! It's a qualification in itself to be gay nowadays!


More race cobblers: Labour 'candidate told she was too white and Jewish' to be selected for Muslim dominated seat | Mail Online
Our foreign reporters are too white, complains BBC diversity czar | Mail Online
We need positive discrimination to meet race targets, say police chiefs - Telegraph

Left Wing filth: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/mar/16/race.gender
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-barred-Government-job--wrong-kind-white.html

Absolutely dspicable: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3341874.ece
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...r-job-recruitment-to-be-enshrined-in-law.html

Is it the blacks' fault that whites are that verminous that they don't even deserve a fair crack of the whip in their own homeland: http://www.poblish.org/article.jsp?id=421322


And to think Andalablue got the needle when I made a joke of that Labour bloke being bitten by a dog! Given the mental rabies which is Leftist dogma, I'm not so sure if the Labourite shouldn't also have been put down for being a loose 'dangerous animal'!




We will get a set of links to Daily Mail opinion columns and immigrant-hate "reports".
And your links were....? Oh, you don't have supplementary backup evidence do you? Probably on the basis that if you put up no evidence, there's none for other people to dismiss out of hand as you do mine!



Daily Mail, huh: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2002/jul/03/raceintheuk.comment
(The 'classic' Joseph Harker Guardian article called OF COURSE ALL WHITE PEOPLE ARE RACIST!)
 
Last edited:

Infinite Chaos

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
18,504
Reaction score
8,591
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
-- what a wicked Daily Mail-reading economic parasite I am
Is that how you see your self?

--First, I'm not trying to downplay the economic recovery of the '50s.
-- However, the question still isn't answered that if we needed migrants to rescue our country economically, why not have encouraged those already-experienced women war workers to take up the slack rather than bring more people in?
Already answered - you didn't read it.

-- A very impassioned and heartfelt whinge. 'Cept, of course, he didn't mention race or DNA once! Well well well, who's being the little pygmy trying to put a 'racial' angle on it now?!
The "pygmies" are the ones who put up such arguments that we are not mostly immigrants to this country or even descended from immigrants. Of course he didn't mention it - I introduced it so you could at least get a grasp on why his argument was such a pile of rubbish. Unfortunately, you didn't understand or look up anything on why most citizens of the UK are of immigrant descent - I could explain further but I can see it's a waste of broadband bandwith.

-- WAYCISM, WAYCISM, WAYCISM! --


Only you that ever shouts that.

As for your further links, your first points in this thread have been countered and you haven't anything in response so I'll come back to whatever countless and pointless links you have if your argument proves to have any merit.
 

Infinite Chaos

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
18,504
Reaction score
8,591
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
-- We had some capacity for taking on an additional workforce from outside during the limited recovery of the 1950s --
-- First, I'm not trying to downplay the economic recovery of the '50s. --snip-- However, the question still isn't answered that if we needed migrants to rescue our country economically, why not have encouraged those already-experienced women war workers to take up the slack rather than bring more people in?--
Just in case you do understand in the concept of "self-contradiction" - you contradict yourself twice here regarding the economic recovery of the 50's AND you also partially answer your own question regarding why immigrants were invited in during the 50's. I agree with you too regarding women in employment - however you and I both know that employment and income equality was something that would take another 30-40 years to start being addressed.

Would never have put you down as someone interested in women's employment rights RoP, you never fail to amaze and amuse me.
 

Republic_Of_Public

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2009
Messages
2,922
Reaction score
343
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
If that's your attitude then I can't be bothered either. Personal invalidation and trying to drag me into racial arguments all the time just don't make this thread fun. (It was about numbers you fool!)


Not once was the question answered of why we needed open-door immigration. You just went into 'holohoax' mode and just contradicted everything without anything more than your say-so.

And seeing as my supplementary backup evidence is so pointless and baseless in comparison to your own superior, well-crafted... oh, you didn't put any up did you?
 
Last edited:

Andalublue

Hello again!
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
27,097
Reaction score
12,352
Location
Granada, España
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
If that's your attitude then I can't be bothered either. Personal invalidation and trying to drag me into racial arguments all the time just don't make this thread fun.
Then please don't feel the need to contribute further posts on the subject. No one would want to ruin your "fun".:roll:
 

Republic_Of_Public

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2009
Messages
2,922
Reaction score
343
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Derailer (well, his mate) blaming the train for the accident... nice! Illuminating too.

...And for what should the DP boards be, if not recreation? We're not being paid are we?!


It's here to flash your ego about, isn't it! Well, some of us by the looks!
 
Last edited:

Andalublue

Hello again!
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
27,097
Reaction score
12,352
Location
Granada, España
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
It's here to flash your ego about, isn't it! Well, some of us by the looks!
Well, that's obviously how you see it. Only problem is that in your case it appears to be your Id that's showing more than your Ego.
 

Camlon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 3, 2009
Messages
2,854
Reaction score
567
Location
Oslo, Norway
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Only in certain quarters..
If it's a "fact" you should easily be able to provide proof of the numbers?
There are people who have done calculations, for instance one professor did that for Denmark and found that immigration to Denmark was negative. http://www.debatepolitics.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=1058832277
Anyway, you don't need numbers like that to know that it affect Britain negative to take in tons of muslims, many radical.
1. It changes the culture in a way we don't approve
2. Their labour participatation is lower
3. Fewer go to university
4. They pay less in taxes and have lower income
5. More of them live on social sexurity
6. They have a much higher crime rate
Remember that I'm not talking about all immigrants, but the ones mentioned above. There are qualified immigrants coming to Britain, but there are qualified immigrants leaving Britain, and everyone wants qualified immigrants.

The current workforce in Britain pays National Insurance and taxes which contribute towards current pension payments. When RoP or I am a pensioner, someone else in the future will be paying for our pensions then - not RoP or myself.
And I would be worried if the current immigrants are the ones who are going to support the future pensioners.

The Cons have put a cap in place because it's politically expedient. What they would really like to do is put a cap on EU immigration so they make a symbolic gesture. None of the political parties are allowed to stop EU migrants UNLESS they take us out of the EU first.
I don't really care if they do. I don't live in Britain and I don't vote in elections in Britian. However we are talking about the current cap, which I support.

Also I would support getting UK out of EU, because EU is a sinking ship.



The numbers of non EU migrants was already limited by the previous Govt when they (finally) brought in the points system. What has happened since is merely symbolic gestures to placate a worried electorate.
Then why do the left go mad? If it is allready limited, then there is no reason to complain.



Strange, do you have figures / links to show that immigration is the cause of the credit crunch? or of Italy / France / England being booted out of the World Cup? Or that the economy of any EU country is suffering directly because of immigrants?
I didn't say that every single problem is the fault of immigrants, but I am saying that immigrants to UK is affecting UK negatively. Then it's madness to take even more immigrants when UK is so overcrowded. Also because of this immigration, emigration of qualified Britons are increasing.

There are problems that are affected by immigrants. For instance think about the riots in France, or a country I know better. Sweden got a lot of problems because of immigrants. Their rape statistics have increased from 20 per 100K to 60 per 100K the last 10 years. In comparison, US got 30 per 100K and was falling. Crime rate in Sweden has increased a lot. They also had riots like France. After what I have seen UK crie rate has been on the rise.

Then there is the government. When they participate less, then it will become more dependants and less people to support the system.
 
Last edited:

Andalublue

Hello again!
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
27,097
Reaction score
12,352
Location
Granada, España
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Anyway, you don't need numbers like that to know that it affect Britain negative to take in tons of muslims, many radical.
1. It changes the culture in a way we don't approve
2. Their labour participatation is lower
3. Fewer go to university
4. They pay less in taxes and have lower income
5. More of them live on social sexurity
6. They have a much higher crime rate
Yes, you do need to back up such wild claims with hard evidence for them to be abything more than xenophobic flannel. You make the claims, prove them. As you admit, you don't live in Britain, so how do you know?

Then why do the left go mad? If it is allready limited, then there is no reason to complain.
Where's your evidence that the Left is going mad? I haven't read any wildly emotive articles attacking the immigration cap. I think it's pointless and nothing more than a gesture, but 'going mad' suggests wild protests and furious condemnation. Please provide some evidence that this is happening.

I didn't say that every single problem is the fault of immigrants, but I am saying that immigrants to UK is affecting UK negatively. Then it's madness to take even more immigrants when UK is so overcrowded. Also because of this immigration, emigration of qualified Britons are increasing.
Proof?

There are problems that are affected by immigrants. For instance think about the riots in France, or a country I know better. Sweden got a lot of problems because of immigrants. Their rape statistics have increased from 20 per 100K to 60 per 100K the last 10 years. In comparison, US got 30 per 100K and was falling. Crime rate in Sweden has increased a lot. They also had riots like France. After what I have seen UK crie rate has been on the rise.
Where's your proof that Sweden's rise in rape has got anything to do with the immigrant population? These wild claims are nothing but xenophobic ranting. The UK crime rate is falling BTW.
 

Camlon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 3, 2009
Messages
2,854
Reaction score
567
Location
Oslo, Norway
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Yes, you do need to back up such wild claims with hard evidence for them to be abything more than xenophobic flannel. You make the claims, prove them. As you admit, you don't live in Britain, so how do you know?
So it's a wild claim that immigration to UK are affecting UK negatively. You are so full of yourself that you are correct by definition, are you? Also, is it xenophobic to claim that immigration to UK is not positive? Seriously!

No, like every single debate, you don't need scientific research to debate. Your argument makes as much sense, as saying that Americans can't debate the health care reform without quoting scientific research. Or that you can't debate how to run our school without quoting scientific papers. The only thing you are trying to do is to silence the debate.

Also i did cite a source, but you didn't cite it.


Where's your evidence that the Left is going mad? I haven't read any wildly emotive articles attacking the immigration cap. I think it's pointless and nothing more than a gesture, but 'going mad' suggests wild protests and furious condemnation. Please provide some evidence that this is happening.
Who cares, but the fact is. If it didn't matter, then why should the left care.

If you don't know that emigration is on the rise, then I think you should educate yourself. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/3982217.stm

if you are talking about the reasons, then just talk to the people leaving. Crime, weather and immigrants are one the top reasons.

Where's your proof that Sweden's rise in rape has got anything to do with the immigrant population? These wild claims are nothing but xenophobic ranting. The UK crime rate is falling BTW.
Is that the only thing you can say, give me proof and using the racist card?! I think it's too much of coincidence that
1. Rape rate in Sweden increased from 20 to 60 in 10 years right after they started taking Iraqi asulym seekers
2. Statistics from Denmark show that immigrants, especially the ones from muslim countries are overrepresented in crime
3. Crime rate in Sweden has been increasing massively since they took the ones who are overrepresented in crime.
But I shouldn't say this, because it's "racist" to be against immigration.


Also, the crime rate in UK is not falling, get your facts right http://www.aic.gov.au/en/publicatio...publications/cfi/cfi115.ashx?w=655&h=355&as=1 (source Australian gov.) it's not without reason that UK got the highest reported violent crime rate in the world.
 
Last edited:

alexa

DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
4,684
Reaction score
1,340
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I am sure Andalublue will be in soon to address all your issues so I will leave him to it for now, but come on

BBC News - Crime figures show 8% fall in England and Wales

Not only do you not know our country, you do not know how to get proper information about it and no matter how much you cry, that is important.
 

Infinite Chaos

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
18,504
Reaction score
8,591
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
If that's your attitude then I can't be bothered either. Personal invalidation and trying to drag me into racial arguments all the time just don't make this thread fun. (It was about numbers you fool!)


Not once was the question answered of why we needed open-door immigration. You just went into 'holohoax' mode and just contradicted everything without anything more than your say-so.

And seeing as my supplementary backup evidence is so pointless and baseless in comparison to your own superior, well-crafted... oh, you didn't put any up did you?
Don't throw your toys out of the pram RoP, the fact I rubbished your backup and the fact you really didn't have much to go on with beyond a few wild contradictions shouldn't stop you posting further.

In essence, we all agree the baseline argument - if there is or was uncontrolled imigration it shouldn't have happened, the country needs skilled workers and if they cannot be internally sourced then the doors should be open to those we need.

Beyond that however, you fall back to type and that's your repeated mistake on all your threads.
 
Top Bottom