Free movement of people in the EU was fine as well until the EU expanded eastwards and suddenly you had loads of skilled and unskilled workers from low wage economies fueling unemployment and disenfranchisement in this country, not to mention the criminal element from those nations. I have nothing against eastern European people - I'm sure the overwhelming majority of them are lovely people, but we should have controlled the numbers coming in to mitigate the economic effects on our own people and make sure no undesirables came in.
Free Movement Between, Aus, NZ, UK, Canada
- Thread starter anything I don't mind
- Start date
- Status
Free movement of people in the EU was fine as well until the EU expanded eastwards and suddenly you had loads of skilled and unskilled workers from low wage economies fueling unemployment and disenfranchisement in this country, not to mention the criminal element from those nations. I have nothing against eastern European people - I'm sure the overwhelming majority of them are lovely people, but we should have controlled the numbers coming in to mitigate the economic effects on our own people and make sure no undesirables came in.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 4,095
You understand we operate under FPTP right, so he the majority of the Commons?
The funny thing is that if we we had proportional representation you'd probably still have Cameron as PM, because CON/UKIP/DUP would have the majority.
Where precisely in the Conservative 2015 manifesto did it say there would be no cuts to the tax credits? It didn't.
Do you think the majority of MP's would back it? Which MP should call the no confidence vote? It would need to be someone senior with broad support for it to actually go anywhere, and do you really think a senior Labour or SNP MP wants to be humiliated when the majority of MP's show confidence in the government?
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 4,095
Australians, Canadians and Kiwi's are for the most part of British extraction. Why would people object to their cousins coming to the UK?
indeed, over 134k now.
Debating if Cameron would be PM under PR is a counter-factual as it inherently changes the game. Constituences (like where I live) that are traditionally one party means many feel that their vote is wasted or ignored so they either vote against apathetically, vote for "can't beat them, join them" or they simply don't turn out. Usually it's the latter.
PR would mean non-voters would turn out. Indeed, a PR system means parties like the LibDems would become stronger as would other independents as they're not fighting against the FPTP system which ensures an Establishment. Assuming people would vote the same way under PR as FPTP is both naive and ignorant of the facts.
Cameron promised live on TV when asked prior to the election if he would cut tax credits, that he wouldn't.
Straw man. I've already told you I don't think anything will come of it for these very obvious reasons. That doesn't mean that it's "idiotic" or not justified.
Back on topic now please.
Last edited:
There'd be a 50,000% increase in "what is this spider?" threads in GD
And "kill it with fire" would be the #1 phrase.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,747
- Location
- Southampton, UK
Australians, Canadians and Kiwi's are for the most part of British extraction. Why would people object to their cousins coming to the UK?
You could argue the same about Jamaica or other ex British colonies.
- Joined
- 28 Dec 2009
- Posts
- 13,052
- Location
- london
I'd move to Aus first, then Spend some years in NZ and canada.
Australians, Canadians and Kiwi's are for the most part of British extraction. Why would people object to their cousins coming to the UK?
Think you're missing a point. I can't see many of them moving over here but I can see why they wouldn't want all the lovely chavs from here going over there.
As much as it's a good idea I can't see it happening.
Definitely for it, I wonder how many numbers would go (both ways).
No, of course you don't.
No, of course you don't.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 4,095
No, you couldn't. The majority of people in Jamaica are not of British extraction, they are of African extraction.
And that is why you wouldn't want freedom of movement extended to them?
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 4,095
Because they are not of British extraction? That would certainly be part of it, yes. Another factor would be the difference in living standards, it would be an almost entirely one way relationship: them moving to us, not vice versa.
I'm not sure if he's actually saying that, but reasons against free movement that I think are valid are:
The likelihood of an inrush of cheap labour, depressing wages in this country (with little movement in the other direction), or
The potential for disharmony, ghettoisation, conflicting cultures, values, or large-scale unemployment and welfare costs among immigrants.
Whether any of that applies to Jamaica I'm not informed enough to say. How well off is Jamaica these days? Would it be an entirely one-way street? If it would be, I'd certainly be against it.
LOL of course it is - because no govt has previously changed direction on issues or not implemented everything in their manifesto
it is absolutely retarded - they won the election and had a proper majority this time not some coalition, even if you want to look at percentage of votes then you can whack in UKIP, DUP etc.. and you'd still get a centre right coalition
the petition is just a meaningless gesture by some butt hurt losers
It would be great to see but I'm not sure Shepherd's Bush could handle the influx.
I'm not sure that a majority of Canadians are of British extraction.
Australians, Canadians and Kiwi's are for the most part of British extraction. Why would people object to their cousins coming to the UK?
I'm not sure that a majority of Canadians are of British extraction.
I was just making sure it's the Africans you don't like.
Since your mate Nigel got on his soapbox and you swung even further to the right you certainly seem it.
- Status