Immigrants & Benefits

vivatifosi

susan6780 wrote: »

From personal experience, I know of a few young white British men that won't work, my own brother says he won't get a job if he doesn't have to. (hangs my head in shame)

Yep, we all know them and a fair few of us are related to them. And most of us want to knock their heads against the brick wall that we should name reality.

susan6780

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

, then chances are they have ulterior motives.

I disagree, maybe its not racism but ( I want to put fear but thats too much of a strong word and would lead to someone saying xenophobic) uncertainty of the unknown?
How many times do you go to the same restaurant when you go for dinner? Just because you KNOW what its like? Its the same analogy?

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

susan6780 wrote: »

I disagree, maybe its not racism but ( I want to put fear but thats too much of a strong word and would lead to someone saying xenophobic) uncertainty of the unknown?
How many times do you go to the same restaurant when you go for dinner? Just because you KNOW what its like? Its the same analogy?

No, I think you may be right with the fear issue, it starts as fear of the unknown, but then such fears are stoked and amplified by the Daily Mail brigade peddling false propaganda.

At which point it often crosses the line into xenophobia, bigotry or racism.

Interestingly, I think most of those folks don't think of themselves as racists, and they're not consciously trying to be so, it's more just a subconscious fear or sense of unease, that leads them to make assumptions which are in fact, prejudiced in nature.

Graham_Devon

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

I think it's fine to have concerns about immigration.... the problem is most of the claims made to back those concerns turn out to be completely bogus.

And when someone is shown extensive evidence that immigration is a net positive, that immigrants don't take jobs from locals on aggregate, that immigrants have lower crime rates than natives, that immigrants increase pay outcomes for most native born, claim less in benefits, etc, but still choose not to believe the evidence as it's not "common sense", then chances are they have ulterior motives.

There is other evidence out there though that's contradictory to the stuff you supply. Namely, the one I keep banging on about from Parliament which keeps on getting ignored, hence why I keep bringing it up!

Therein lies the problem. It's not so much people choosing to ignore the evidence you supply, it's that people can harvest just as much evidence to the contrary, which tends to lead to stalemate, or bombardment of "evidence".

I've just posted up a graph regarding public spending in the UK. It shows we top the EU. It also shows that most of those countries with mass inflows of immigrants to this country have the absolute lowest levels of social welfare.

Now, I can have as much evidence thrown at me to the contrary, but sometimes it takes just one, factual graph to show a myriad of issues, and a myriad of conclusions one can take from that.

At the end of the day, we all make our own conclusions. I DO look at your evidence, but I often find it's misguided, as in not comparing things properly, or find its pulled from those with vested interest in keeping the party going....normally business, who can take these people on as self employed and pay far less than minimum wage.

We often get the programmes stating how british people won't pick the fruit and veg. What we don't get is the other side....British people wouldn't be able to get by, without living 10-12 to a house like those immigrants do for a couple of years while saving up, to them, lots of money to take home.

1. The farmer is NOT paying minimum wage, he's paying self employed people.

2. Those self employed can live in the conditions they do for a year or two while saving the money to take home (which in their naive country is 5-10 years wages). A british person cannot live like that for life.

All we really get from that scenario is "the british won't do it". Well no, and neither would you. You might if it was minimum wage. But theres no requirement for that, as the employer can get away with a lot less. It doesn't get us anywhere. It get's someone living here for a year or two a LOT.

susan6780

Daily Mail? Do people read that? Really? Are they still warning us of Reds Under Our Beds?

vivatifosi

susan6780 wrote: »

I disagree, maybe its not racism but ( I want to put fear but thats too much of a strong word and would lead to someone saying xenophobic) uncertainty of the unknown?
How many times do you go to the same restaurant when you go for dinner? Just because you KNOW what its like? Its the same analogy?

I think there's a bit of that. However to be fair Graham has also put up some evidence that is a bit contradictory. I think working with facts and stats is the way forward, though it does miss out on some of the softer cultural factors. For me, immigration is a complex issue and it isn't as straightforward as all immigration is good.

Equally, we have to understand why people feel the way that we do, so that we don't get another blow out like we've had this week over Boston, Lincs. When situations like that get out of hand they quickly get nasty. I think the government needs to understand the roots of frustration before they boil over into all out racism. Once elements of a community actively dislike each other, it is a long way back to social cohesion.

A._Badger

susan6780 wrote: »

Daily Mail? Do people read that? Really? Are they still warning us of Reds Under Our Beds?

July 2012 figures for national dailies and their decline....

• Daily Mirror : 1,082,054 ; -8.74
• Daily Record : 275,526 ; -9.73
• Daily Star : 623,534 ; -11.78
• The Sun : 2,550,859 ; -9.60
• Daily Express : 555,544 ; -11.25
• Daily Mail : 1,921,239 ; -6.29
• The Daily Telegraph : 581,249 ; -8.34
• Financial Times : 290,765 ; -13.61
• The Guardian : 209,354 ; -15.85
• i : 280,122 ; 52.51
• The Independent : 83,619 ; -54.28
• The Scotsman : 34,127 ; -12.47
• The Times : 404,099 ; -8.41
• Racing Post : 46,836 ; -15.34

grizzly1911

A._Badger wrote: »

July 2012 figures for national dailies and their decline....

• Daily Mirror : 1,082,054 ; -8.74
• Daily Record : 275,526 ; -9.73
• Daily Star : 623,534 ; -11.78
• The Sun : 2,550,859 ; -9.60
• Daily Express : 555,544 ; -11.25
• Daily Mail : 1,921,239 ; -6.29
• The Daily Telegraph : 581,249 ; -8.34
• Financial Times : 290,765 ; -13.61
• The Guardian : 209,354 ; -15.85
• i : 280,122 ; 52.51
• The Independent : 83,619 ; -54.28
• The Scotsman : 34,127 ; -12.47
• The Times : 404,099 ; -8.41
• Racing Post : 46,836 ; -15.34

Morning Star?

homelessskilledworker

It appears that not even a desperate Government agrees with Hamish and his open door policy for Bulgarians and Romanians.

They are now considering an advertising campaign in their native countries to put them off.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/immigrants-...6.html#kBAwqGx

Why is that Hamish?

nomoreboomandbust

susan6780 wrote: »

and i still believe that immigrants are good for us

You and Hamish make a lovely couple