The rise of Extremism in Economically tough times

lostinrates

setmefree2 wrote: »

I'm just pondering - the same as Robert Peston -

Well, he's wrong IMO in this instance. Maybe not in general, but in some instances. Actually, I'll check areas I know, like that hospital area to see if ukip got in if someone reminds me tomorrow. I'd be sad if it has, but when I drove just a few miles south of there last week ( its not my local area) I saw a depressing number of ukip posters and dearth of anyone else's. Something I commented on elsewhere.

Like it or not this suggests that a group of peoe feel unlistened to, or unheard.

You say you are listening, as am I, but while I am hearing something, a lot of which I do not agree with, some of which I concede, it seems some don't want to hear. If you won't hear you cannot counter.

Graham_Devon

danothy wrote: »

This surely then is a matter of there not being enough of them, rather than too many people. Like houses and their associated occupancy rates and prices, not enough supply rather than too much demand.

It does seem to me sometimes that the capacity argument against immigration seems to be locked into the idea that we have maxed ourselves out in terms of roads, housing and services.

You could build more roads, airports, homes, etc etc etc.

However, that's not neccesarily what people want to see. We are already one of the most densely populated areas on the EU.

Certainly living in such a metropolis is not high on my wish list. Secondly, as you say, we could do these things. But the issue is that we haven't. So while we could, the absolute evidence is that we haven't.

I'd certainly like to see more housing. But I'd like to see it in the right place. Some garden cities etc are good, well needed ideas.

But the thought of simply never ending building across vast swathes of the UK doesn't really sit with me. I'd far rather simply control the levels of immigration.

The other problem with building en masse is if anything changes politically in the future and many emmigrate back away from the UK we will be left with serious problems in the country as we'll have based our economy on ever growing immigration. Things can change quickly, and I'd like to see a better grounding than simply "growth" in numbers.

danothy

Bantex wrote: »

It depends on whether you think just ever increasing population and supply is the answer. Most low skilled immigrants are unlikely to pay enough tax to fund the public services they use.

Firstly, there's no reason to think that the UK population would be "ever" increasing even with completely free immigration. As an aside, it needs to increase while life expectancy is increasing, but this will have a limit too.

Secondly, there's plenty of low skilled natives who are unlikely to pay enough tax to fund the public services they use, but we have paid for their education on top of that. A working age immigrant of the same status would still be cheaper. If people paying in less than they take out is the thing you object to one might expect you to be in favour of expatriation too.

Bantex_2

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

And yet the UK profits from EU immigrants quite heavily, as they use less in public services than they contribute in tax.

EU immigrants subsidise the native born. Not the other way around.

Not all of them do, I would prefer to pick and chose the profitable ones.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

CLAPTON wrote: »

36% of London voters are foreigners
add in those that are the (voting) children of foreigners then maybe the puzzle isn't so great

Or perhaps it's because immigration has made London the world leading city that it is today, and created a dynamic, thriving economic powerhouse.

setmefree2

CLAPTON wrote: »

36% of London voters are foreigners
add in those that are the (voting) children of foreigners then maybe the puzzle isn't so great

So? What's wrong with foreigners? And what exactly do you mean by foreigner?

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Bantex wrote: »

Not all of them do, I would prefer to pick and chose the profitable ones.

They are already profitable en-masse.

You want them to be even more profitable? Isn't that a bit exploitative?

wymondham

setmefree2 wrote: »

Seriously is that what passes as excitement in Wymondham. (I'm guessing that's in Norfolk?)

oh yes, this is exiting when you're in Norfolk!

setmefree2

Graham_Devon wrote: »

You could build more roads, airports, homes, etc etc etc.

However, that's not neccesarily what people want to see. We are already one of the most densely populated areas on the EU.

Certainly living in such a metropolis is not high on my wish list. Secondly, as you say, we could do these things. But the issue is that we haven't. So while we could, the absolute evidence is that we haven't.

I'd certainly like to see more housing. But I'd like to see it in the right place. Some garden cities etc are good, well needed ideas.

But the thought of simply never ending building across vast swathes of the UK doesn't really sit with me. I'd far rather simply control the levels of immigration.

The other problem with building en masse is if anything changes politically in the future and many emmigrate back away from the UK we will be left with serious problems in the country as we'll have based our economy on ever growing immigration. Things can change quickly, and I'd like to see a better grounding than simply "growth" in numbers.

So in your view people are voting UKIP because of housing?

danothy

Graham_Devon wrote: »

You could build more roads, airports, homes, etc etc etc.

However, that's not neccesarily what people want to see. We are already one of the most densely populated areas on the EU.

Certainly living in such a metropolis is not high on my wish list. Secondly, as you say, we could do these things. But the issue is that we haven't. So while we could, the absolute evidence is that we haven't.

I'd certainly like to see more housing. But I'd like to see it in the right place. Some garden cities etc are good, well needed ideas.

But the thought of simply never ending building across vast swathes of the UK doesn't really sit with me. I'd far rather simply control the levels of immigration.

The other problem with building en masse is if anything changes politically in the future and many emmigrate back away from the UK we will be left with serious problems in the country as we'll have based our economy on ever growing immigration. Things can change quickly, and I'd like to see a better grounding than simply "growth" in numbers.

You are arguing to stop something because you think it will never end naturally, when it in fact will.