The rise of Extremism in Economically tough times

Graham_Devon

kabayiri wrote: »

I normally put forward the view that I don't mind quality immigration but I don't support mass immigration; particularly at a time when the government is unable to forward plan key resources to support them.

On my part I have always maintained that I would like to see the UK adopt a system much like Australias.

I don't really care where the immigrants race is, what their skin colour is, what their hair colour is or if they have 12 toes.

What I do want to see is an end to open borders.

This apparently suggests I hate foreigners (pretty strong word) and am therefore racist.

No one seems to want to discuss controlled immigration to the UK. This is prevelant across the UK, not just on here. It's either a free for all, or everyone who disagrees becomes a racist in the blink of an eye.

Theres got to be a happy medium where we still benefit from immigration, but we are not hostage to open borders. Unfortunately we cannot seem to have such a discussion as its drowned out with the racist nonsense.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

kabayiri wrote: »

I suspect the pro immigration business movement are keen to support continued mass immigration to underpin mass cheap labour.

Putting aside for a moment the fact that the research and data simply doesn't support that statement.

What if it did?

Lets take a hypothetical scenario where all the research was wrong, and immigrants did in fact drive down wages.

Why would you want to create artificial skills and labour shortages, driving up the price of the goods and services you bought?

Would the pensioners in the other thread complaining about Newark being over-run with EU immigrants (despite only 2% of the local population being form the EU) be happy to pay vastly increased prices for their plumbers, the fruit in their shops, the sandwich they had for lunch, etc, in order for it to be served by someone with a British accent?

Generali

Graham_Devon wrote: »

On my part I have always maintained that I would like to see the UK adopt a system likeAAustralia's

So you'd like immigration per head of population to double from the current level in the UK. That seems contrary to what you've said before.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Graham_Devon wrote: »

On my part I have always maintained that I would like to see the UK adopt a system much like Australias.

So you want to see a system that works well in delivering badly needed EU immigrants to us at virtually no administrative cost, replaced with a system that is expensive to run, a bureaucratic nightmare to navigate, and prone to political meddling.

Why?

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Generali wrote: »

So you'd like immigration per head of population to double from the current level in the UK. That seems contrary to what you've said before.

Of course he wouldn't.

And that's the problem.

They want controls so they can persuade meddling politicians to reduce immigration. And consequences be damned.

vivatifosi

Regarding Malthus and population growth. Current thinking of UN and other agencies is that global population will rise to 10bn from the current 7bn and then taper. The reason being that as countries develop, their birth rate drops. If historical data is reviewed, then this can already be seen to be happening.

What will happen though is a big demographic shift in terms of where people are. Massive war/disease/famine excepted, most growth will come from Sub Saharan Africa. Also at some point, as people in India have more children that those in China, it will overtake China as the most populous nation.

Graham_Devon

Generali wrote: »

So you'd like immigration per head of population to double from the current level in the UK. That seems contrary to what you've said before.

:sigh:

We've already been here Generali, and I've already answered this.

No. I said I would like to see the same sort of system in terms of controls.

I feel any input here is rather pointless. I've done my best to explain the position and it seems so have others, but it appears you are determined to drown it out with "you are racist", "you hate foreigners" and now, completely spin.

You will not discuss anything I have stated, so it would probably be best left now.

Generali

Graham_Devon wrote: »

:sigh:

We've already been here Generali, and I've already answered this.

No. I said I would like to see the same sort of system in terms of controls.

I feel any input here is rather pointless. I've done my best to explain the position and it seems so have others, but it appears you are determined to drown it out with "you are racist", "you hate foreigners" and now, completely spin.

You will not discuss anything I have stated, so it would probably be best left now.

If a set of rules lead to a particular outcome in Australia then why would you imagine the same rules would lead to a different outcome in the UK? Seems odd to me.

Graham_Devon

Generali wrote: »

Lots of posters say that your input is pointless but I try to be nicer than that.

If a set of rules lead to a particular outcome in Australia then why would you imagine the same rules would lead to a different outcome in the UK? Seems odd to me.

As I said - A similar system to the Australia system.

I did not state exactly the same system with exactly the same policies.

And yes, lots of posters do say my posts are a waste of time. I tend to take that with a pinch of salt however, considering many of them are the same posters, either with dual accounts or a long string of PPR'd usernames. I also tend to believe it's one of the easiest way to avoid any reasonable debate on a subject you've been questioned on.

Generali

Graham_Devon wrote: »

As I said - A similar system to the Australia system.

I did not state exactly the same system with exactly the same policies.

And yes, lots of posters do say my posts are a waste of time. I tend to take that with a pinch of salt however, considering many of them are the same posters, either with dual accounts or along string of PPR'd usernames.

So how would you make it different in order to cut migration not only below a system you think has failed but also below one which is successful by your claim yet failing by your measure.

It's hard to keep up with you, gotta be honest.