| Non-motoring > UK Population growth | Miscellaneous |
Thread Author: smokie |
Replies: 176 |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 09:53
UK Population growth - smokie
|
|
"Up by 491,100 to 64,596,800....Net migration added 259,700 to the population, while "natural growth" - births minus deaths - added 226,200." www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33266792 No wonder we need so many new houses and the roads seem so congested... |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 10:22
UK Population growth - Roger.
|
| ..and primary schools are under pressure, the NHS is struggling................... |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 10:28
UK Population growth - Alanovich
|
|
I'm sorry, weren't we supposed to be getting 60,000,000 Romanians and Bulgarians not too long ago? What happened to them? A quarter of a million seems a paltry figure, and hardly sufficient to top up tax revenues for pensions etc. I'm quite concerned by this and we need a rethink on immigration so that more people are encouraged to come here and work. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 12:23
UK Population growth - Londoner
|
|
So, your sarcasm aside, what actually IS your estimate of the population that the UK can manage to sustain, given the current levels of provision for housing, health, employment, transport infrastructure et cetera? 65 million, 70 million, 80 million? More? Have you anything positive to contribute to the thread beyond enjoying a side swipe at the idiots in UKIP? |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 12:43
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
>>what actually IS your estimate of the population that the UK can manage to sustain, Ideal level of immigration is not going to be a single number, and it certainly isn't going to be zero. One assumes that younger people earning and paying tax are required, to balance the number of British aging and relying on the state. (not a judgement, BTW). Quite clearly people coming here and living on benefits without contributing are not required and should be prevented. Or at least, any net gains in such an area should be avoided. But then I also think we should be preventing British people from living on benefits as a chosen way of life. I'd guess it also depends on the current birth rate and the current rate of, and any changes to, expenditure on state resources (NHS, Education, Benefits, etc.), as well as tax revenues. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 12:50
UK Population growth - Londoner
|
|
snipquote!!! >> I'd guess it also depends on the current birth rate and the current rate of, >> and any changes to, expenditure on state resources (NHS, Education, Benefits, etc.), as well as >> tax revenues. >> Thumb. All excellent points. Classical economic theory full accepts under-population as well as over-population as being problematic. We need an optimum, manageable population at any given time. Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 25 Jun 15 at 12:53
|
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 12:44
UK Population growth - Alanovich
|
|
>> So, your sarcasm aside, what actually IS your estimate of the population that the UK >> can manage to sustain, given the current levels of provision for housing, health, employment, transport >> infrastructure et cetera? >> >> 65 million, 70 million, 80 million? More? >> >> Have you anything positive to contribute to the thread beyond enjoying a side swipe at >> the idiots in UKIP? >> More people, more workers, more tax, more funds to pay for the stuff. Current levels of provision are irrelevant as provision increases with population. There are schools being built aplenty round my way, new ones, and existing ones being expanded. My area isn't alone. 500 extra new free primary schools coming soon. Not difficult. Why shouldn't I enjoy a sideswipe at the idiots in UKIP? That's what they are and it's fun to mock, although not very challenging I'll admit. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 12:52
UK Population growth - Londoner
|
|
>> More people, more workers, more tax, more funds to pay for the stuff. >> >> Current levels of provision are irrelevant as provision increases with population. There are schools being >> built aplenty round my way, new ones, and existing ones being expanded. My area isn't >> alone. 500 extra new free primary schools coming soon. >> >> Not difficult. >> Troll Alert. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 12:55
UK Population growth - Alanovich
|
|
>> Troll Alert. >> Hey ho. It's not my problem if you can't differentiate reasonable argument (with a bit of mild mickey taking) from trolling. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 13:40
UK Population growth - Londoner
|
|
Alanovic, I REALLY did think that you were trolling, especially since you were obviously having a go at UKIP. Economics isn't your strong point - even though you are probably quite brilliant in subjects in which you specialise. Let me recommend this to you: www.forumforthefuture.org/sites/default/files/project/downloads/populationweb.pdf You need have no qualms about reading it. It's not racist, right-wing mush. I wouldn't have anything to do with it if it were. Here's a suitable taster. QUOTE However, in a world of finite resources, which are already under pressure, it would be difficult to countenance a population that was required to continue growing ad infinitum. The ‘new blood’ argument also suggests that – as the population continues to age – we would need ever more young migrants to support those elderly – both in the UK and globally. This would be a pyramid scheme. The population cannot keep growing forever. At some point, we will have to come up with an alternative model. END_QUOTE Last edited by: Londoner on Thu 25 Jun 15 at 13:41
|
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 13:59
UK Population growth - CGNorwich
|
|
"At some point, we will have to come up with an alternative model" There are only two other solutions. 1 The younger portion of society work harder and harder for longer and longer to support that element of the ageing population that are unable to work. They also need to pay more and more tax to support healthcare and social services for the ageing population at the same time receiving less and less benefits themselves 2 Older people are eliminated from society or receive radically reduced social care, health and other benefits from the state Which do you prefer or do you have another alternative? Last edited by: CGNorwich on Thu 25 Jun 15 at 14:00
|
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 14:42
UK Population growth - Londoner
|
|
>> >> Which do you prefer or do you have another alternative? >> You already know that there is no nice, easy solution to this issue, but we can at least stop making it worse. - Assuming that the birth rate remains below replacement level for people who are already UK citizens, we will need immigration to top up the population level so that it keeps pace with economic growth. - I welcome controlled immigration to meet the UK's needs. (a discussion in its own right). - We need to change our pattern of working, which is happening but on too small a scale. Instead of working your entire life then ... wham! retirement!...we need to have an intermediate stake of part-time working which is not so taxing as full-time labour, and which enables experience workers to train/mentor junior members of the workforce. This keeps more people more economically active for longer, reducing the costs of state support. - We need to save more and take more responsibility for our own welfare. I read a lot of comments on forums from people who complain that they have saved hard and gone without luxuries in order to fund a decent retirement, but that their neighbour/relative/friend has splashed out on new cars, holidays, jewellery etc and yet gets help from the state. I feel their anguish. We may WANT luxuries and toys, but we must prioritise what we NEED. - Tackle lifestyle issues which impact quality of life in old age, and prevent older people from contributing in their (I should say "own" at my age) self-help. e.g. obesity, lack of exercise, substance abuse and so on. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 14:47
UK Population growth - sooty123
|
|
>> - We need to change our pattern of working, which is happening but on too small a scale. Instead of working your entire life then ... wham! retirement!...we need to have an intermediate stake of part-time working which is not so taxing as full-time labour, and which enables experience workers to train/mentor junior members of the workforce. This keeps more people more economically active for longer, reducing the costs of state support. I think that already happens, there are quite a lot retired on here. I bet many have part time jobs to keep them ticking over. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 15:18
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
>>We may WANT luxuries and toys, but we must prioritise what we NEED. No. Categorically not. It is not for the state to say how we should lead our lives. I did not work so hard because I was driven by what I needed. I was, and remain, driven by what I want[ed]. Would I have worked so hard to supply what the State decided other people needed? No. >>I feel their anguish I do not. Nor do I sympathise. People who lead their [financial] life one way and then resent people who lead their life another need to get over themselves. How can what another person does or does not have make one happier with what oneself does or does not have? I might be disappointed or impressed with myself, but that is hardly the fault or responsibility of someone else. e.g. I earn x. I have and receive a level of satisfaction with x. My satisfaction is not affected in either direction by whether you earn 1/2x or 2x. >>We need to have an intermediate stake of part-time working which is not so taxing as full-time labour, and which enables experience workers to train/mentor junior members of the workforce. And if the do not wish to work part time? Because they wish to work not at all or because they wish to work more? Or if the younger workers are better? Or if the role is no longer required? We should facilitate such an environment perhaps, but not enforce it. We should, as you say, take responsibility for what we do with our own lives. People are not the same; not in health, desire, drive, capability, attitude or anything else you care to mention. Welfare should be aimed at those who cannot look after themselves, not those who choose not to. e.g. screw around at school, get nicked for various stuff, then get over the idea that life is going to be financially tough. It will never be as good for you on welfare as for the person who cannot work. Whatever the minimum wage for working people is, I see no reason why someone who cannot work should not receive that. However, someone who simply does not work, should receive a fraction of it. Life should be possible, not good. We should determine what the State will pay for, to whom and under what conditions, and determine how much and by what rules people within that State will contribute. - define the "deal" if you like. And then live with, and take responsibility for, that deal. Not seek people to blame for our own position. Trying to design a single set of rules which will fit all people equally will, and must, fail, so there will always be injustices. We need to accept that, fix them as an when, and stop reading the Daily Mail. Or actually, read it if it entertains you, just stop believing it. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 15:27
UK Population growth - Londoner
|
|
>> >>We may WANT luxuries and toys, but we must prioritise what we NEED. >> >> No. Categorically not. >> >> It is not for the state to say how we should lead our lives. >> >> I did not work so hard because I was driven by what I needed. I >> was, and remain, driven by what I want[ed]. Would I have worked so hard to >> supply what the State decided other people needed? No. >> I presume you missed the bit where I said: "We need to save more and take more responsibility for our own welfare." You got the wrong end of the stick ENTIRELY! :-) I was expounding my puritan streak. Life is hard and don't expect the state to support you if you had money and spent it enjoying yourself with no thought for tomorrow. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 15:31
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
Londoner, surely you didn't miss the bit where *I* said... "We should, *as you say*, take responsibility for what we do with our own lives. :-) <- I hate smiley faces, but sometimes it seems to only way to avoid an argument. But I admit I may have been a bit further towards the other end of the stick than you intended. It was where I took you to be saying that people should worry about what they want not what they need, in a compulsory fashion. Rather than, people should worry about what they want to worry about, and should then take responsibility for their own decisions and stop looking at everybody else's. Last edited by: No FM2R on Thu 25 Jun 15 at 15:32
|
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 15:44
UK Population growth - Londoner
|
|
>> It was where I took you to be saying that people should worry about what >> they want not what they need, in a compulsory fashion. Rather than, people should worry >> about what they want to worry about, and should then take responsibility for their own >> decisions and stop looking at everybody else's. >> Absolutely! I have a feeling that we are in violent agreement! LOL |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 15:32
UK Population growth - sooty123
|
|
>> It is not for the state to say how we should lead our lives. >> I think the 'state' will always encourage or discourage certain behaivors I always take that as meaning telling us what to do. It might not ban something but make it very difficult. If we take the gov as an example of the 'state' we vote them in to do this. I think voters want the gov to take the country in a certain direction which will mean do or not doing something that you did in the past. How can what another person does or does >> not have make one happier with what oneself does or does not have? I'm not sure happy is part of it, disapproval or dislike is perhaps much more common. >> >> e.g. I earn x. I have and receive a level of satisfaction with x. My >> satisfaction is not affected in either direction by whether you earn 1/2x or 2x. Many people gauge the value of something by using others things similar to work out that value. People's time (labour) is no different people use the worth of others (in part) to work out theirs. It's a natural reaction. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 15:36
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
>I think the 'state' will always encourage or discourage certain behaivors As it should. > I always take that as meaning telling us what to do Typically I don't. But on occasions when it tries to start "telling" then I get annoyed. Although strangely the people who are seemingly the most likely to tell me what I should or should not think or do, seem to be the ones who start off telling me how I should be free from such control. I do not use what other people earn as a criteria. I will do the best job in the world for free, I will do the worst job in the world for £1bn. My price for doing a job is largely driven by how attractive I find that job and my wish to have that job. The employers is driven by how much he wants or needs me to do it. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 15:40
UK Population growth - sooty123
|
|
> > I always take that as meaning telling us what to do >> >> Typically I don't. But on occasions when it tries to start "telling" then I get >> annoyed. >> I can't see to much between them, one more obvious one less so. >> I do not use what other people earn as a criteria. I will do the >> best job in the world for free, I will do the worst job in the >> world for £1bn. My price for doing a job is largely driven by how attractive >> I find that job and my wish to have that job. >> >> The employers is driven by how much he wants or needs me to do it. It's not wholely others but a useful gauge for many, I'm sure you'll have seen it many times. But everyone is different to work out their worth. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 15:47
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
>> I'm sure you'll have seen it many times Absolutely. I used to be a welder at Gascoignes in Reading [its a block of flats now] and the competition between people over wages came down to pennies. I never understood it. Which is not to say I didn't want more or would not have resented less, but it wasn't material to how satisfied I felt. There is a difference between fighting for more depending on what someone else is earning than the personal satisfaction that comes from comparing. Its partly a personal insecurity thing I think; To judge oneself by the achievements, behaviours or rewards of others. Last edited by: No FM2R on Thu 25 Jun 15 at 15:47
|
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 15:53
UK Population growth - sooty123
|
|
There is >> a difference between fighting for more depending on what someone else is earning than the >> personal satisfaction that comes from comparing. >> Yes can be for different reasons, I meant the former. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 15:46
UK Population growth - Cliff Pope
|
|
>> >> Which do you prefer or do you have another alternative? 3) Export older people to a country with a young population imbalance? In a smaller world with easy travel, perhaps New Bournemouth should be in India or Africa? (Tongue in cheek, of course :)) |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 15:48
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
>>In a smaller world with easy travel, perhaps New Bournemouth should be in India or Africa? So far as I can see there's every chance its already been placed in Bolivia. b***** loads of retired Brits there. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 15:54
UK Population growth - sooty123
|
| Interesting, Bolivia isn't somewhere I would think of as a retirement place for Brits. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 15:57
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
| And Costa Rica, apparently. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 15:24
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
>>Let me recommend this to you: > >>www.forumforthefuture.org/sites/default/files/project/downloads/populationweb.pdf Worth a read, although its a discussion document and should be read as such. Thanks. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 22:27
UK Population growth - Dutchie
|
|
Isn't most of the land in the U.K privately owned? Plenty of room to build more houses for people to live in.If there is a will.Yes some of our towns are overpopulated that is where the work is. This immigration argument is getting boring. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 10:36
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
>> the NHS is struggling............... Additional stress on the NHS is one of the several factors impacted by an aging population, not by immigration. What would be your approach to that? because for all you know the immigrant population may be funding that system more than they are costing it - foreigners subsidising the old and aging Brits, if you like. Or maybe not, but you should find out rather than just recycle the same old uneducated rubbish. www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_334975.pdf |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 12:53
UK Population growth - TheManWithNoName
|
| Farage never said millions of Romanians and Bulgarians would come here. He said there was the potential for them to do so because of open borders which we, despite being a sovereign nation, could no nothing about - not even against those with criminal backgrounds. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 12:54
UK Population growth - Alanovich
|
|
>> Farage never said millions of Romanians and Bulgarians would come here. He said there was >> the potential for them to do so because of open borders which we, despite being >> a sovereign nation, could no nothing about - not even against those with criminal backgrounds. >> So he said it to create fear then. Thanks. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 13:04
UK Population growth - TheManWithNoName
|
| No, he said it to highlight growing concern and unrest with issues such as NHS, schools, social interaction and many other issues which are real to many people and we are unable to control our own borders without breaching rules foistered on us by a manifestly corrupt old boys network. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 13:12
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
>>he said it to highlight growing concern and unrest Perhaps. I think I might replace "highlight" with "play on". And the rules were not "foisted" upon us, we decided to adopt the environment and all that comes with it. And now we seem to be considering not being part of it, which is equally fine. And I'm not sure which "manifestly corrupt old boys network" you might be talking about; Equally I think you don't understand the current issues; See this... www.express.co.uk/news/world/586366/Calais-migrant-crisis-UK-drivers-trapped-French-strike-targeted-stowaways Those "immigrants" are not European. If they were, they'd just get on the train. In this case there are no restrictions on border control, other than basic human rights. We can stop them all coming if we wish and if we are capable. Being part of the EU or not has no bearing on this at all. The immigration figures above; What part of them was EU immigration and what was not? Because we can already stop all the non-EU if we wish. Do you know? If not, perhaps you should find out. Or you could rely on Farage, or any other politician for that matter, to "highlight growing concern". Last edited by: No FM2R on Thu 25 Jun 15 at 13:14
|
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 15:11
UK Population growth - sooty123
|
| Is it me or has some posts gone from this thread? |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 15:15
UK Population growth - smokie
|
| Could be you, I've not edited it and I can't see anyone else has... |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 15:18
UK Population growth - sooty123
|
|
I replied to the point about '60m E Europeans' further up thread. No matter it wasn't earth shattering.
Last edited by: sooty123 on Thu 25 Jun 15 at 15:19
|
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 15:19
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
There is a Sooty one missing. There is definitely something in this forum which causes stuff to disappear. Almost as if every now and again the forum reverts to a slightly older version of its own database. Last edited by: No FM2R on Thu 25 Jun 15 at 15:20
|
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 17:25
UK Population growth - movilogo
|
|
** copy pasted from Word - so paragraph formatting lost, can't be bothered to reformat again - sorry ** Let me give my 2 pence on population growth. I migrated from India where population as well as density is very high. In fact, as of now, England’s (discarding rest of UK) population density is comparable to that of India’s. Population density in big Indian cities is extremely high. As a result, traffic is horrendous, it takes too long to reach destination, commuting is especially bad. We are at least lucky in weather aspect in UK. Yes, we don’t get that much Sun here, but being a cold country is far better than living in a hot country (and I can feel the difference). People in UK obey traffic rules in 99.99% cases. But in India people don’t. Here flashing headlight means giving way, there it means “get out of my way†(remember this – if not yet may get killed). As you approach towards London, the driving standard falls a lot. Areas where population density is high, drivers tend not to give way and seem less courteous than rest of UK. In London, if you give way to another car, you may get stuck behind a signal for 30 seconds more which will add cumulatively and you will arrive late in your destination (and often in bad mood). With higher population, your child may miss your nearest/favourite school. This means driving down further to different school, which will subtract timing from your own time and you will have less time for your own “entertainmentâ€. This will put you in bad mood. In my initial years of UK arrival, I was surprised at how much “personal space†people give here to others. Cars keep gap from other cars. People move out of your way from aisles in supermarkets. However, as population grows, people can’t afford to give space to others. Peak hours tube journey in London is not that much different from that in Mumbai. Well, there are still few differences though. In London, 99% people are well dressed and people get down/board train after it stops in station. In Mumbai, all the “transactions†are completed (on commuter trains) before the train comes to a stop. If you wait till train comes to halt, you have no chance to get it (really). If one tube is delayed in London, the next train becomes like Mumbai local. In India, government hospitals are only little bit better than morgues. Those who had money can go to private hospitals, those who don’t simply die. This will happen here when NHS gets privatised. By the way, it is same in USA too – so not really a developing world only problem. When a system is trying to meeting demand much higher than expected loads, it will crumble after some time. Say your local hospital capacity is 100 beds. Suddenly there is a cholera outbreak and there are 200 patients. How do you select 100 candidates only? Now it is first come first served. But fast forward 10 years from now. The refugees would say they are being discriminated. Some specific religious groups will claim their faiths are not being followed in NHS. Based on liberalism, there will be quotas in NHS, schools etc where these so called “deprived†people will get preference. Extremely wealthy people will buy their way. The have-nots will do riots if they are not given something. Only the middle classes will suffer as we are neither wealthy nor fight like animals. Those who have kept quiet, paid taxes all their lives will suffer the most. Did you see how people fight in supermarkets nowadays when food is reduced? I have witnessed this myself and it was featured in national newspapers recently. 10 years back it would have been unthinkable in a developed country! When large number of animals fights over limited resource, it results in dog-eats-dog situation. London has highest population density in UK and it is already in backward mode. The difference between rich and poor is growing. Search on internet about Mr Ambani’s house. He built world’s most expensive house in Mumbai, which is surrounded by slums! This is going to be future of London. Some of the most expensive areas of London is also home to some most deprived council estates. London work culture is distinctively different from that of rest in UK. Outside of M25, leaving desk at 17:00 is acceptable. Not so in London. You will find my office in the capital where people are working beyond 20:00 hours. Not that they are always working but often showing off to management how hard workers they are! This is the norm in India, China, Singapore etc. With so many migrants fighting for jobs, the work culture will only get worse. Spending more time in office means you have no time for your creativity. If you do day after day, your health will go down. Why still migrants come here if UK is so bad? Well, it is still better than 99% of the world. However, situation is getting worse. UK has already started picking up lots of problems from crowded developing countries. Most migrants, who are like me, coming via legal routes and integrating with the UK society, are very much against open door migration. This is because we can foresee what problems over population can cause as we had first-hand experience of this! It takes a long time to build something better. However, it can become bad very quickly! You may argue that aging population needs younger workers to support them. But all those young workers will become aged one day. So you need more young workers to support them again. If this loop continues then a large number of people will be fighting over limited resource again (the land area is not increasing). The govt. doesn’t care as they only want votes. If people are on benefits, they will vote in their favour. So they are interested to bring more migrations/refugees and keep a large number of people on dole. This is the reason why those in power, wants to increase rich poor division. There are a small number of intellectual people who can understand how govt is fooling them, but they are always overcome by sheer number of benefit claimants. Democracy does not difference between donkey casting vote and a lion casting vote. Politicians can sleep better if there are too many donkeys in the demography. So, in summary, over population is bad. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 17:32
UK Population growth - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> ** copy pasted from Word - so paragraph formatting lost, can't be bothered to reformat >> again - sorry ** In which case you might as well not have bothered posting. Lost will to live after first 10% Probably tl;dr anyway but certainly is without formatting. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 18:13
UK Population growth - Focusless
|
|
With a bit of formatting (as intended, I believe): Let me give my 2 pence on population growth. I migrated from India where population as well as density is very high. In fact, as of now, England’s (discarding rest of UK) population density is comparable to that of India’s. Population density in big Indian cities is extremely high. As a result, traffic is horrendous, it takes too long to reach destination, commuting is especially bad. We are at least lucky in weather aspect in UK. Yes, we don’t get that much Sun here, but being a cold country is far better than living in a hot country (and I can feel the difference). People in UK obey traffic rules in 99.99% cases. But in India people don’t. Here flashing headlight means giving way, there it means “get out of my way†(remember this – if not yet may get killed). As you approach towards London, the driving standard falls a lot. Areas where population density is high, drivers tend not to give way and seem less courteous than rest of UK. In London, if you give way to another car, you may get stuck behind a signal for 30 seconds more which will add cumulatively and you will arrive late in your destination (and often in bad mood). With higher population, your child may miss your nearest/favourite school. This means driving down further to different school, which will subtract timing from your own time and you will have less time for your own “entertainmentâ€. This will put you in bad mood. In my initial years of UK arrival, I was surprised at how much “personal space†people give here to others. Cars keep gap from other cars. People move out of your way from aisles in supermarkets. However, as population grows, people can’t afford to give space to others. Peak hours tube journey in London is not that much different from that in Mumbai. Well, there are still few differences though. In London, 99% people are well dressed and people get down/board train after it stops in station. In Mumbai, all the “transactions†are completed (on commuter trains) before the train comes to a stop. If you wait till train comes to halt, you have no chance to get it (really). If one tube is delayed in London, the next train becomes like Mumbai local. In India, government hospitals are only little bit better than morgues. Those who had money can go to private hospitals, those who don’t simply die. This will happen here when NHS gets privatised. By the way, it is same in USA too – so not really a developing world only problem. When a system is trying to meeting demand much higher than expected loads, it will crumble after some time. Say your local hospital capacity is 100 beds. Suddenly there is a cholera outbreak and there are 200 patients. How do you select 100 candidates only? Now it is first come first served. But fast forward 10 years from now. The refugees would say they are being discriminated. Some specific religious groups will claim their faiths are not being followed in NHS. Based on liberalism, there will be quotas in NHS, schools etc where these so called “deprived†people will get preference. Extremely wealthy people will buy their way. The have-nots will do riots if they are not given something. Only the middle classes will suffer as we are neither wealthy nor fight like animals. Those who have kept quiet, paid taxes all their lives will suffer the most. Did you see how people fight in supermarkets nowadays when food is reduced? I have witnessed this myself and it was featured in national newspapers recently. 10 years back it would have been unthinkable in a developed country! When large number of animals fights over limited resource, it results in dog-eats-dog situation. London has highest population density in UK and it is already in backward mode. The difference between rich and poor is growing. Search on internet about Mr Ambani’s house. He built world’s most expensive house in Mumbai, which is surrounded by slums! This is going to be future of London. Some of the most expensive areas of London is also home to some most deprived council estates. London work culture is distinctively different from that of rest in UK. Outside of M25, leaving desk at 17:00 is acceptable. Not so in London. You will find my office in the capital where people are working beyond 20:00 hours. Not that they are always working but often showing off to management how hard workers they are! This is the norm in India, China, Singapore etc. With so many migrants fighting for jobs, the work culture will only get worse. Spending more time in office means you have no time for your creativity. If you do day after day, your health will go down. Why still migrants come here if UK is so bad? Well, it is still better than 99% of the world. However, situation is getting worse. UK has already started picking up lots of problems from crowded developing countries. Most migrants, who are like me, coming via legal routes and integrating with the UK society, are very much against open door migration. This is because we can foresee what problems over population can cause as we had first-hand experience of this! It takes a long time to build something better. However, it can become bad very quickly! You may argue that aging population needs younger workers to support them. But all those young workers will become aged one day. So you need more young workers to support them again. If this loop continues then a large number of people will be fighting over limited resource again (the land area is not increasing). The govt. doesn’t care as they only want votes. If people are on benefits, they will vote in their favour. So they are interested to bring more migrations/refugees and keep a large number of people on dole. This is the reason why those in power, wants to increase rich poor division. There are a small number of intellectual people who can understand how govt is fooling them, but they are always overcome by sheer number of benefit claimants. Democracy does not difference between donkey casting vote and a lion casting vote. Politicians can sleep better if there are too many donkeys in the demography. So, in summary, over population is bad. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 18:33
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
>can't be bothered to reformat again So why should I be bothered to struggle with the format? Clearly we both have the same level of interest in what you've written. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 21:23
UK Population growth - VxFan
|
|
>> There is definitely something in this forum which causes stuff to disappear. Blame Dave. Oh, hang on. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 17:30
UK Population growth - Boxsterboy
|
|
>> Those "immigrants" are not European. If they were, they'd just get on the train. In >> this case there are no restrictions on border control, other than basic human rights. We >> can stop them all coming if we wish and if we are capable. Being part >> of the EU or not has no bearing on this at all. >> They become European if Italy, Greece or Hungary give the the right to be knowing it will move the problem out of their back yard. Then we couldn't do anything ... |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 17:45
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
>>Then we couldn't do anything But it isn't happening. That's why they're all camping at Calais. But its not so much that which bothers me, its all this spouting off by people who haven't even taken the time out to find out the situation. I don't know where they get the views that they blindly recycle, it can't just be the Daily Mail, surely. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 18:07
UK Population growth - Westpig
|
|
>> But it isn't happening. That's why they're all camping at Calais. If they've escaped persecution or abject poverty and made it to a European country, then to start with I have sympathy with their plight and you can understand someone trying to get away from whatever awfulness they had to put up with... However after that, if they wish to move from one EU country to another, they've then become economic migrants, after a better deal. We need to A, resist economic migrants and B, look at our welfare system to see if we've made it too easy (for everyone). Why do people with virtually nothing travel the whole of Europe, trying to get in here, France is a civilised country, why not stay there? The answer is of course glaringly obvious. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 18:11
UK Population growth - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> Why do people with virtually nothing travel the whole of Europe, trying to get in >> here, France is a civilised country, why not stay there? The answer is of course >> glaringly obvious. You mean most of them speak English? |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 18:15
UK Population growth - Haywain
|
|
"You mean most of them speak English?" Arguing the toss over benefit entitlement in a language that you don't speak is, I can imagine, quite difficult; at least, anywhere other than the UK. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 19:54
UK Population growth - Dog
|
|
>>You mean most of them speak English? The majority of them do apparently. Plus our economy is booming. Plus they most likely have contacts here who have already slipped in. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 20:52
UK Population growth - Westpig
|
|
>> You mean most of them speak English? >> No, our benefits system is far too generous. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 20:55
UK Population growth - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> No, our benefits system is far too generous. For Asylum seekers? Maybe, just maybe, you need to check reality against what the press say. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 21:33
UK Population growth - CGNorwich
|
|
To add a few facts to the rhetoric this is what asylum seekers are entitled to claim: www.gov.uk/asylum-support/what-youll-get |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 21:35
UK Population growth - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> To add a few facts to the rhetoric this is what asylum seekers are entitled >> to claim: >> >> www.gov.uk/asylum-support/what-youll-get Or www.refugeecouncil.org.uk/policy_research/the_truth_about_asylum/facts_about_asylum_-_page_1 |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 21:40
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
Assuming we are talking about non-EU citizens; Its not a question of how much; Paying them a little bit doesn't make it better. All or nothing, in or out. If they are a genuine asylum seeker who has fled life threatening oppression and danger and escaped to the UK, and if their entrance is accepted, then they should receive a suitable amount. We should not mistreat them or worry about the odd £5. If they are not a genuine asylum seeker, they shouldn't get a damn thing and should be subject to a normal visa application process which can only be done from outside the country. and then pushed out. And if they came in on a particular truck, then that truck company is responsible for the cost of shipping them out. Ditto ferry companies, airlines and train services. You watch those trucks get sealed up when it starts costing significant money. The other side is the whinging minnies need to shut up if its an XFactor contestant who gets kicked out or if they think the Border Controls are too expensive. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 22:29
UK Population growth - Westpig
|
|
>> >> No, our benefits system is far too generous. >> >> For Asylum seekers? >> >> Maybe, just maybe, you need to check reality against what the press say. >> You'll need to think about this for a moment. Why is there a queue of people in Calais, most of whom have travelled the length and breadth of Europe... to get here? Why haven't they stayed in Italy or France or wherever? If you were to consider the arguement that they might have relatives / friends here, who travelled in similar circs in the past, why did they come here? The answer is they think we are Treasure Island. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 22:42
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
Our benefits do not seem to be over generous insofar as financial payment to an individual is concerned. They do seem to be paid to too many people Consequently i think we do not to adjust the payment amount, we need to change the payment criteria. Last edited by: No FM2R on Thu 25 Jun 15 at 22:43
|
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 22:50
UK Population growth - sooty123
|
|
Interesting that this seems to revolve around the benefits issue, but I'd bet most of them come here because they think they can get a job. Working cash in hand somewhere. As to questions as to why don't think stay in france many do they end up all over Europe. I read the other day more end up in Hungary than in italy, just because some end up here doesn't mean they all are. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 23:48
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
Firstly let us remember that the report which started this thread was discussing *legal* immigration. The mess in Calais is largely attempts at illegal immigration. I would imagine that most legal immigration is not a particular drain on the country; they're legal, they're doing things the right way, they probably pay taxes and work and all that sort of stuff. No doubt there are a few dodgy ones, but I doubt its much of an issue. Illegal immigrants are another matter. Unacceptable. There should be enforced rulings that say, you can apply to come here, you can some here openly and ask to stay, but if you try to get in we will stop you, take your finger prints, you will get nothing and we will kick you out to the country you came from - usually France. In truth, I doubt that illegals do get much in the way of benefits when they do get in. Ok, some do, but not any significant amount. The illegals come here to work for cash, steal or con, or otherwise live below the horizon. I have to carry, at all times, a docket which shows I am in Chile legally. If I do not carry it, I will be arrested until I produce it. If it is in my house, then it is my responsibility to find someone to bring it to me. I will still be fined for not carrying it, and if I was driving my car will be taken. If I cannot produce it, even if I just lost it, I will be deported. I could not get a phone, not even Prepaid, I could not go to any government building or service, I cannot buy a motor vehicle, or a flight ticket, cable or satellite, I cannot have a bank account or any utility supply, I cannot rent anywhere or do anything without that proof of legal presence. You literally can do NOTHING here without your ID card. I suspect that it is the lack of bureaucracy and enforcement in the UK which makes it attractive. You can do what you like; buy a car, rent a place, get a Blockbuster card, get a bank account etc. etc. Just lie, no documentation required. France, Germany, Spain, Italy? Bureaucracy and ID cards. But, the Daily Mail knows that nobody wants ID cards. Nobody wants ID checks. Because its wrong and unreasonable. Last edited by: No FM2R on Thu 25 Jun 15 at 23:49
|
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 00:27
UK Population growth - Dutchie
|
|
It is a massive humanitarian problem and it isn't going away.Many countries are in turmoil and people are scared and they run. I agree about the lack of bureaucracy in the U.K. Talking about I.D cards.I still have a photo of my mothers I.D.card which she got with the German compliment.She hated the cards and talked about big brother watching. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 07:16
UK Population growth - Zero
|
|
>> The answer is they think we are Treasure Island. They do, that is why they come here. They have no proof however that is the case. I bet none of the 3K camped in France trying to get here know anyone here. There is this story going around, like a myth, in certain countries that a: getting in here is easy: and b: once here their lives will be perfect. One point in all this Calais furore. There are, reportedly 3k camped there trying to get in to the UK. There are, reportedly 100k who have entered the EU. Seems like only 3% think we are good enough! |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 13:50
UK Population growth - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> You'll need to think about this for a moment. >> >> Why is there a queue of people in Calais, most of whom have travelled the >> length and breadth of Europe... to get here? >> >> Why haven't they stayed in Italy or France or wherever? Large numbers have gone to Germany and Sweden and I suspect many, many individuals remain in Italy. France, for all I love the place, does not do well on tolerance of minorities. They're not exactly rushing to offer shelter to those in Calais. Others, entering southern France from Italy are being sent back. Article here gives some numbers in relation to those leaving Syria taken in by European nations. www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/jan/29/where-are-the-syrian-refugees-going Meanwhile in Lebanon one in four of the population are refugees. Not much different in Turkey's border zone. >> If you were to consider the arguement that they might have relatives / friends here, >> who travelled in similar circs in the past, why did they come here? >> >> The answer is they think we are Treasure Island. Alternatively, there are historic links with the Indian sub continent, English is the world's second language and our economy is sucking in labour. Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 26 Jun 15 at 13:54
|
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 13:54
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
>>Others, entering southern France from Italy are being sent back. Which ought to prevent France complaining about us sending people back to them. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 18:21
UK Population growth - Zero
|
|
>> >> But it isn't happening. That's why they're all camping at Calais. >> >> If they've escaped persecution or abject poverty and made it to a European country, then >> to start with I have sympathy with their plight and you can understand someone trying >> to get away from whatever awfulness they had to put up with... As soon as anyone has made it to Europe, they should no longer able to claim asylum in the UK and any claims lodged here should be rejected out of hand. The reason is simple, as westie says they have reached a place of safety, and moving anywhere else is merely a choice, not a matter of life or death. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 09:59
UK Population growth - sooty123
|
|
>> As soon as anyone has made it to Europe, they should no longer able to >> claim asylum in the UK and any claims lodged here should be rejected out of >> hand. The reason is simple, as westie says they have reached a place of safety, >> and moving anywhere else is merely a choice, not a matter of life or death. I'm sure that's true of the theory but the political realities are somewhat different. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 10:51
UK Population growth - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> >> and moving anywhere else is merely a choice, not a matter of life or >> death. >> >> I'm sure that's true of the theory but the political realities are somewhat different. Spot on. You cannot, for obvious reasons, send those who've carried on to Calais, back to the political situation from which they fled. The only option is to send them back to the 'first safe country'. That's not practical politics either. We either cope with these people and disperse them round Europe abd/or other safe countries OR establish decent facilities nearer home where there is a prospect of repatriation if/when stability returns to Iraq/Syria. The fact, contrary to myths and lies in UK media, is that we're not pulling our weight. Germany and Sweden have taken the lion's share so far. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 13:30
UK Population growth - Westpig
|
|
>> The fact, contrary to myths and lies in UK media, is that we're not pulling >> our weight. Germany and Sweden have taken the lion's share so far. >> We might not be in this sphere... but we very much do in other ways e.g. when our military step up to the plate. So IMO it should all be evened out. Which means if country 'x' didn't send much when a lot of other countries stood up and helped in Bosnia / Iraq / Afghanistan / wherever.... then they can have our share of refugees now. Isn't that what friendships and unions is all about? |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 13:34
UK Population growth - Westpig
|
|
>> >> The fact, contrary to myths and lies in UK media, is that we're not >> pulling >> >> our weight. Looking at these figures, we are more than pulling our weight: tinyurl.com/npxahzy What figures are you looking at? |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 13:52
UK Population growth - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> tinyurl.com/npxahzy >> >> What figures are you looking at? Much the same ones. Look at Germany and Sweden, the latter a much smaller country (by population) than UK. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 16:24
UK Population growth - Westpig
|
|
>> Much the same ones. Look at Germany and Sweden, the latter a much smaller country >> (by population) than UK. >> So one country over performs, by some margin...and that means in your book ours isn't stepping up to the plate? The figures are about right when you consider we trail Germany and France by population, land size and GDP. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 13:53
UK Population growth - Zero
|
|
>> >> >> The fact, contrary to myths and lies in UK media, is that we're >> not >> >> pulling >> >> >> our weight. >> >> Looking at these figures, we are more than pulling our weight: >> >> tinyurl.com/npxahzy >> >> What figures are you looking at? Probably ones more recent than that. Its indesputable that in the current crisis washing over the Med other EU countries are taking our share, because we are in fact, taking none of them. However, there is one aspect that should not be overlooked, we have taken more than our fair share of legal EU migrant workers, in effect making room for the current asylum seekers hitting mainland Europe. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 13:41
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
France should deal with them. These are not families or refugees, these are all young men whose motives I suspect. I said months and months ago, we should make legal application quick and easy and stamp hard on illegal. The number of people in Calais is tiny - 2,000 out of a lot of 000's - but its as good a place as any to start. Make a place in Calais where someone can go and apply for entry to the UK. Make it quick and easy. They can wait where they are - in this case France - while the *quick* process takes place. Approve and let in those that you should - essentially refugees or normal visas. Reject, repel and then ignore those that you have rejected, they are France's problem. If France doesn't like that, then France needs to look at its own border arrangements. If they wish to appeal they can do it from France. Strengthen the border. Illegals found should be DNAd, printed and expelled. If they are illegal in the face of a quick and easy visa application process, then sympathy seems unnecessary. Any vehicle found carrying an illegal should have the owner fined on an escalating basis and the owner responsible for the removal of the illegal. (British Airways check your US visa in Heathrow. Why? Because of the nasty fine if they take you to the US and you are refused admission). Employers should be required to check status. Anybody employing an illegal should be fined - badly. Any immigrant committing a crime over a certain level should be deported. i.e. mugging, drug dealing, burglary, rape etc. are not ok. I'd prefer the UK implemented ID cards. I think the objections are silly and the advantages are huge. But it seems to be a big emotional issue for some reason. We're a little b***** island, how hard can it be? Expensive perhaps, but hard? Last edited by: No FM2R on Fri 26 Jun 15 at 13:44
|
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 14:49
UK Population growth - sooty123
|
|
>> They can wait where they are - in this case France - while the *quick* >> process takes place. Hmm not too sure who happy the french would be about that. >> Any vehicle found carrying an illegal should have the owner fined on an escalating basis >> and the owner responsible for the removal of the illegal. I think that already happens. >> >> Employers should be required to check status. Anybody employing an illegal should be fined - >> badly. I think that already happens. >> We're a little b***** island, how hard can it be? Expensive perhaps, but hard? >> Politically very, If we want to set up some sort of visa centre in France, what are we going to give them to get them to agree. Bearing in mind this sort of thing isn't done in isolation. For example the PM is trying to get all the EU countries onboard to redo the EU rules and regs, best not to upset them if you want a favour off them. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 14:59
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
>> They can wait where they are - in this case France - while the >> *quick* process takes place. > > Hmm not too sure who happy the french would be about that. So what? They cannot force us to take them, and if they don;t like it then they should address their own border approach. > Any vehicle found carrying an illegal should have the owner fined on an escalating > basis and the owner responsible for the removal of the illegal. > >> I think that already happens. I don't think so. >> We're a little b***** island, how hard can it be? Expensive perhaps, but hard? > > Politically very. Not really. Its only a question of doing it. >>If we want to set up some sort of visa centre in France, what are we going to give them >>to get them to agree. I don't think it would be difficult. Why would they refuse? And we already have an immigration office presence there. >>For example the PM is trying to get all the EU countries onboard to redo the EU rules >>and regs, best not to upset them if you want a favour off them. I am strangely unconcerned about that. A bit of strength would be good, I think. The way the EU is going is not good four us, and if it will continue in that direction i think it will increasingly become something that we should be out of. If it becomes something a bit different, then perhaps we should be part of it. That "something different" ought to include a better approach to immigration. Such as joining in and helping resolve the immigration issues we believe we face. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 15:12
UK Population growth - Zero
|
|
nd the owner responsible for the removal of the illegal. >> > >> >> I think that already happens. >> >> I don't think so. It does sort of - 900 truck drivers fined in 2014, but not responsible for shipping them back. How can you, France wont take them. Last edited by: Zero on Fri 26 Jun 15 at 15:13
|
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 15:18
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
>>900 truck drivers fined in 2014, Fining the truck drivers is perhaps one step. But significantly fining either the trucking company or whoever had contracted that truck would focus the minds. As for repatriating them, then if one has decided that they are not refugees or asylum seekers, then there would appear to be no reason not to ship them home. If they *are* in danger at home, then perhaps we should be accepting them. Last edited by: No FM2R on Fri 26 Jun 15 at 15:18
|
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 15:19
UK Population growth - sooty123
|
|
>> So what? They cannot force us to take them, and if they don;t like it >> then they should address their own border approach. >> Like I said other issues, and I don't just mean the EU redoing the rules and regs. Telling your neighbours to poke it isn't the best idea. >> I don't think so. www.fleetpoint.org/fleet-industry-news/news-by-date/immigrant-stowaways-battled-smartwitness/19024/ £2000 per person, April 2014. >> I don't think it would be difficult. Why would they refuse? And we already have >> an immigration office presence there. I think there might be a difference between an office presence and effectively creating a pull to keep II in the local area. Don't think the locals would be too impressed. >> |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 18:29
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
>>However after that, if they wish to move from one EU country to another, they've then become economic migrants, after a better deal. Fair enough. Do you think though, that we should expect the closest "good" country to the "bad" country to pick up all the "refugees", or that all "good" countries should do their bit, irrespective of EU membership? Do we think its just tough on the guys closest? But you do have a point; I wonder why there is not an intermediate level of citizenship. As in, you;ve been accepted as a citizen of XXX, but you;re only a citizen of the EU after xxx years. Before that, you need to apply for a visa. There are several levels of citizenship with different rights, for sure. Daughter No. 1 was born in Rio. She has a British passport (and Chilean and Brazilian) and is British by descent, she has all the same rights as I do, except one. If in the future she has a child outside the UK, then that child will not automatically be a British Citizen. So if that kind of clause is available, then it is surely not beyond the wit to say that a visa does not extend full "EU Rights". Although its probably inescapable that for any future children born to them, full EU rights would apply to the child. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 19:26
UK Population growth - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> Do you think though, that we should expect the closest "good" country to the "bad" >> country to pick up all the "refugees", or that all "good" countries should do their >> bit, irrespective of EU membership? If, hypothetically, the refugees were coming in millions from Ireland, or more particularly a culturally alien state witihn hailing distance of GB's west coast, I suspect WP and Z would be whistling a different tune. Even in 'normal' times expecting the countries closest to pick up all the refugees would be absurd. And we're not in normal times. The civil wars in Iraq, Syria and Libya plus ongoing conflicts in north east Africa means the world is facing a refugee/displaced person crisis on biggest scale sine 1945. It needs concerted action at level of not just EU but UN, OAU etc. The response from our own government and those of other EU countries is pathetic. Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Thu 25 Jun 15 at 19:27
|
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 19:40
UK Population growth - Zero
|
|
>> If, hypothetically, the refugees were coming in millions from Ireland, or more particularly a culturally >> alien state witihn hailing distance of GB's west coast, I suspect WP and Z would >> be whistling a different tune. Even in 'normal' times expecting the countries closest to pick >> up all the refugees would be absurd. It does not alter the fact that asylum should only be claimed as soon as you reach "safety" If, say they reach italy from somalia, they then smuggle themselves to the uk, we should send them back to somalia, because clearly they are not genuine asylum seekers. "I get more money in england" don't cut it. Last edited by: Zero on Thu 25 Jun 15 at 19:43
|
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 19:45
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
There's two different things here; Firstly, its quite correct, you can only claim asylum when you're leaving danger. Leaving somewhere just because you'd rather be somewhere else is not asylum seeking. Clearly that second move should not come with any rights or privs, you just apply for a visa and get one or don't. For that reason, when claiming asylum, you should not get full EU privs, you should just get rights in the country that accepted you. It also begs the question as to why Italy, France and whoever are not compelled to either accept their application or push them back from whence they came. I don't think there's any part of the law which allows you to simply ignore them while they move on elsewhere. Secondly, and a whole 'nother subject, is whether or not countries should *offer* places to some currently in the state they sought asylum in, to lessen the burden on that first State. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 19:59
UK Population growth - Zero
|
|
>> Secondly, and a whole 'nother subject, is whether or not countries should *offer* places to >> some currently in the state they sought asylum in, to lessen the burden on that >> first State. Yes tis a whole different thing. We have chosen not to offer a burden outlet. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 19:47
UK Population growth - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> If, say they reach italy from somalia, they then smuggle themselves to the uk, >> we should send them back to somalia, because clearly they are not genuine asylum seekers. Why not? How does Italy cope. >> "I get more money in england" don't cut it. It would help if we tackled the myths punted by UK media. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 19:57
UK Population growth - Zero
|
|
>> >> If, say they reach italy from somalia, they then smuggle themselves to the uk, >> >> we should send them back to somalia, because clearly they are not genuine asylum >> seekers. >> >> Why not? How does Italy cope. what does "italy not coping" have to do with if they are genuine asylum seekers? >> It would help if we tackled the myths punted by UK media. There are no myths, the facts speak for themselves, we, the Uk, class mainland Europe as "safe" You can't claim asylum from somewhere else in Europe, ask Julian Very Strange. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 20:43
UK Population growth - Westpig
|
|
>> If, hypothetically, the refugees were coming in millions from Ireland, or more particularly a culturally >> alien state witihn hailing distance of GB's west coast, I suspect WP and Z would >> be whistling a different tune. Even in 'normal' times expecting the countries closest to pick >> up all the refugees would be absurd. I think there should be a level playing field within the EU or NATO or whatever agreement structure we are talking about... So that would mean that Italy that finds itself swamped by refugees might call upon other nations within their agreement to shoulder a more equal burden... as we would in your hypothetical Irish difficulty. However, as part of that parity, I would want to factor in such things as: 'how much did you contribute to the last war that NATO / G8 / EU thought appropriate'?... Ah, next to sod all I see... well go and poke it for us taking some of your refugees then. However, I also think that the UK should not be that closely aligned to the EU and much above a common market we shouldn't have signed up to and the way forward would be less ties with the EU, in which case we should act more like Australia with a refugee issue. So bottom line is we should, within signed agreements, be shouldering our burden, but only if others do likewise (not just for refugee problems, but across the whole spectrum) and longer term we should loosen those ties anyway. I do though think generally you have missed the point. The current refugee problem in Calais has people in a civilised, prosperous EU country (France) wishing to move to another one(UK), that problem is not simply a refugee problem it is an economic migrant problem. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 21:06
UK Population growth - Zero
|
|
>> However, as part of that parity, I would want to factor in such things as: >> 'how much did you contribute to the last war that NATO / G8 / EU >> thought appropriate'?... Ah, next to sod all I see... well go and poke it for >> us taking some of your refugees then. So its ok for us to take the major role in destabilising the areas the refugees come from then? In my book we would have a much better moral case if we could turn round and say "It wasn't us that caused the problem - so we are not helping out with the aftermath" Alas we we are in the "we helped to cause it, but we are not clearing up the mess" camp. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 21:19
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
>>In my book we would have a much better moral case if we could turn round and say "It >>wasn't us that caused the problem - so we are not helping out with the aftermath" Well, "less bad" certainly, I think "much better" might be stretching it. >>Alas we we are in the "we helped to cause it, but we are not clearing up the mess" camp. We are, and we shouldn't be. As you say, the worst of positions. But what do you do when there is something bad going on? e.g. Bad people stomping all over bits of the world. People in here were applauding individuals going to fight IS, were advocating going and giving them a good slap, etc. etc. And this was often reflected in the tabloid media. And sadly politicians are driven by the tabloid reflection of the electorate, so off we go and get involved in one thing after another. It never works out very well. The difficulty can be summed up with another example; "illegal immigrants should be thrown out. They should not get benefits." that's pretty much the Daily Mail battle cry I think. Well, unless they look attractive, enter X-Factor and sing quite well. And then the Daily Mail is up in arms at the British Government trying to throw her out. How in God's name do we achieve a decent and consistent approach when opinions move like that? |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 18:31
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
>>We need to A, resist economic migrants and B, look at our welfare system to see if we've made it too easy (for everyone). Absolutely. And as far as I can see, as long as you apply the same benefit rules to your own citizens as you do to other EU citizens, then largely you're ok. And if that is not the EU approach, then it should be ours anyway. I can see nothing wrong in applying any test to any foreign national that you already apply to your own nationals. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 18:18
UK Population growth - Zero
|
|
>> Farage never said millions of Romanians and Bulgarians would come here. He said there was >> the potential for them to do so because of open borders which we, despite being >> a sovereign nation, could no nothing about - not even against those with criminal backgrounds. Err no. There was no fudging about potential, he said, many times, they were actually coming. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 19:16
UK Population growth - Londoner
|
|
Farage's claim: Ukip previously suggested 750,000 people in Romania and Bulgaria were planning to move to the UK in 2013/14, claiming its figure came from a BBC survey ampp3d.mirror.co.uk/2014/01/13/why-nigel-farages-5-million-migrants-warning-is-out-of-step-with-reality/ Actual figures from ONS: There has been a lot of public interest in Bulgarian and Romanian (EU2) migration to the UK, following the end of transitional employment restrictions on 1 January 2014. These restrictions had previously placed limits on the kind of employment Bulgarian and Romanian citizens could undertake in the UK. Latest figures for the year ending December 2014 show that 46,000 EU2 citizens migrated to the UK. This represents 8% of total immigration to the UK. www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/migration1/migration-statistics-quarterly-report/may-2015/sty-eu2.html 750,000 versus 46,000. Something of an overestimate by Nigel. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 20:26
UK Population growth - Roger.
|
|
The Aussies just turn 'em round, I believe. Apparently the people smugglers/ gangsters are finding it hard to get customers nowadays, when those customers know there's a good chance they won't reach their chosen land of milk and honey. |
|
New Thu 25 Jun 15 22:31
UK Population growth - Dutchie
|
|
Nice people the Aussies.They treat the aborigenes like a lower class talk about apartheid. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 14:12
UK Population growth - Old Navy
|
|
>> The Aussies just turn 'em round, I believe. >> Apparently the people smugglers/ gangsters are finding it hard to get customers nowadays, when those >> customers know there's a good chance they won't reach their chosen land of milk and >> honey. >> The Aussies have it sussed, they pick up the boats and deliver their contens to an offshore island where there is basic accommodation and administrative processing. Then they ship them off to island nations in the south Pacific. If a boat manages to make it to the mainland the army pick them up and off to the island they go. www.theweek.co.uk/world-news/57369/immigration-riot-australias-asylum-seeker-policy-illegal Last edited by: Old Navy on Fri 26 Jun 15 at 14:14
|
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 14:47
UK Population growth - smokie
|
| "The policy has been criticised by the UN as inhumane and illegal. " |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 14:55
UK Population growth - Old Navy
|
| But it works. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 14:57
UK Population growth - smokie
|
| So would execution... |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 15:02
UK Population growth - Old Navy
|
|
You may think that execution is the answer but not really a practical one. Is it any different to to the EU moving economic immigrants to the smaller EU countries? Not that they are likely to stay there. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 15:11
UK Population growth - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> But it works. Does it? It may keep the illegals off the streets of Sydney or Melbourne but boats are still attempting the crossing. And as Smokie says an inhumane policy cannot be justified just because it seems to work. Racism is still pretty rife in Australia. Dutchie mentions treatment of Aboriginals and Oz politicians say stuff that would rightly put them beyond the pale here. Only last week I was talking to a former Civil Service colleague, a black Brit of Caribbean extraction. We were remembering an Australian women named Alix, taken on from an agency to do some publicity stuff for us. Made herself singularly unpopular due various reasons including outspoken views and unwillingness to co-operate with others. We let her go after 10 days. The extra bit I heard for first time last week was that this woman had gone for drink after work with colleague mentioned above and mixed race Australian lawyer. Both left drinks unfinished after Alix's repeated use of word 'wog'. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 15:19
UK Population growth - Old Navy
|
|
Australians don't "get" PC. They speak their mind. Most tone it down when here when they suss us out, some don't. When you have seen the aboriginal problems there first hand you might understand, don't judge them by our standards.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Fri 26 Jun 15 at 15:22
|
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 15:38
UK Population growth - Zero
|
|
>> Australians don't "get" PC. They speak their mind. Most tone it down when here when >> they suss us out, some don't. When you have seen the aboriginal problems there first >> hand you might understand, don't judge them by our standards. Not sure the abos had any problems till the white man commeth.... |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 15:49
UK Population growth - Old Navy
|
| I am sure they didn't, any more than the indigenous Americans, or any of the many others that the British Empire exploited. What is your answer to the problem? |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 16:06
UK Population growth - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> I am sure they didn't, any more than the indigenous Americans, or any of the >> many others that the British Empire exploited. What is your answer to the problem? What is the problem? Your post at 15:19 implied that it was the Aborigines rather than the white man - 'don't judge them by our standards'. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 16:19
UK Population growth - Old Navy
|
|
The European and aboriginal cultures are a poor match. Think of it like London and the Romanians sleeping on the streets with no legal means of support. And frequent addiction to alcohol.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Fri 26 Jun 15 at 16:19
|
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 15:23
UK Population growth - Londoner
|
|
@Bromptonaut We need, of course, to split "Asylum Seekers" from "Economic migrants". The former are historically relatively small numbers, and there are internationally agreed views on their case being a humanitarian one based on genuine fears for personal safety. The real issue is around the numbers of "Economic migrants" which is at a high enough level to alarm the EU countries. What's your proposed solution to the current issue with economic migrants coming into EU countries? Imagine that you are the Dictator in charge of the EU, and your word is law. :-) Last edited by: Londoner on Fri 26 Jun 15 at 15:24
|
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 15:36
UK Population growth - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> We need, of course, to split "Asylum Seekers" from "Economic migrants". The former are historically >> relatively small numbers, and there are internationally agreed views on their case being a humanitarian >> one based on genuine fears for personal safety. The key word there is historically. There are now very large numbers of people on the move from the Levant, Libya and various countries in NE Africa which are riven by conflict amounting to Civil War. They are likely to meet the agreed humanitarian definition based on fear of persecution etc. So first of all you have a process for separating the genuine refugee sheep from the economic migrant goats. You might also through UN, OAU etc try to make provision for refugees nearer home and ensure those trying to travel to the west understand the reality of the journey. There was a piece on the radio recently pointing out that or every migrant death on the Med several more dies crossing the Sahara. I've no problem with idea of flying those who are genuine 'illegals' home provided home is safe. If it's not then they're refugees. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 15:45
UK Population growth - Londoner
|
|
>> >> I've no problem with idea of flying those who are genuine 'illegals' home provided home >> is safe. If it's not then they're refugees. >> I pretty much agree with what you said. One factor that people forget about genuine asylum seekers, especially those fleeing war zones, is that they often want to go back and help rebuild their country of origin once the immediate crisis has passed. As for the "illegals"/"refugees" an awful lot hinges on how we define "safe". There is a bigger picture here which requires truly hard decisions to be made, but originates from the fact that the planet does not have enough resources to sustain all of our "needs", never mind all of our "wants". (And the elephant in the room is overpopulation) |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 15:52
UK Population growth - Old Navy
|
|
You have the key word Londoner, "Resources". If us humans don't become extinct through a natural event, starvation will kill us off. Last edited by: Old Navy on Fri 26 Jun 15 at 15:54
|
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 16:39
UK Population growth - Westpig
|
|
>> I've no problem with idea of flying those who are genuine 'illegals' home provided home >> is safe. If it's not then they're refugees. >> What is 'safe'? Most normal people's definition would be entirely different from some slime ball with an extensive criminal history trying his best not to be expelled. The courts have been full of them, hence the ECHR difficulties. Oh sorry, I forgot, it's just the tabloids stirring it. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 17:30
UK Population growth - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> Most normal people's definition would be entirely different from some slime ball with an extensive >> criminal history trying his best not to be expelled. >> >> The courts have been full of them, hence the ECHR difficulties. >> >> Oh sorry, I forgot, it's just the tabloids stirring it. I was talking about people who come here and are or are not adjudged refugees. People we'd like to send back but cannot because of ther ECHR rights (usually family life rather than fear of persecution) is another story. And the whole point of Human Rights is that they're indivisible. And no of course the press wouldn't stir it by presenting one or two egregious/exceptional cases as typical . No never, Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 26 Jun 15 at 17:30
|
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 17:50
UK Population growth - Westpig
|
|
>> And no of course the press wouldn't stir it by presenting one or two egregious/exceptional >> cases as typical . No never, >> I am glad the press give it 'extensive coverage' / 'stir it'... depending on your political leanings. It highlights the abuse that needs to be stamped out. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 17:56
UK Population growth - Westpig
|
|
>> I was talking about people who come here and are or are not adjudged refugees. >> >> >> People we'd like to send back but cannot because of ther ECHR rights (usually family >> life rather than fear of persecution) is another story. And the whole point of Human >> Rights is that they're indivisible. So on Planet Bromptonaut, no one would go back. The reason being, it would never be 'safe' in the eyes of a human rights lawyer and a system whereby free legal cover is provided to fight as long as you wish... so whatever legislation covered it would be overruled by the ECHR... and if your country of origin could prove it was 'safe', you'd just grab the nearest trollop and get her up the duff, which is what goes on now. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 18:09
UK Population growth - sooty123
|
|
> The reason being, it would never be 'safe' in the eyes of a human rights >> lawyer and a system whereby free legal cover is provided to fight as long as >> you wish... so whatever legislation covered it would be overruled by the ECHR... and if >> your country of origin could prove it was 'safe', you'd just grab the nearest trollop >> and get her up the duff, which is what goes on now. >> How many is that an example of ? |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 20:14
UK Population growth - Westpig
|
|
>> How many is that an example of ? >> No idea. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 21:02
UK Population growth - sooty123
|
|
>> >> How many is that an example of ? >> >> >> >> No idea. Ahh right, if you don't know the number how can you know if it's a real issue. What if it were 1 per year? Last edited by: sooty123 on Fri 26 Jun 15 at 21:02
|
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 22:07
UK Population growth - Westpig
|
|
>> Ahh right, if you don't know the number how can you know if it's >> a real issue. What if it were 1 per year? If it were 1 per year i'd agree with you it wouldn't be a problem. It isn't. It is considerably more than that, it is a known phenomena within my last career. I don't know the exact numbers. ... and as an aside, I know someone, down here, who has a family member in that situation, a most unpleasant tale whereby the girl involved, although an adult has a mental age of a youngish child and the now increasingly older parents have to care for their unexpected grandchild... and had to pay out a fortune for custody hearings, whilst the other side was on Legal Aid.. with the knowledge that matey now has his 'stay in Britain' card nicely sorted. North African asylum seeker. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 22:08
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
>>with the knowledge that matey now has his 'stay in Britain' card nicely sorted. You know who started that? Ronnie Biggs in Brasil. Exactly how he managed to remain there. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 22:18
UK Population growth - sooty123
|
|
>> >> Ronnie Biggs in Brasil. Exactly how he managed to remain there. >> It was reported here in the UK (and I also thought) it was because he had citizenship and the gov of Brazil didn' ship 'their own' overseas for trial? |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 22:40
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
No, knocked up a girl, had a child, got to stay until she was 16. From wikipedia, but there are several other sources as well...... "In 1974, Daily Express reporter Colin MacKenzie received information suggesting that Biggs was in Rio de Janeiro; a team consisting of MacKenzie, photographer Bill Lovelace and reporter Michael O'Flaherty confirmed this and broke the story. Scotland Yard detective Jack Slipper arrived soon afterwards, but Biggs could not be extradited because his girlfriend, nightclub dancer Raimunda de Castro, was pregnant. Brazilian law at the time did not allow a parent of a Brazilian child to be extradited" He was not a Brazilian citizen, just an awful man. Last edited by: No FM2R on Fri 26 Jun 15 at 22:41
|
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 22:43
UK Population growth - sooty123
|
|
>> No, knocked up a girl, had a child, got to stay until she was 16. >> Ahh right, I think I must have remembered it wrong. Thanks. Last edited by: sooty123 on Fri 26 Jun 15 at 22:44
|
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 22:16
UK Population growth - sooty123
|
|
> If it were 1 per year i'd agree with you it wouldn't be a problem. >> It isn't. >> >> It is considerably more than that, it is a known phenomena within my last career. >> I don't know the exact numbers. I'm not being a clever a*** when I ask. I don't know either, I just think we need to know the scale of the issue before we worry to much about tackling it. The case you outline is very subjective, we might end running round after a hand full of cases. until the number is known, then if it is even solveable, it's vague issue at best. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 22:17
UK Population growth - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> ... and as an aside, I know someone, down here, who has a family member >> in that situation, a most unpleasant tale whereby the girl involved, although an adult has >> a mental age of a youngish child and the now increasingly older parents have to >> care for their unexpected grandchild... We need to unpick the issues here. Firstly, the unexpected grandchild could equally well have been fathered by a ne'er do well from Devonport. Controlling the fertility of the mentally incapacitated is another thread. Secondly, has 'matey's' stay in Britain card actually been sorted or is that just an assumption? |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 22:33
UK Population growth - Westpig
|
|
>> Secondly, has 'matey's' stay in Britain card actually been sorted or is that just an >> assumption? >> Yes. I can't really go into too much more detail, because someone has shared the yarn with me and there's a lot more to it. It's not really my place to disclose it all on a public forum, suffice to say it's not nice. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 22:34
UK Population growth - Westpig
|
|
>> Firstly, the unexpected grandchild could equally well have been fathered by a ne'er do well >> from Devonport. Controlling the fertility of the mentally incapacitated is another thread. Quite agree..it's just that we were talking about asylum seekers on this thread.. not the average inhabitant of Devonport. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 17:59
UK Population growth - Zero
|
|
>> The courts have been full of them, hence the ECHR difficulties. Think you will find our courts are mostly full of our own home grown scroats. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 18:02
UK Population growth - Westpig
|
|
>> Think you will find our courts are mostly full of our own home grown scroats. >> Quite agree, even more of a reason why we don't need anyone else's. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 16:26
UK Population growth - Armel Coussine
|
|
>> left drinks unfinished after Alix's repeated use of word 'wog'. Pity to waste a drink even in distasteful company. A contemporary at school in Ceylon used that term, wog, to describe the Sinhalese and Tamil natives of the place. His father was a Colombo businessman or 'commercial'. Even at nine or ten I recognized it as vulgar and racist, although I had never heard the term 'racist'. My parents were very down on vulgar racial epithets and never used them. My father used to call the locals 'the locals', which is a morally neutral term. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 16:59
UK Population growth - Westpig
|
|
>> The extra bit I heard for first time last week was that this woman had >> gone for drink after work with colleague mentioned above and mixed race Australian lawyer. Both >> left drinks unfinished after Alix's repeated use of word 'wog'. >> So that's one whole country done down... for allowing one opinionated member to escape and try to join the British civil service. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 17:26
UK Population growth - Bromptonaut
|
|
> So that's one whole country done down... for allowing one opinionated member to escape and >> try to join the British civil service. It was an example - consistent with what's said above about Ozzies not getting PC. We had a constant Australian presence in the office from 2002 until 2010/11. Others told stories of their countrymen's views. IIRC another was 'reminded' about diversity policies following some iffy comments but cannot recall exact detail. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 18:25
UK Population growth - Old Navy
|
| There is a simple answer to the criminals who want the human right to a family, deport their family with them. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 20:01
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
Bromp, I've replied to this note of yours, not because its connected, but I cannot find the one where you mentioned this subject; Under EU law, illegal immigrants may be deported to their first known point of entry into the EU bloc. EU law means that as a minimum they can be sent back to France, although I have no idea of the level of required proof. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 20:19
UK Population growth - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> Under EU law, illegal immigrants may be deported to their first known point of entry >> into the EU bloc. Thanks. When posting earlier I couldn't remember whether it was EU or wishful thinking by Jack Straw when he was Home Sec enshrined in UK legislation. It might have made sense ten years ago when asylum was largely an issue of hundreds per month people on planes. It won't stand up now when people arrive by boat in thousands per week to Italy and Greece. I reiterate point I made yesterday. Those advocating the 'asylum at point of entry or not at all' schtick would change their tune pretty quick if the conflict was off the UK's coast. Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 26 Jun 15 at 20:20
|
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 20:22
UK Population growth - Zero
|
|
> >> I reiterate point I made yesterday. Those advocating the 'asylum at point of entry or >> not at all' schtick would change their tune pretty quick if the conflict was off >> the UK's coast. Its not, so please do stop trying to throw non events in to the mix. Its like saying "what happens if Mars explodes and they all land in Thetford" |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 21:08
UK Population growth - sooty123
|
|
> Its not, so please do stop trying to throw non events in to the mix. >> Its like saying "what happens if Mars explodes and they all land in Thetford" >> In fairness it's the principle. are we open to helping other countries in the eu? |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 21:10
UK Population growth - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> Its not, so please do stop trying to throw non events in to the mix. It's a relevant to challenge to those who say it's the Eyeties problem. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 20:31
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
>Those advocating the 'asylum at point of entry or not at all' schtick would change their tune pretty quick if the conflict was off the UK's coast. One is a principle the other is an emotion. What is the principle of asylum seeking? That one is fleeing one's own country for fear of harm. So, when you enter into, say, Italy from your own country then you are claiming to be a genuine asylum seeker. An application which may or may not be granted. If it is granted, you are now in Italy. If it is not granted then you are on your way back to wherever. Having entered Italy and now moved to, say, France, on what basis are you seeking entry? Because you are NOT, categorically NOT, fleeing your own country for fear of harm. You are leaving Italy which is NOT your own Country because you feel it may be better elsewhere. You are not an asylum seeker from Country X, you are an illegal immigrant from Italy. So you are NOT, and should NOT be considered by France as an asylum seeker or refugee and most certainly not by the UK if you get that far. This is not the same as where you might end up when you have applied to be an asylum seeker in Italy. It woudl seem to me reasonable that Italy has agreements with other countries that they will share the burden. Thus it may be that some would be taken by the UK. But they would not enter the UK because they are seeking asylum in the UK, they are NOT. They would enter the UK as part of the UK's agreement with Italy. In the absence of such an agreement they would have no basis on which to apply for entry other than as an economic migrant seeking a visa. You are confusing whether or not the countries should share the burden with the right of the person to choose which country to apply in, including countries that he's not actually in. Asylum seekers seek asylum at the first point of safety. Once past that first point of safety they should no longer be eligible for that claim. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 21:07
UK Population growth - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> That one is fleeing one's own country for fear of harm. >> >> So, when you enter into, say, Italy from your own country then you are claiming >> to be a genuine asylum seeker. An application which may or may not be granted. >> >> If it is granted, you are now in Italy. If it is not granted then >> you are on your way back to wherever. So what we need is an EU wide standard for Asylum and an EU wide system for deciding if it's met. And of course an EU wide appeals tribunal. Which is not in accord with the political mood right now. Until we have that though claimants, just like those with other grouses, will be tempted go 'venue shopping' for the place where they're most likely to succeed/get a fair hearing (delete as appropriate). Marks figures above suggest UK success rate is about 30% Actually, being in the 'fair hearing' camp I'm proud of the fact that UK is regarded as the place to go. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 21:23
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
>> I'm proud of the fact that UK is regarded as the place to go. I'm proud of the fact that my wallet is worth nicking. I don't like it when they do it though. That to one side, if the truth is that they are coming here because of the fair hearing, then I guess that's good. The genuine asylum seekers come here because we're fair. Ok, lets let that stand. But you're missing the point, because there's only 8,000 a year at present so its noise level!! The issue is the illegal immigrants. Now *why* are they coming? I suspect its because we do not have the controls over them once they are in. No ID cards etc. etc. So once they are in, then job done. Get into France and the job is not done. Because every day you will run into another problem because you don't have an ID card. Again; 1) Legal non-EU immigration. Totally controllable. 2) Legal EU immigration. Not currently controllable, but not currently a major issue. 3) Genuine asylum seekers. totally controllable and not an issue. 4) Illegal immigrants. Out of control. Totally an issue. Aside from NIMBYs, haters of all things foreign and racists, for who its all a problem, the real current issue is non-EU illegal immigrants. They are not coming here because we are fair, honest and nice. They are coming here because WE ARE EASY. There are two barriers to an illegal immigrant; 1) How easy is it to get in? 2) How easy is it to live once in? Since our problem comes from legals overstaying, then quite obviously getting in for them is easy. The ones we see at Calais are [currently] noise level but should be kept in Calais. Sealing up the border is fairly easy. blah blah manpower, blah blah money, blah blah inconveniencing holidaymakers with delays. It just takes the political will. Our problem is how easy it is to live in the UK as an illegal. ID Cards. Can you think of another solution? And Farage and his ignorant whipping up of the masses is hiding the issues. The more I look at this the less I think of him and his followers - he's manipulative and they are blind believers (uneducated and non-inquisitive). This is not rocket science. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 21:31
UK Population growth - Armel Coussine
|
|
>> This is not rocket science. No. That's pretty simple. This is extremely difficult and convoluted. How often do I have to say that? UKIP just isn't clever enough to cope. They had Identity cards when I was small. Perhaps they would work now, who knows? |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 21:37
UK Population growth - sooty123
|
|
>> The issue is the illegal immigrants. Now *why* are they coming? >> >> I suspect its because we do not have the controls over them once they are >> in. No ID cards etc. etc. So once they are in, then job done. >> >> Get into France and the job is not done. I wonder how many enter france but then stay there? |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 21:41
UK Population growth - Armel Coussine
|
|
>> I wonder how many enter france but then stay there? More space, lower prices, better food - who wouldn't? |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 22:00
UK Population growth - sooty123
|
|
>> >> I wonder how many enter france but then stay there? >> >> More space, lower prices, better food - who wouldn't? >> Many might, just seemed to be the thought that everyone who entered france is just looking for a way to the uk. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 21:40
UK Population growth - Bromptonaut
|
|
@NoFM I'm in rare situation of having both son and daughter at home. We've eaten and drunk well and I'm too mellow to deal with all of this right now. Couple of thoughts though (a) Assylum is about the 24k who claim, not the 8k who succeed (b) If you think legal EU migration is 'not currently a major issue.' you've gotten out of touch with UK politics.* Pretty much all of Cameron's EU 'renegotiation' charade is about migration from the EU. *If you mean 'not really a major issue but subject of political hot air' then I might agree. Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 26 Jun 15 at 21:41
|
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 21:43
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
>*If you mean 'not really a major issue but subject of political hot air' then I might agree. That. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 18:29
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
Immigration figures for 2014 follow; (inward / outward / net) British.. 83,000 / 139,000 / -56,000 EU....... 268,000 / 91,000 / 178,000 Non-EU 290,000 / 94,000 / 197,000 The EU net immigration can be further split to EU15 82,000 A8 48,000 So, 50% of immigration is people from Non-EU Countries who have migrated and been granted visas as economic migrants. Of the EU net immigration 60% is from EU15 (the original and supposedly richer countries) 40% of migration comes from A8 countries, which are the countries that have joined since 2004 The "illegals" within the UK or trying to get into the UK are all non-EU. So, where does anyone think leaving the EU will solve a problem insofar as immigration is concerned? |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 19:50
UK Population growth - Roger.
|
|
Nigel Farage writing in Breitbart. Fair warning for those who do not like facing differing opinions. www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/06/26/farage-for-breitbart-directionless-eu-means-migrant-crisis-in-calais-can-only-get-worse/ |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 19:54
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
A few more facts; Non EU Immigration 2014 [This is *LEGAL* immigration, for non EU citizens.] 1) For study 130,000 2) For work 70,000 3) Accompany/Join somebody already here 50,000 4) Other reason 10,000 1) has fallen for years because of abuse crackdown but now slightly rising 2) is capped. Although this cap will rise as the economy grows. 3) gently declined as rules tightened. So seemingly either self-funded or private grant. Asylum Applications 2014 1) Total applied 24,000 2) Total Granted 8,000 1) is down from a high in 2002 of 84,000. 60% of applications are dismissed, even after appeal. 2) is reasonably steady at around 8,000 per year for the last 5 years. So, it would seem that asylum seekers / refugees are no more a problem than non-EU immigrants However!!! Slightly more than 50% of those asylum applications are made AFTER the immigrant has been detected. Thus, real asylum applications are half of the above. The other half come from detected illegals. What conclusions could we consider; We may be granting too many study visas, especially to students. Although limiting this will impact the finances of UK education which relies on these fee paying entrants. Approved work visas are low, and in any case are usually profitable cases for the UK. Accompanying/joining may be too high, especially since these are often joining study visa holders, albeit that this is now limited to above graduate level students. EU immigration is less well understood. It is increasing, from E15 and A8. It is the significant "increaser" amongst legal immigration. Genuine asylum applications are NOT currently any kind of issue. I wonder why the Daily Mail cannot find this stuff? Its all ONS, & Home Office Stats. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 20:12
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
Illegal presence in the UK. For obvious reasons there are no official or confirmable numbers, however the following woudl be relevant. "illegal" covers both those who have entered illegally and those who entered legally but did not leave on time. In 2007 estimates ranged between 374,000 and 719.000 living in the UK At that time the estimate of UK born children currently within the UK with illegal immigrant parents was 43,000 to 145,000. (this does not include children where one parent was either legal or British) The LSE said that their "Best guess" was at the mid point of the high and low estimates in all cases - so 620,000 illegal immigrants currently living in 2007 The LSE have also said that their estimate for 2012/2013 was 863,000. unbelievably they felt that 604,000 of those were in London. A reasonable estimate would be that now the problem is around 1,000,000 and no more. Probably less, since nobody has any record of how many illegals leave. The vast majority of those illegal immigrants are thought to be people who have entered legally and then not left. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 20:13
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
Is anybody gaining anything from these figures, or am I wasting my time? Other than my own education and information, that is. I wonder why UKIP can't find the real figures either. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 20:19
UK Population growth - Zero
|
|
>> I wonder why UKIP can't find the real figures either. Facts and truth does not make good scare stories. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 20:39
UK Population growth - Armel Coussine
|
|
>> Is anybody gaining anything from these figures, or am I wasting my time? Interesting for what they're worth FMR. Keep them coming. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 20:52
UK Population growth - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> Is anybody gaining anything from these figures, or am I wasting my time? Yes we're gaining*. No you're not wasting your time. *I've studied similar numbers in past so my own views are being confirmed. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 20:57
UK Population growth - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> The LSE have also said that their estimate for 2012/2013 was 863,000. unbelievably they felt >> that 604,000 of those were in London. Why unbelievable? Having flitted daily between metropolis and market town for 25 yrs it looks 'finger in air' plausible to me. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 21:05
UK Population growth - Old Navy
|
|
>> >> The LSE have also said that their estimate for 2012/2013 was 863,000. unbelievably they felt >> >> that 604,000 of those were in London. >> No surprise, you keep telling the rest of the country how wonderful it is. Feel free to keep them. Last edited by: Old Navy on Fri 26 Jun 15 at 21:06
|
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 21:14
UK Population growth - Armel Coussine
|
|
>> Why unbelievable? Having flitted daily between metropolis and market town for 25 yrs it looks 'finger in air' plausible to me. Quite. London can hold almost any number of people. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 21:24
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
Of all that I wrote, all the facts and figures that I quoted, the one thing you take from it all and feel that is worthy of comment, is that I find it surprising the proportion who have remained in London? Well, that was worthwhile. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 21:26
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
Anyway, I've had enough of this thread now. The figures are there to be studied, the issues are obvious, the solutions simply take understanding, defining and commitment. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 21:37
UK Population growth - Armel Coussine
|
|
>> the solutions simply take understanding, defining and commitment. 'Simply' eh? Easy peasy then, in a pig's ear... 'The issues are obvious', tee hee... |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 21:45
UK Population growth - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> Of all that I wrote, all the facts and figures that I quoted, the one >> thing you take from it all and feel that is worthy of comment, is that >> I find it surprising the proportion who have remained in London? >> >> Well, that was worthwhile. Seriously, it was worthwhile. Whn you read this stuff it's the bit that's counter to intuition or personal experience that grabs you first. On that basis AC and i were just surprised that you were surprised. Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 26 Jun 15 at 21:47
|
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 22:28
UK Population growth - Zero
|
|
>> Of all that I wrote, all the facts and figures that I quoted, the one >> thing you take from it all and feel that is worthy of comment, is that >> I find it surprising the proportion who have remained in London? >> >> Well, that was worthwhile. One thing I can't quite get from those figures, is how many had toys, how many had prams, and what proportion were thrown from what? |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 22:42
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
| I think the answer is 0111000001100101011011100110100101110011 |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 22:53
UK Population growth - Zero
|
|
>> I think the answer is 0111000001100101011011100110100101110011 0111011101100001011011100110101101100101011100100000110100001010 |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 22:56
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
Made me smile. 01001001 00100000 01101100 01101111 01110110 01100101 00100000 01111001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01100010 01110101 01110100 00100000 01111001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01100001 01110010 01100101 00100000 01110110 01100101 01110010 01111001 00100000 01100010 01101001 01110100 01110100 01100101 01110010 Last edited by: No FM2R on Fri 26 Jun 15 at 22:58
|
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 23:01
UK Population growth - Zero
|
|
0100100100100000011011110110111001101100011110010010000001101100011011 110111011001100101001000000110110001100001011001110110010101110010 |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 23:04
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
| 01111001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01100100 01101111 00100000 01101011 01101110 01101111 01110111 00100000 01100100 01100001 01110110 01100101 00100000 01110111 01101001 01101100 01101100 00100000 01100010 01100101 00100000 01101000 01100001 01110110 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01100001 00100000 01100110 01101001 01110100 |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 23:09
UK Population growth - Zero
|
|
>> 01111001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01100100 01101111 00100000 01101011 01101110 01101111 01110111 00100000 01100100 01100001 01110110 >> 01100101 00100000 01110111 01101001 01101100 01101100 00100000 01100010 01100101 00100000 01101000 01100001 01110110 01101001 01101110 >> 01100111 00100000 01100001 00100000 01100110 01101001 01110100 0110100001100101001000000111011101101001011011000110110000100000011001 1101100101011101000010000001110100011010000110010100100000011000100110 1100011000010110110101100101 |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 23:12
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
| aGUgZGVzZXJ2ZXMgaXQ= |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 23:20
UK Population growth - Zero
|
| tr` this ?>e s_/rt /ss |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 23:37
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
| 01111001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01110111 01101001 01101110 |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 23:44
UK Population growth - Zero
|
|
>> 01111001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01110111 01101001 01101110 You ebcdic |
|
New Sat 27 Jun 15 00:02
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
|
>>You ebcdic No, that would be 01011001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01100101 01100010 01100011 01100100 01101001 01100011 and I quite clearly said 01111001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01110111 01101001 01101110. Cloth ears. |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 23:04
UK Population growth - Zero
|
|
>> Made me smile. 67 6f 20 74 6f 20 62 65 64 |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 23:06
UK Population growth - No FM2R
|
| 79 6f 75 20 6e 65 65 64 20 74 6f 20 64 72 69 6e 6b 20 6d 6f 72 65 |
|
New Fri 26 Jun 15 23:12
UK Population growth - sooty123
|
| Has this been turned into some sort of geek forum? |
|
New Sat 27 Jun 15 04:51
UK Population growth - Pat
|
|
Now this thread has degenerated into a lesson of logarithms can I put forward a more simplistic view on illegal immigrants from some of my colleagues who have to deal with this on a daily basis. They should of course be turned back at the first border they encounter after their own country but of course, thanks to the EU we no longer have physical borders, just free movement. Free movement which costs the UK dearly. France can, and should, deal with the situation in and around Calais and the other ports, but turns a blind eye to it on the premise of if they ignore it, it will then become our problem to deal with. They have scanners to 'xray' the lorries with, supplied and funded by the UK, but such a small percentage of vehicles are actually scanned by the French authorities, it is unbelievable. The UK has paid for most of the fencing around the French ports. We finance a UK Border Force based in Calais to do what the French authorities should be doing in trying to police the illegals, who use bolt croppers to obtain entry through the back doors of padlocked trailers or wedge themselves under the axles because the scanners are ignored. The French have always 'cocked a deaf 'un' on this problem until the noise becomes deafening and then show a token amount of interest until it dies down again. Their way of dealing with the problem is to do nothing and it will become our problem....and it works. As mentioned above, despite all this any lorry driver found with illegals hiding on/in their vehicle anywhere in the UK is fined £2000 per person. There is talk of raising that to £4000 despite the unavoidable queues at the ports, created mainly by the French going on strike, and the lack of use of equipment the UK has financed and provided. Of course, this isn't helped by the fact the illegals in question only want to go to the UK for the opportunity to work illegally and face little action on deportation if found. Pat |
|
New Sat 27 Jun 15 05:43
UK Population growth - sooty123
|
|
but of course, thanks to the EU we no longer have physical borders, >> just free movement. >> >> Free movement which costs the UK dearly. We still have border controls, these people getting into the back of wagons aren't EU citizens. >> They have scanners to 'xray' the lorries with, supplied and funded by the UK, but >> such a small percentage of vehicles are actually scanned by the French authorities, it is >> unbelievable. >> Do we have any on the uk side and are they used? >> Of course, this isn't helped by the fact the illegals in question only want to go to the UK for the opportunity to work illegally. >> I'd agree on that. |
|
New Sat 27 Jun 15 17:25
UK Population growth - BrianByPass
|
|
>> We still have border controls, these people getting into the back of wagons aren't EU >> citizens. >> As I understand it, the EU member nations have failed to agree on the numbers of "boat refugees" that each member country should take in. What I can't understand is why the Italians or Greeks (or whichever country the boat peopleget taken to first) don't just give everyone of these "refugees" a passport. Because, as soon as these refugees have got their travel documents, they will immediately travel from Italy to their dream destination country - be it Germany or "London" (UK in other words) - and there will be nothing the Tories or UKIP can then do stop them coming here legally. |
|
New Sat 27 Jun 15 12:25
UK Population growth - Armel Coussine
|
|
>> Has this been turned into some sort of geek forum? I don't think a modern geek would regard binary code as proper geekery, more kindergarten stuff. |
|
New Sat 27 Jun 15 17:59
UK Population growth - Armel Coussine
|
|
>> binary code I once had a job, lasted a month or two, that involved staying up all night poring over endless sheets of the Scheiss that came out of a slot in a desk, and bits of which had to be deciphered. It wasn't badly paid but it made me ill, too much coffee and snout, the flickering glare of fluorescent tubes, the numbing hum of the air conditioning (but the valve computer, a thing that filled two floors of a Queen Anne house and was less powerful by far than our laptops and tablets, still made the place hot), not enough kip. Ugh. Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Sat 27 Jun 15 at 18:04
|
|
New Sat 27 Jun 15 19:20
UK Population growth - Old Navy
|
|
It is easier to get in than get out. :-) www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/crime/holidaymakers-with-unpaid-fines-face-airport-arrest-1-3814543 |
Forum Version 3.0 - By Khoosys
Car4play Forum
