What do YOU mean by it?
I don't mean anything by it. I didn't say it.
Suppose it depends on what you mean by immigration?
For example I don't suppose many people have an issue with Filipino nurses, care assistants, Romanian plumbers, Polish engineers or anyone else from anywhere that has come to the UK and filled jobs that need filling - lets face it without those workers the NHS and the care system would be in a worse state than it is, but bizarrely these are the people that the government are preventing entering the UK to reduce net migration and address concerns about exploitation of overseas workers.......
Then you have the 'small boats' which is what people are pi$$ed off about - that's the problem that needs solving.
The government 'stopping the gangs' seems to be doing a great job - look at the figures for the first 6 months of the year.....
Doesn't help that the French seem to be willingly helping them get here despite the UK giving them a crap ton of cash to stop it....
Then we have the hotel issue - lets face it someone in government with links to the private companies that administer this is getting very rich off this.....
Not sure what the hotel companies take on all this is as they're getting paid for it.
The 2 largest hotels in the town where I live have been used for the last 3-4 years to house them, it was supposed to be 6-12 months when it was first touted to the local council....
That's what the issue is - what was supposed to be a temporary solution is now becoming a permanent issue.
And a related question, why were so many people keen to take in Ukrainian refugees, into their own homes, but so few seem keen to take in Sudanese?
As above, it's the ability to empathise. Most people can do that with people who have similar lives and ethnicity. The further apart people are the harder it is and that's something that prob goes back to tribal survival needs and now looks more like a failing of human nature.
Watching the news last night, Epping Forest protests ..
Over say the last 10 years, I wonder what the percentage of people convicted of sex offences against minors is among UK passport holders in that area (or the UK as a whole) Vs the asylum seekers in that hotel or as a whole.
I don't know, but I suspect it's not skewed far either way and I wondered if those protests are rationalised or justified by one case of that type of offence. Maybe I'm just being biased after seeing all the UK and St Georges flags among them. But as the guy they interviewed said, "they're not racists" .. Well, some of them probably aren't. Anti-immigration is an acceptable outlet for racists though.
I don't know what to "make any effort to align with the country they have chosen to move to" means.
You know those British people who go and live in Spain. All live together in a 'colony', other British migrants move there to provide British services to them (Pubs, restaurants), never bother to learn Spanish as they don't need to interact with Spanish people - basically they are of no benefit to Spain in any way whatsoever and make no effort to be part of Spain as a whole.
It is like that. (I used British people in Spain deliberately to avoid any more accusations of racism but I am sure they will come)
lets face it without those workers the NHS and the care system would be in a worse state than it is,
I’m not sure that’s even true - home grown medical professionals are unable to find jobs due to budget constraints preventing hiring. The immigration issue is open to misrepresentation on all sides because it doesn’t exist in a vacuum and is affected by a bunch of other stupidities.
Then you have the 'small boats' which is what people are pi$$ed off about - that's the problem that needs solving.
I think even the small boat arrivals would be accepted by more if the demographics of those seeking refuge weren't overwhelmingly young adult males, see official government figures. Note 2023 was the last year that arrivals were categorised by sex for some reason.
Is there a reason that in a genuine crisis the small-boat refugee demographic wouldn't broadly match that of the affected population in the country being fled?
end up taking in less people
The point was "why don't people want to go to France rather then the UK"... many more do want to go to France... but as an "Island State" 🤮 we confuse the whole issue because people need to come via continental countries to get here to claim (flying isn't an option, because we've shut that down). It's so bloody difficult (and dangerous) to get to the UK, that it's no surprise that it's mostly people genuinely fleeing an even more dangerous situation that attempt to come here to claim asylum.
Is there a reason that in a genuine crisis the small-boat refugee demographic wouldn't broadly match that of the affected population in the country being fled?
Because it's so difficult and dangerous (and expensive) ?
Then you have the 'small boats' which is what people are pi$$ed off about - that's the problem that needs solving.
You see, I disagree with that.
A (growing IMO) number of people are pissed off about anyone who simply looks or seems 'foreign' - even if they were born here. That has been legitimised a lot in the last 10 years.
It's a problem that needs solving and it is the problem that is splashed all over the media every day, but I strongly believe it is a trojan horse in many people for long-standing racism.
Doesn't help that the French seem to be willingly helping them get here despite the UK giving them a crap ton of cash to stop it....
Loving some of the the anti-French shite on this thread. Migrants are moved away from Calais, fed and watered. They really aren't being helped to get to the UK; that's in your xenophobic froggy hating head.
https://www.francebleu.fr/theme/les-migrants-de-calais
Ernie says no-one needs asylum seekers, however it's what's made America great. People fleeing various regimes turned the US into the scientific, industrial, military and nuclear powerhouse it is.
basically they are of no benefit to Spain in any way whatsoever and make no effort to be part of Spain as a whole
Inward investment, spending their Uk pensions in Spain on local goods and services, c'est tout bénef'.
A few decades ago I decided to become a migrant and worked abroad. Then me and Madame Edukator got on our bikes (literally, thank you Norman 😉 ) and rode around till we got to Pau and set up a business. So:
We arrived in our 20s qualified (Geology degree, History doctorate, PGCEs, good language skills) and raring to go - we cost nothing to France in education or care up to that point.
We soon employed people contributing to their wealth as well as ours
We trained people to work for mainly US companies on international contracts who in turn brought money back to France.
I'd like to think my efforts as a cadre at Lindt were a tiny but positive contribution to the Swiss company's decision to increase investments in its French factory
As Brexit loomed on the horizon we made the decision to move all of our assets to France
When we closed the business madame Edukator did agrégation and has since been a language teacher teaching her native language which is a plus for the language skills of the future French work force.
We have son: Science Po educated and an asset to France. Oh yeah, he's a ski instructor too with some UK clients happy to find an ESF with perfect English to show them around the off-piste wonders of the Tarantaise- all good for France. We spoke English in the house and French outside the garden gate.
When we reach English retirement age our English pensions wil be paid to us here.
So which country benefitted? IMO the vast majority of those arriving in the UK will contribute positively to the UK economy and the country for which economic migration is a problem is the country they left behind taking their skills, drive and lust for life with them.
In your case you have been a model person to move to another country but then you didn't go straight into a British 'colony' and spend your money propping up businesses owned by British people.
If all immigration was like that, spread across the country, more integrated, more effort to fit into the country they have chosen to live in I don't think there would be anywhere near as much anti immigration stuff.
In you case you have been a model person to move to another country but then you didn't go straight into a British 'colony' and spend your money propping up businesses owned by British people.
It doesn't matter who owns those businesses, they still provide local services, they pay taxes and social security contributions, they employ people, often some local people too. There's a village in the Dordogne which you could decribe as an expat gheto if you're being negative or a thriving immigrant community if you're being postitive. The was a positive report on French TV about it, even the postman and mayor are of UK origin. The services provided correspond exactly to what norther European tourists hope to find and bring in tourist revenue.
The Brit expats (now often dual nationals) came with money and ideas and invested
Their activities thrived so they pay lots of tax and social security
Their activities in tourism bring in foreign money helping France's balance of payments headache.
Ernie says no-one needs asylum seekers, however it's what's made America great.
That's debatable. Shall we ask the yocals* who were displaced by those immigrants**? Uhhhhh wait... Could that be along the lines of what our "gap toothed plebs" and "thick as shit" kinfolk fear?
* Native Americans
** Invaders
Apologies. We all know that will never happen. Rule Britannia. I'm just saying words that fit together. I haven't got a clue, it was an amusing thought experiment. In other thoughts I was wondering how "immigrant gap toothed plebs" or "thick as shit immigrants" might go down? Anyway, pointing out what I might consider to be possible exhibits of double standards and potential hurty feelings of... wait what were they... "gap tooth plebs" who are "thick as shit" is I believe referred to as whataboutery, and of far less importance than the actual real violence a minority of the aforementioned people inflict upon immigrants.
You know those British people who go and live in Spain. All live together in a 'colony', other British migrants move there to provide British services to them (Pubs, restaurants), never bother to learn Spanish as they don't need to interact with Spanish people - basically they are of no benefit to Spain in any way whatsoever and make no effort to be part of Spain as a whole.
Why should they be barred from living in Spain?
I love the fact that I can go to the East End of London and feel as if I might be in Bangladesh, or go to the North End of Croydon and feel as if I might be in Turkey.
Why is that a problem for you ?
That's debatable. Shall we ask the yocals* who were displaced by those immigrants**? Uhhhhh wait... Could that be along the lines of what our "gap toothed plebs" and "thick as shit" kinfolk fear?
* Native Americans
** Invaders
As you feel such empathy for those who suffered under various colonisations I'm surprised you aren't welcoming their descendants with open arms. 😛
Ernie says no-one needs asylum seekers, however it's what's made America great. People fleeing various regimes turned the US into the scientific, industrial, military and nuclear powerhouse it is.
Well I am glad you think America is great but it has never "needed" asylum seekers to achieve that. You can be an immigrant to a country without being an asylum seeker.
Immigration has undoubtedly been a benefit to the UK but I don't think that Nigel Farage's asylum seeking ancestors were ever actually needed.
Why is that a problem for you ?
It isn't, but in response to the question "Why are people so against immigration?" I don't believe that it is not helping.
My neighbour is Taiwanese and nobody has a problem about that but if 80% of the street was Taiwanese people who couldn't speak a word of English and just mixed among themselves I don't believe that makes for a good society.
Just thinking of stuff that makes up the general anti immigration stance outside of the main reason of it being very over represented as an issue because it is better to be upset about that than inequality which is the actual course of a lot of problems.
As you feel such empathy for those who suffered under various colonisations I'm surprised you aren't welcoming their descendants with open arms. 😛
Sometimes I think maybe we could split the world in two, everyone who wants to fight and argue and be nasty to each other, **** off to one side of the world, the rest of us, who'd like to live peace, not fighting each other, not discriminating against each other, will live on the other side. There's only really the matter of how we prevent the fighty side from fighting us.
Sometimes I think maybe we could split the world in two, everyone who wants to fight and argue and be nasty to each other, **** off to one side of the world, the rest of us, who'd like to live peace, not fighting each other, not discriminating against each other, will live on the other side. There's only really the matter of how we prevent the fighty side from fighting us.
I have always said that but starting at a smaller scale and just splitting the UK into Left and Right. Be very interesting to see how it pans out but as you say the Right would just invade the Left
The population of what is a very small country is expanding rapidly, certainly faster than our infrastructure, house building and public services for example can keep up with.
...
Someone needs to make the decision of who is allowed in and who isn't, and at the moment I think we've got it back to front. We've got a load of Polish builders and Romanian plumbers who have left perfectly good countries
I don't think you've really thought this argument through, have you.
Is there a reason that in a genuine crisis the small-boat refugee demographic wouldn't broadly match that of the affected population in the country being fled?
If a conflict arises those who most able to flee and survive the journey will be the youngest, fittest and strongest, probably men in their twenties and thirties. Those more likely to stay behind due to responsibilitiea caring for family unable to flee are probably women.
But also if moving for purely economic reasons it makes sense to send the bread-winner ahead.
I love the fact that I can go to the East End of London and feel as if I might be in Bangladesh, or go to the North End of Croydon and feel as if I might be in Turkey.
Which is lovely for you as a tourist. But if you'd lived there for fifty years and now feel as though you might be living in Turkey despite not having moved house...?
As Kerley says one or two neighbours being different is good, gives the place some variety, most of them is less good, it starts to feel like somewhere else.
Places I used to live and cycle through: racist, Brexity, xenophobic to the core - look at the Brexit vote results.
This made me laugh, buying their flags from Temu - soooooooooo patridiotic.
“In case anyone needs flags Temu has them,” wrote one poster. Amazon has a deal on flagpoles, suggested another.
Need to get more of this sort of info out
Why should they be barred from living in Spain?
Why is that a problem for you ?
Who said anyone should be barred from living in Spain? Or that they thought thriving migrant communities in London were a problem?
If all immigration was like that, spread across the country, more integrated, more effort to fit into the country they have chosen to live in I don't think there would be anywhere near as much anti immigration stuff.
Whilst I wish this were true, I don't believe it is. Racists have been racist since WAY before "young men" were arriving in small boats. If anything, the opposite is true - the areas with the lowest incidence of foreigners tend to be the ones most anti-immigration.
But in any case: why should they? As someone else said earlier (and I said earlier still), we often don't do that. British migrants (who are, lest we forget, not fleeing warzones) often don't integrate. Instead they congregate in sunny little enclaves on the continent with other immigrant Brits whose grasp of the local language extends to "dos cervezas por favor." They hole up together in the Rose & Crown, Tenerife discussing how much of a disc race it is that there are so many mosques in the UK.
@cougar I don't know. Presumably some the Sudanese or Afghans or Iraqis who do need to flee and move somewhere else are builders and plumbers too? I would argue that a Syrian builders have a greater need to come here than Bulgarian ones do.
The thing with freedom of movement in the EU is that when it was small it kind of balanced out, roughly the same number of Germans went to work in France as Frenchmen went to work in Germany, Belgians went to Italy and vice versa. In the last twenty five years it has become very much one way as the EU has expanded, it's generally Bulgarians and Poles and Romanians heading to Germany and France and Britain and very few going the other way.
The difference with refugees is that no one is expecting two way traffic, no Brit in their right mind wants to move to Syria but plenty have a very legitimate reason for wanting to move the other way, and we have a legal, and I would argue moral, duty to accept those people.
A lot of this thread has conflated immigrants and refugees
Oh, hey, I've had an idea. Let's operate an exchange programme. For every person arriving in a small boat we can ship off a "they don't even make an effort to speak the language" Brit to Syria and see how long it takes them to become fluent in Arabic. If they get tired of living in a warzone, I hear Rwanda is nice this time of year.
Be very interesting to see how it pans out but as you say the Right would just invade the Left
Sometimes I think maybe we could split the world in two, everyone who wants to fight and argue and be nasty to each other, **** off to one side of the world, the rest of us, who'd like to live peace, not fighting each other, not discriminating against each other, will live on the other side. There's only really the matter of how we prevent the fighty side from fighting us.
I have always said that but starting at a smaller scale and just splitting the UK into Left and Right. Be very interesting to see how it pans out but as you say the Right would just invade the Left
Nah, this is easy, they'd turn on each other first. A bit like "there are no atheists in foxholes," there aren't many hungry rats either.
If a conflict arises those who most able to flee and survive the journey will be the youngest, fittest and strongest, probably men in their twenties and thirties. Those more likely to stay behind due to responsibilitiea caring for family unable to flee are probably women.
And whilst the life of women and children left behind is highly likely to be horrendous, it is still the case that males between 14 and 45 are the most likely to be put up against a wall and shot if they're on the wrong side when an area falls to this or that faction.
Places I used to live and cycle through: racist, Brexity, xenophobic to the core - look at the Brexit vote results.
Such a strong correlation and one that is so often brushed over by Brexit apologists.
Amazon has a deal on flagpoles, suggested another.
This is how moronic these people are. The 'movement' is about tying flags to lampposts (where, presumably, they can be taken down by the council, just like the adverts for last year's local fete). So why would they need flagpoles?
Unless they're planning to put them up on their own property, which is absolutely fine*.
Or are we to assume that they've already got their own flags up?
*As long as you don't want the property value of yours and every house within sight to decrease by 5%.
I may be over-simplifying the immigration issue. However, I think it is boils down to:
- Increased concentration of wealth in fewer and fewer hands.
- It is far easier to brainwash people to believe the problems are caused by immigration and asylum, rather than hugely reduced investment in public services - especially when the people influencing media discourse have very little to gain from investment in public services and gain hugely from privatisation.
If a conflict arises those who most able to flee and survive the journey will be the youngest, fittest and strongest, probably men in their twenties and thirties. Those more likely to stay behind due to responsibilitiea caring for family unable to flee are probably women.
Not a mindset I think I jive with, I couldn't imagine leaving my wife and kids in e.g. Syria, but I can see the argument. Fair enough.
But also if moving for purely economic reasons it makes sense to send the bread-winner ahead.
If you're moving for purely economic reasons though, you shouldn't arriving by small boat crossing.
I don't know. Presumably some the Sudanese or Afghans or Iraqis who do need to flee and move somewhere else are builders and plumbers too? I would argue that a Syrian builders have a greater need to come here than Bulgarian ones do.
...
A lot of this thread has conflated immigrants and refugees
Indeed.
There are two separate arguments here. "What we need" (or heaven forfend, what we can provide) is a question for regular immigration. It's why we have the immigration system we do, we were screwed after WWII because all our doctors &c were young men of fighting age. Choosing to move to the UK in order to work ideally should be a decision of mutual benefit.
By comparison, asylum seekers generally don't give their life savings to Honest Dave's Used Dinghies in order to get £10/week in benefits, they're risking a life-threatening journey to a country they know little about because the alternative is far worse. We take them in because a) we're obliged to under international law and b) it's the morally just thing to do.
It serves the interests of white supremacists to conflate the two. Whilst it may sell newspapers to the easily led in the short term, history has generally not looked favourably upon such demographics. Dehumanising people is a road to concentration camps, and we're goose-stepping towards convincing the extant populace that this is a good idea.
I may be over-simplifying the immigration issue. However, I think it is boils down to:
- Increased concentration of wealth in fewer and fewer hands.
- It is far easier to brainwash people to believe the problems are caused by immigration and asylum, rather than hugely reduced investment in public services - especially when the people influencing media discourse have very little to gain from investment in public services and gain hugely from privatisation.
Neither of those are immigration issues. Rather, immigration is a dead cat thrown on the table to misdirect the public's attention away from those issues. And it's proving wildly successful.
But in any case: why should they? As someone else said earlier (and I said earlier still), we often don't do that. British migrants (who are, lest we forget, not fleeing warzones) often don't integrate. Instead they congregate in sunny little enclaves on the continent with other immigrant Brits whose grasp of the local language extends to "dos cervezas por favor." They hole up together in the Rose & Crown, Tenerife discussing how much of a disc race it is that there are so many mosques in the UK.
Exactly, you have just backed up what I have been saying. You don't think that is good behaviour for Brits in Spain so why is that any different to people from another country in Britain who do the same?
It is however a minor issue but may be a piece in the reasoning for some people. If the numbers were put out weekly maybe people would get the correct picture
n,000 people given Visa's to do jobs x, y and z. (needed - or at least should be)
n,000 people given student visas (not really needed but keeps some chancellors on £500K per year)
n,00 asylum seekers granted asylum (not needed but have an obligation)
and so on.
The top two figures will always dwarf anything else but would at least give people perspective. Wouldn't help those in a street full of non English speaking Taiwanese people feel any better but would go someway to helping overall.
I think part of the problem is that prejudice and racism has been less frowned upon or discouraged and indeed more normalised in recent years. It seems lots of people seem emboldened by this.
I have faced increased racism since the Brexit referendum. In my experience - I have witnessed more prejudiced comments openly expressed for the last 9 years. Prior to this - I haven’t experienced open racism since the 1980’s.
Neither of those are immigration issues. Rather, immigration is a dead cat thrown on the table to misdirect the public's attention away from those issues. And it's proving wildly successful.
Exactly my point, Cougar. Ignore the real causes and use immigration as an issue to distract from the reality.
Exactly, you have just backed up what I have been saying. You don't think that is good behaviour for Brits in Spain so why is that any different to people from another country in Britain who do the same?
Almost but not quite. I wasn't commenting on whether it was good or bad behaviour at all. Rather I was pointing out the rampant hypocrisy.
If I emigrated I'd probably want to go somewhere I could communicate with the majority of people at at least a basic level and I'd probably miss Marmite. Having people around me with shared experiences might help in acclimatising and making new friends. I might start a board game club. I probably wouldn't sign up to the local Catholic church. But I'd also want to be somewhere where I could experience local culture, "integrate" if you will, because otherwise I might as well move to a leafy 'burb on the South coast over here.
Wanting to be with "your own kind" to varying degrees is perfectly understandable, it's human nature. I expect that I wouldn't fare overly well in Dubai, for instance. But then it would be somewhat churlish of me to denigrate others for wanting the same things, you cannot in good faith proudly champion your own culture in one breath and then expect others to simply abandon their own on a whim the next. How many ex-pats British immigrants would fail the Tebbit Test themselves? I'd wager it's as close to "all of them" as makes no odds.
It is however a minor issue but may be a piece in the reasoning for some people. If the numbers were put out weekly maybe people would get the correct picture
We'll have to agree to disagree on this point, for reasons I've already mentioned.
You cannot reach your "some people" using pesky things like facts because they simply don't care. They're driven by emotion rather than reality and will outright reject new information which contradicts their established beliefs. Spend an hour on YouTube watching LBC phone-in clips and you'll see this in action over and and over and over again. Callers are told that they've been misinformed and they don't respond with "oh, I didn't realise that," rather they go "well, it's what I think / what I've heard" and then hurriedly try to change the subject.
This is (IMHO) why the Left is losing ground to the Right hand over fist. We still think we're fighting a war of logic when it's actually a war of feelings, and the latter will always Trump the former. How long has STW been a hotbed of political discourse, pre-referendum at least? Ten+ years of debate, would we need the fingers of both hands yet to count the number of changed minds do we think?
That Guardian article .. unreal. People are losing the plot. The distraction tactics are working.
This is (IMHO) why the Left is losing ground to the Right hand over fist. We still think we're fighting a war of logic when it's actually a war of feelings,
Yeah. Logic doesn't apply here, clearly. It's about feelings and pride among people who're clutching at pride in something as they're not getting it from their own life. Not sure why, but they're not happy people are they.
Keir Starmer’s official spokesperson said the prime minister was a “patriot” who believed people should “absolutely” fly the British and English flags
Weak. So weak. So scared of the right. Useless.
Lets not forget that racisms works both ways.....
Are the street full of Taiwanese going to be happy and integrate with the (insert race/language) families who suddenly start renting the houses on their street?
Worth mentioning that there are massive areas of segregation/ghettoization in many large cities that's been going on since the 50's/60's. Who's fault that is probably isn't relevant now, but this has also not helped the perception of the "them & us" culture that the far right latch on to.
I'm all for integration and the rich tapestry of multi-cultural Britain, but without certain elements of society wanting to and being willing to integrate it's flogging a dead horse, and that willingness to integrate must be mutual....
You cannot reach your "some people" using pesky things like facts because they simply don't care.
Of course you can reach 'some people'. Certainly not all, but some. Those people are currently fed bullshit and they take it as read, feed them actual truth (regularly) and some people will take note of it.
Do we think 'Brick Dick' and 'Wheelie Bin Woman' would respond to a jolly good lecture on the realities of the world?
Weak. So weak. So scared of the right. Useless.
Shape-shifting chameleon, totally in thrall to Reform. It is like he is hypnotised.
What he should have said is:
"Hanging flags without permission on public property without permission will probably mean they'll be taken down. Whilst I share feelings of pride in the good things the UK has done and will defend the right of a person to display our national flags on their own property, I would hope that people who do this do it with sensitivity to others because that is the decent, British way to act".
Or similar. Basically saying "it is your right to be a bit of a **** if you want to, but it's not nice to exercise that right, so it's back on you".
