Stay or go? EU poll - Oh the irony.

Graham_Devon

mayonnaise wrote: »

What a nonsense.
Selective immigration policies are applied all over the world. If e.g. you go to Vietnam, you'll need a visa. Citizens of neighbouring countries like Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia...etc...don't need a visa to enter Vietnam. Are you going to call their visa policy racist? Get a clue, man.

You are making my point for me. Not sure if you realise it or not.

What most want is controlled immigration, exactly as you describe above.

That's all I want....but in suggesting this on this forum I've been labeled racist more times than I care to count.

To me, and many others, I don't care where they are from, I just want to see controlled immigration, fair to all.

I DON'T want to see uncontrolled immigration for anyone in the EU while watching people in Calais (including children) die and suffer inhumane conditions trying to get here.

All I want to see is a FAIR immigration policy applied to ALL regardless of where you were born or come from. One which doesn't discriminate based on where you were born.

You can certainly take issue with that system if you wish to. But it's utter nonsense to apply the racist badge at every opportunity.

ruggedtoast

Graham_Devon wrote: »

What a nonsense.

People need to open their eyes.

We have people living in appalling conditions in camps around Calais, trying to get to the UK, but barred from entry based SOLELY on the fact that they were born somewhere other than the EU.

And we keep banging the racist drum towards anyone who believes that the same standard should be applied to ALL? REGARDLESS of where they come from?

Total and utter nonsense. Those continually shouting racists at anyone who wants to see controlled immigration applied to EVERYONE really need to stop and think about what they are saying here at a time of crisis in Calais.

The thing you are missing, Graham, (intentionally I assume) is that there is a functioning free movement agreement with the EU that added £20bn to our economy over the last decade.

Of course some people from Poland want to come here, the reason they arent decamping en masse is that they are part of the EU and their country has to be run to a set of minimim standards. Standards the UK helped to write and reagrees to every time there is a new member. The same standards you UKIPers deride as being a threat to your liberty.

There is no such reciprocal agreement with Libya, Somalia, the Congo or any of the other hell holes the Calais shanty towns hail from. If you cant tell the difference between migration from inside the EU and outside the EU I dont think you can offer much to this topic.

Generali

Bantex wrote: »

Possibly on a basis of get your own house in order before telling others where they are wrong?

Are you really saying that unless Australia treats Aboriginals better then I shouldn't discuss immigration policy in the UK?

Sounds a bit mental to me.

Graham_Devon

ruggedtoast wrote: »

The thing you are missing, Graham, (intentionally I assume) is that there is a functioning free movement agreement with the EU that added £20bn to our economy over the last decade.

You might want to read what Conrad has just stated about this in DT.

The report had to be positive, or they lost funding. The author has stated so on LBC radio. it was funded by the EU.

In other words, it was always going to be a positive report, they just had to figure out what to include to make it so.

Bantex_2

Generali wrote: »

Are you really saying that unless Australia treats Aboriginals better then I shouldn't discuss immigration policy in the UK?

Sounds a bit mental to me.

If you think the way your adopted country treats aboriginals is OK, seems a bit rich to accuse others of racism.

danothy

Graham_Devon wrote: »

What a nonsense.

People need to open their eyes.

We have people living in appalling conditions in camps around Calais, trying to get to the UK, but barred from entry based SOLELY on the fact that they were born somewhere other than the EU.

And we keep banging the racist drum towards anyone who believes that the same standard should be applied to ALL? REGARDLESS of where they come from?

Total and utter nonsense. Those continually shouting racists at anyone who wants to see controlled immigration applied to EVERYONE really need to stop and think about what they are saying here at a time of crisis in Calais.

Unfortunately, someone quoted this reply so I was inadvertently exposed to more of your toxic incompetence despite having you on ignore. Since the damage is done already I will respond.

It is impressive how you have completely failed to comprehend that "the same standard" being "applied to ALL" "REGARDLESS of where they come from" includes people who were born in the UK and were gifted citizenship for such an accident.

If you were not to completely ignore what I was saying in favour of your own toxic rhetoric then you would see that I in fact do support the same treatment for everyone, "REGARDLESS of where they come from".

By that very token, I don't particularly advocate telling people they can't live where they choose. Freedom of movement for human beings is a good thing in my view, for many more reasons than I have witnessed you openly consider. You, on the other hand appear to indeed want to be able to tell people where they can't live, and you seem to justify that desire based around the apparent need to manage the quality of the applicant. Seems reasonable so far, if we ignore the disparity between your perception of that need and reality.

You do not however appear to advocate such quality checks on people born by chance in the UK. If you for some reason do not think that people born here should be subject to the same criteria for acceptance as those not born here then that requires justification. I have yet to see what justifies that difference in treatment. Anything objective like economic contribution would apply equally to natives and non-natives, for example.

If you can't justify that, then you are basically saying that being born in the UK carries some sort of birthright that makes us special and/or grants us privilege to live here untested, where as other people aren't special. This is an inherently racist position.

You either support freedom of movement regardless of point of origin, a system of immigration and depatriation based on quality of person, or you are discriminating based on birthplace. The latter is the racist one.

Do you, Graham, who so overtly supports managing the "quality" of the human beings who would seek to live in the UK also support managing the quality of the human beings who were born here by chance? Or are you basically a massive racist as I suspect you to be.

mayonnaise

Graham_Devon wrote: »

You are making my point for me. Not sure if you realise it or not.

What most want is controlled immigration, exactly as you describe above.

Emm... no...that's not what I described.
All over the world, there are trading blocs, economic areas, or just a loosely defined collective of countries that apply a relaxed immigration policy towards each other as compared to the rest of the world. There's nothing racist about that.
Similarly there is nothing racist about allowing free movement within the EU while applying immigration controls on non-EU citizens.

Graham_Devon

mayonnaise wrote: »

Emm... no...that's not what I described.
All over the world, there are trading blocs, economic areas, or just a loosely defined collective of countries that apply a relaxed immigration policy towards each other as compared to the rest of the world. There's nothing racist about that.
Similarly there is nothing racist about allowing free movement within the EU while applying immigration controls on non-EU citizens.

And theres nothing racist about wanting controlled immigration applied to all, either.

Graham_Devon

danothy wrote: »

It is impressive how you have completely failed to comprehend that "the same standard" being "applied to ALL" "REGARDLESS of where they come from" includes people who were born in the UK and were gifted citizenship for such an accident.

Goods grief, that's pathetic... as is the rest of your reply which stems from that.

Bantex_2

danothy wrote: »

You do not however appear to advocate such quality checks on people born by chance in the UK. If you for some reason do not think that people born here should be subject to the same criteria for acceptance as those not born here then that requires justification. I have yet to see what justifies that difference in treatment. Anything objective like economic contribution would apply equally to natives and non-natives, for example.

If you can't justify that, then you are basically saying that being born in the UK carries some sort of birthright that makes us special and/or grants us privilege to live here untested, where as other people aren't special. This is an inherently racist position.

You either support freedom of movement regardless of point of origin, a system of immigration and depatriation based on quality of person, or you are discriminating based on birthplace. The latter is the racist one.

Do you, Graham, who so overtly supports managing the "quality" of the human beings who would seek to live in the UK also support managing the quality of the human beings who were born here by chance? Or are you basically a massive racist as I suspect you to be.

What a daft point, the UK is stuck with it's own dross. (Bit like if your own children are not much cop).
Cannot see the point in admitting more dross though.