Goodbye to the UK as we know it

Potternerd

BlueEyedGirl wrote: »

Please do not refer to me as a 'Little Englander' just because I am concerned about an influx of refugee's coming into Europe or our country without adequate checks being carried out. I am all for people being allowed to integrate into our country and society whether they be migrants or refugees. I am however concerned about security and how 'we' are going to afford to help all these people.

I would love nothing more than to enter Sweden to live, but I like many others would have to go through the proper channels. Therefore, what makes refugees any different?

What proper channels? It's part of the EU?

geerex

BlueEyedGirl wrote: »

Please do not refer to me as a 'Little Englander' just because I am concerned about an influx of refugee's

I agree with your stance, but please learn not to apostrophise "refugees". In the eyes of some, it weakens your argument.

BlueEyedGirl

geerex wrote: »

I agree with your stance, but please learn not to apostrophise "refugees". In the eyes of some, it weakens your argument.

Oh my finger slipped... or was it the auto-correct?

And we all know how your grammar and spelling goes on your other posts!

Takeaway_Addict

Potternerd wrote: »

Do you mean I pay an extra 5% personally or everyone does?
Actually I would be happy to pay more tax to fund NHS, education, humanitarian aid etc. obviously not bailing out bankers, subsidising tax-dodger multi nationals etc. also not to have to subsidise low wages through the benefits system. I know tabloids have made socialism a dirty word but clause 4 pretty much summed it up. Why not help when you can instead of being selfish?

You personally, start paying it as of now 5% more, I can get you HMRC's bank account details if you want and I am sure they will appreciate the donation.

Let me know if you want the details!

DandelionPatrol

BlueEyedGirl wrote: »

Please do not refer to me as a 'Little Englander' just because I am concerned about an influx of refugee's coming into Europe or our country without adequate checks being carried out. I am all for people being allowed to integrate into our country and society whether they be migrants or refugees. I am however concerned about security and how 'we' are going to afford to help all these people.

I would love nothing more than to enter Sweden to live, but I like many others would have to go through the proper channels. Therefore, what makes refugees any different?

Although you deny being in the EU, in fact both Little England and Sweden are in the EU. So under free movement within the EU, there are no channels for you to go through, you can just go.

hollydays

jaydeeuk1 wrote: »

Not sure why you need to resort to insults or portray those quoting factual information to be some sort of racists, no doubt to disguise the poor quality of your argument. I didn't grow up around here so cannot comment on education, but it is well known that schools in Derbyshire have among the lowest amount spent per head on them in the UK, therefore with children soon to start school I would love that £1 billion pounds to be directed in to education instead.
Derby itself has a very high level of immigration and my business deals with NHS, and they have a huge struggle trying to balance the books, which is getting harder each year resulting in a number of key services particularly to the elderly being closed down and moved elsewhere. Not some racist rant, but a fact.

Your points aren't factual, they are the argument of the pub. Read the following to see what people thought was " well known", to quote your words:

" The most compelling proof is the Mori survey on public attitudes to refugees carried out for Reader's Digest in November 2000. This found that - after a year in which the Daily Mail had run more than 200 stories about asylum seekers and refugees - 80% of adults believed that refugees come to Britain because they regard it as a "soft touch", 66% thought there are too many immigrants in Britain, and 63% considered too much is being done to help immigrants. These opinions mirror those of the tabloids.

Reader's Digest also found that wildly exaggerated and inaccurate views about asylum seekers were rampant. Respondents believed that asylum seekers received £113 per week in benefits, as opposed to the real figure of £36.54. They thought that 20% of the population were immigrants, though only 4% really are. And they estimated that 26% of the population belonged to an ethnic minority, as against the actual figure of 7%. In the 1940s, there were similar wild overestimations of the numbers of Jews in Britain."

jaydeeuk1

missbiggles1 wrote: »

You seem to forget that we're part of the EU, so "here" is the appropriate word.

With Germany destroying Greece and humiliating millions of people, showing Merkel to be the unelected dictator of the superatate we all suspected her to be and rising anti EU feeling, hopefully we won't be in the EU much longer. Denmark has the right idea and I can see more European govts being more right wing over the next few years. I've no problem helping others but we can't even feed, house, employ and look after our existing population properly and we're giving a whole new group of people priority in housing, benefits and access to NHS when others have spent their life paying in to it and finding themselves not getting the service they were promised it will and is causing resentment. Its almost like a pyramid scheme, and it will collapse unless something changes. Its like giving hundreds to charity each month when you and your family are living hand to mouth on pay day loans.

Potternerd

Takeaway_Addict wrote: »

You personally, start paying it as of now 5% more, I can get you HMRC's bank account details if you want and I am sure they will appreciate the donation.

Let me know if you want the details!

I fail to see the logic of this. My whole point is that those of us fortunate enough to live in a relatively peaceful and stable country should collectively be doing more.
Do your HMRC details specify that it won't go to bankers etc? Obviously not!

BlueEyedGirl

Potternerd wrote: »

What proper channels? It's part of the EU?

It is. However, I cannot just turn up, walk into social housing and take on employment without registering with the proper authorities, there are proper channels to follow. In the case of Sweden I would have to do several things to ensure I can migrate into the Swedish way of life smoothly.

Potternerd

geerex wrote: »

Elephant in the room?
More like a herd of them.

Like it or not, we all know of an area, or indeed a city where the white indigenous people are in a minority. Bradfordistan, tower hamlets etc. It is quite clear that THEY don't want to integrate with us, it is also quite clear that WE don't want to live amongst them.
I defy anyone on this thread to name a city/town/area where THEY live which is nicer/better than prior to their arrival. Town upon town and city upon city are becoming slums where people born in this country are too scared to go. Places where the call to prayer are played like in some middle Eastern country.
Meanwhile, all you left leaning morons are welcoming MORE followers of that ideology into this country, an ideology which is wholly incompatible with our values. They will not change to fit in, they will expect US to change for THEM. And we will, because our leaders are traitors.

Them and us? What about our common humanity?
This isn't a picture I recgnise.