Biggest population in Europe?

ninky_2

piggeh wrote: »

If you were to go to a foreign country wouldn't you rather join with fellow British (well, debatable) rather than end up in a country where no one shares your cultural background.

no.:eek:!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

workingNOMAD_2

We are not full for gawd sake! We have lots of room...the UK is more than London and the South East...

I personally hope our population increases as it will be good for the economy and means we can boss the rest of Europe.

However I think parents that do not achieve 5 GCSEs or on the social should not be allowed to have children.

Dylanwing

I think I'm going to give up on this immigration stuff. I find the other side of the argument unpleasant so I'll bow out here.

To those arguing on the anti-immigration side - feel free to think you've won or made a point or whatever. I'd just rather not discuss stuff with people whose views I find amoral (as opposed to immoral).

Enjoy the rest of the debate guys!

So, I think that the UK infastructure cannot accomodate any significant population increase, and our welfare and pension system is already overloaded, and a small Country that produces very little cannot sustain an ever-increasing population, without changing the whole ethos of the Country. Does that make me amoral or xenophobic? One of the reasons why immigration is such a hot topic is that nobody seems prepared to debate it, or be completely honest about the affect that it is having on ordinary people.

ninky_2

vivatifosi wrote: »

Thats my thought too lir. As I see it there are three groups of people that get lumped together in one: migrants to the country that have a legal right to be here (either through work permit or from being from another EU state), economic migrants that don't have a legal right to be here (illegal immigrants) and those seeking political asylum.

In the case of the first group, they have a right to be here, people should get over it. Its the flip side of the great right that we all have as individuals to go work in the Costas, Paris, Krakow, Stockholm or wherever takes our fancy.

In the case of the second group, if you think people are working illegally they are probably being exploited by their employers and on below even minimum wage. So shop the employer if they are doing something illegal.

In the third instance we have a duty in law to house those seeking political asylum from horrific regimes and its right that we do that. My DH works for an airline, so I know from what his colleagues have told me that people flush their passports down the toilets to claim asylum at the point of entry when they are not from the country that they claim to be from. In this instance there are certain destinations that are more known for this (in much the same way as the drug routes are known), so as such drug flights are targeted by customs, why not have a sterile area in airports where these flights are sent to, the customs is handled at the gate? Then anyone who tries to get into the airport and mingle with other customers cannot get that far, and if they've already disposed of their passport its clear where they've come from, they can be investigated and repatriated to their known country of exit. As a backup you could also get the airline to photocopy the travel docs of everyone prior to boarding, that way even if the evidence has been flushed, a backup copy is available.

People are always going to look for a better life, so would we if we were in their situation. If we want the issues addressed, we need to deal with the causes: they would not work here if there was nobody to employ them (though at the same time ask yourself if that's somewhere you want to live) and they would not get into the country if we closed immigration loopholes. Those are issues for the government to address.

At the same time there is one big question that I never hear the answer to: if illegal immigrants and asylum seekers can get into Europe, why are so many so keen to get to the UK, when they are already within the safety of the EU? Of all the questions in the immigration debate that's the one I would like to know the answer to the most, because the answers people give to that have the potential to build the most workable solutions.

Checks at airports will not work as many illegals will use other means of entering the country such as hiding underneath lorries.

The reasons people destroy their passport includes hiding the fact they have passed through another country (e.g Turkey) that they could have claimed asylum in as under the legislation they should have claimed asylum there.

People come to the UK because of the (previously) strong economy along with the benefits system. Succesful asylum claimants go straight to the top of the council housing list. When the govt was letting people buy their council properties at vast discounts this was the equivalent to them of winning the lottery. They are also driven by rumoured successes of others who claim to have "made their fortune" here. Often these stories are overinflated but culturally often they want to save face back home or don't want to upset their families with the sorry truth.

If we were to follow the spirit of asylum to the letter entire populations of many countries would be eligible to live here. It used to be just the richer ones so we didn't mind but now the poor are making their way over the government has realised this is unsustainable. The cost of hearing asylum cases costs this country a fortune and ridiculous legal debates are used to deny the majority. For example, you may have been tortured but unless you can prove this was state sanctioned and not the result of an individual prison guard AND that you wound DEFINITELY be tortured again you will be refused.

lostinrates

workingNOMAD wrote: »

We are not full for gawd sake! We have lots of room...the UK is more than London and the South East...

I personally hope our population increases as it will be good for the economy and means we can boss the rest of Europe.

However I think parents that do not achieve 5 GCSEs or on the social should not be allowed to have children.

We have acreage and empty homes in parts of the country, but we are short on money and jobs: there is a valid argument to look at immigration. For me purely 'colour' 'race' and 'religion' are not amoung them, although other aspects of society might be. I would, as I think you suggest, prefer a society where we had higher rates of personal fulfilment, employment and standard of behaviour than a British white-out of poor education and laziness. I feel however the only realistic option lies somewhere in the middle.

cocktail

ninky wrote: »

Checks at airports will not work as many illegals will use other means of entering the country such as hiding underneath lorries.

People come to the UK because of the (previously) strong economy along with the benefits system. Succesful asylum claimants go straight to the top of the council housing list. When the govt was letting people buy their council properties at vast discounts this was the equivalent to them of winning the lottery. They are also driven by rumoured successes of others who claim to have "made their fortune" here. Often these stories are overinflated but culturally often they want to save face back home or don't want to upset their families with the sorry truth.

.

illegal immigration is just that--ILLEGAL
giving amnesty to thosands enmasse just because it proves too costly to process them is ridiculous and portrays a weakness which is played upon by the future illegal immigrants.
Recession and its aftermath would mean that legal immigrants would lessen in the future either due to lack of jobs, protectionism or sheer unattractiveness of the british economy. note-legal migrants do not get any benefits and most of them are productive for the economy
illegal immigrants would continue to pour in and bearing in mind that these would be the most unproductive group of people--claiming benefits,social housing,etc

mewbie_2

Pity the UN couldn't spend some time making a projection about Darfur and doing something about it.

Still, as they have time to make meaningless projections which are unlikely to be accurate perhaps they could also project what would happen to this country if all the immigrants left. Impact on tax revenues, the NHS, etc.

Dylanwing

Still, as they have time to make meaningless projections which are unlikely to be accurate perhaps they could also project what would happen to this country if all the immigrants left. Impact on tax revenues, the NHS, etc.

I think you omitted the word 'Illegal'.

mewbie_2

Dylanwing wrote: »

I think you omitted the word 'Illegal'.

Illegal meaningless contributions? Makes even less sense.

Cleaver

maninthestreet wrote: »

Where are these 20 million going to live, and where are they going to work???

London. KFC.

Sorted.