Forum menu
THM - like it. 😉
I may not agree but I laughed
I have suggested to individuals that they might want to reconsider their words as the potential to be interpreted as xenophobic / racist was there
LOL. So like me you haven't met a European racist for years. What you've done is twisted people's words on the internet to make them look racist.
Glad you laughed - it was meant as a gentle joke. Humour can work better than BS occasionally!
Questioning people's motivation is essential when looking at these things.
How?
Same way you interview somebody, same way you get information you want and assess people. Ask questions, talk, engage see what really drives them, sometimes confronting people - it's great being a white male immigrant really does let you have some shock value when you call out somebody for their behaviour.
Same way you interview somebody, same way you get information you want and assess people. Ask questions, talk, engage see what really drives them, sometimes confronting people - it's great being a white male immigrant really does let you have some shock value when you call out somebody for their behaviour.
You know what I meant, how does guessing a motivation help you win a debate?
It's irrelevant. He already knows his motivation.
All you can do is spell out your case, and point out any factual errors he makes.
I've met people who are open to being persuaded, many are just mislead. Part of understanding what why is understanding what they believe.
does it matter to you if your new neighbours are from Yorkshire, or Linconshire? Now, does it matter to you if they are from England or Poland?
Exactly.
So wanting less immigration is nothing to do with the Country of origin. Yorkshire, Poland, it makes no odds. So if what you say is true, being anti-immigration can't possibly be racist.
The point is Land is a zero sum game. If someone else is using a bit of land[1], you have a bit less of it. It's that simple.
[1] Putting a dwelling on it. Driving a car on it. Mountain biking on it. Whatever.
Part of understanding what why is understanding what they believe.
Calling them racist.
...and you know what. Doesn't this last bit of debate prove my point.
We're spending all this time arguing about whether it's racist to want a lower population in the Uk, but even if we reach agreement you still haven't convinced me that larger population improves my life.
The argument lost the debate for remain, it was a total distraction.
OOB - yes I've met racists. Trust me.
We're spending all this time arguing about whether it's racist to want a lower population in the Uk, but even if we reach agreement you still haven't convinced me that larger population improves my life.
Exactly, if you moved another family into your house, and they paid half the bills, financially you'd be better off, would your quality of life?
OOB - yes I've met racists. Trust me.
Go on then, answer my original question with one of them. Don't be shy.
Exactly, if you moved another family into your house, and they paid half the bills, financially you'd be better off, would your quality of life?
This.
Maybe it is better to live two families to a house, but the way to convince the family of that is not to say "You must just hate the people we're moving in with you" it's to convince them of the benefits. Somehow. 🙂
That's all very well but how do you explain why the New Forest was one of the highest vote leave areas.
They certainly don't like immigrants in the New Forest (from my experience), yet there is zero impact to people in the New Forest. Not exactly overcrowded so the population argument is not relevant and I would guess immigration is some of the lowest in the country.
I could tell you why they don't like immigration but it would involve calling them racist. And yes you can try and debate with them but how many times have you debated with a racist about other races/cultures and how successful was that for you?
Maybe it is better to live two families to a house, but the way to convince the family of that is not to say "You must just hate the people we're moving in with you" it's to convince them of the benefits. Somehow
No, but I'm sure that telling them that if they dare to complain about it they are racist xenophobic scum isn't going to endear them to the concept either 😉
That's all very well but how do you explain why the New Forest was one of the highest vote leave areas.They certainly don't like immigrants in the New Forest (from my experience), yet there is zero impact to people in the New Forest. Not exactly overcrowded so the population argument is not relevant and I would guess immigration is some of the lowest in the country.
Because they look ten, fifteen miles down the road and say "**** that for a game of soldiers, no thanks"
I don't think anyone is moving into your house.
Still, if that person was a surgeon, and you needed an op, you might mind less.
If your roof was falling in, and that person was a roofer, you might mind less.
The idea that "extra people" just take up room, rather than improving the country, is a popular viewpoint, for sure.
That's all very well but how do you explain why the New Forest was one of the highest vote leave areas.
Because they leave tacks on the road during sportives?
That's all very well but how do you explain why the New Forest was one of the highest vote leave areas.
Have you tried to drive through the New Forest on summers day? Any of the attractions you care to name are heaving. They're building in a big way all along the M27 corridor to the East and that's just the bits I know about. Even on weekdays commuting from Lymington to Sotton is a nightmare.
It's rammed! A pretty poor example of somewhere that is improving with a rising population/
If your roof was falling in, and that person was a roofer, you might mind less.
Although perhaps if you were a roofer too, you might be less happy about it, particularly when you found out that he was willing to do the job for less than you could afford to, because housing benefit was paying his rent.
I don't think anyone is moving into your house.
Still, if that person was a surgeon, and you needed an op, you might mind less.
If your roof was falling in, and that person was a roofer, you might mind less.
The idea that "extra people" just take up room, rather than improving the country, is a popular viewpoint, for sure.
Just an anology, not against immigration whatsoever. But rather just throwing houses up wherever a green/brown site may appear, proper infrastructure needs to be factored in too. The fault of local government/planning I might add, not people wanting to move to a particular area.
because housing benefit was paying his rent.
and boom he drops the other BS line.....
But rather just throwing houses up wherever a green/brown site may appear, proper infrastructure needs to be factored in too. The fault of local government/planning I might add, not people wanting to move to a particular area.
A little common sense might be returning.
and boom he drops the other BS line.....
My sister in law works in the housing benefit department of Lincolnshire county Council, she'd open your eyes..
because housing benefit was paying his rent.
and boom he drops the other BS line.....
No, an EU worker arriving in the UK would be fully eligible for housing benefit.
Have you tried to drive through the New Forest on summers day?
I have lived in the New Forest for 16 years so have a fair idea of what it is like. It is empty compared to most places, even in summer.
I didn't say it was improving with a rising population. I was saying that the residents have no experience of immigration yet don't like it anyway - with no logical reasons. When discussing immigration with them the upshot is basically they don't like immigrants because they are from another country.
No, an EU worker arriving in the UK would be fully eligible for housing benefit.
The BS is they are all claiming it, that was your point wasn't it otherwise why bring it up? You know that EU migrants contribute higher? Draw less? etc. or do you want to try and say what you really meant.
The BS is they are all claiming it, that was your point wasn't it otherwise why bring it up?
I didn't say "they are all claiming it" - you were simply wrong, just be a man and admit it.
I was saying that the residents have no experience of immigration yet don't like it anyway - with no logical reasons.
Just far do you think it is from the New Forest to Southampton (where in the 2011 census, 18% of all residents were born abroad)? And therefore on what basis do you begin to assume that the residents have "no experience of immigration" (given even the New Forest census data says 6% of the residents population was born abroad?
particularly when you found out that he was willing to do the job for less than you could afford to, because housing benefit was paying his rent.
So what did you mean? As usual it's a little confusing
Are we ignoring the trend towards complete urbanisation of the UK? Only when we are riding urban downhill as the norm instead of rooty woodland singletrack will we wake up and realise that perpetual year on year uncontrollable population growth of a finite space is not sustainable. Much bigger issue then brexit mind, and riding on rural trails will be the least of our problems.
Are we ignoring the trend towards complete urbanisation of the UK?
Yes people won't stop living!
I wonder how many folk complain about immigration yet squeeze out multiple children without the merest thought for the strain that puts on the environment, local resources, money etc...
[i]Are we ignoring the trend towards complete urbanisation of the UK? Only when we are riding urban downhill as the norm instead of rooty woodland singletrack will we wake up and realise that perpetual year on year uncontrollable population growth of a finite space is not sustainable. Much bigger issue then brexit mind, and riding on rural trails will be the least of our problems. [/I]
Eh?
Try looking at Google Earth, even places you think are 'urban' have a far greater level of countryside than you can possibly imagine.
So what did you mean? As usual it's a little confusing
I meant what I said, that's why I said it, perhaps you should have read it rather than extrapolating it into something else that you thought I meant? Or perhaps you should apologise after being shown to be wrong?
I wonder how many folk complain about immigration yet squeeze out multiple children without the merest thought for the strain that puts on the environment, local resources, money etc...
Majority of UK population growth is through immigration and extended life rather than birth rates (and its suggested that much of the birth rate is from recent immigrant community too)
edit: The population increase of the UK in the year to mid-2015 included natural growth (more births than deaths) of 171,800 people, net international migration of 335,600. - source: [url= https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/bulletins/annualmidyearpopulationestimates/latest ]ONS[/url]
yes you tries to extrapolate that the workers were offering a lower price due to receiving housing benefit. Again you seem to want to make that point, do you have the figures on EU migrants claiming benefit or did you read it in the mail?
Divide and conquer, part of the plan isn't it. It's a great one to trot out isn't it - think it got covered over many pages. What about all those dirty locals on their benefits?
Or, You could just admit that you were wrong
About what? you were trying to make the immigrants and benefits claim again?
if that person was a surgeon, and you needed an op, you might mind less.If your roof was falling in, and that person was a roofer, you might mind less.
The idea that "extra people" just take up room, rather than improving the country, is a popular viewpoint, for sure.
Isn't that a better argument than name calling?
Try looking at Google Earth, even places you think are 'urban' have a far greater level of countryside than you can possibly imagine.
In which case it's easy to keep everyone happy.
Change the planning process so 5 or more objections to any development or infrastructure veto it.
That way all the building will go on spare needless land that only a handful of people care about.
I wonder how many folk complain about immigration yet squeeze out multiple children without the merest thought for the strain that puts on the environment, local resources, money etc...
Good point but I think a lot of people have guilt about it. I do. The Chinese got it right, we have a lot to thank them for.
It's weird:
You say you want less immigration people think you're Oswold Mosely.
If you dared say you wanted a 1 child policy they'd call you Joseph Mengele.
But you say "We need a plague to wide half of us out and everyone laughs and agrees."
People are mad.
I have lived in the New Forest for 16 years so have a fair idea of what it is like. It is empty compared to most places, even in summer.
Most places? Hong Kong?
I didn't say it was improving with a rising population.
Good because if you had you'd have been wrong.
Are we ignoring the trend towards complete urbanisation of the UK?
+1
It's little things that get me. You build 5000 houses. Many people have dogs. A few of those don't clear up. Where you stick 5000 houses you not only ruin a chunk of nice Rural land but you turn the entire surrounding footpath and bridleway network into a sea of dog s**t to the point you can't ride it at night. Yes, economically the area has become far more valuable. But a nicer place to live?
Ninfan - you true Brexy.
Very careful not to lie, while still being misleading.
There were 697,852 live births in England and Wales in 2015, an increase of 0.4% from 2014.
Source: ONS
So almost twice as many births as your immigration figure - which I accept was net, but even immigrants die so using a net figure for indigenous population growth is misleading.
You need four figures to make your point - in, out, births and deaths.
Otherwise you're bullshitting again.
I see where this is going. igm, are you King Herod? 🙂
Certainly not.
But if ninfan et al actually want to address population growth, then instead of banning useful folk we need to work here...
Playful sarcasm mark 😉
By the way there is a good reason I didn't answer your question in the real world. Somethings are painful even when it was for the best.
Otherwise you're bullshitting again.
My quote:
[i]"The population increase of the UK in the year to mid-2015 included natural growth (more births than deaths) of 171,800 people, net international migration of 335,600 "[/I]
Was a [u]direct quote[/u] from section one of the ONS report I linked to
So, unless you are saying that the ONS are manipulating the figures to support Brexit, i suggest you owe me an apology.
Pwned