But they all happened at a time of regulated migration.
Clearly showing a regulated approch doesn't cause a detriment.
Sinxe we had unregulated migration there ahve been no "biggies"
Brexit thread - what happens next
- Thread starter Gilly
- Start date
- Status
But they all happened at a time of regulated migration.
Clearly showing a regulated approch doesn't cause a detriment.
Sinxe we had unregulated migration there ahve been no "biggies"
Free next day delivery
Hahahahahaha like Chinese / Indian takeaway is authentic foreign food
Agreed on Samsung though!
NONE of the above has anything to do with immigration.
Well yeah, there's that.
It wasn't meant to be anything to do with immigration specifically, rather Chris' comment about losing our culture. Why should we only care about the parts of our culture that may be directly "affected" by people coming over here, rather than the influx of all the other causes of changes to our culture over the last 50 or so years?
That's also ignoring the point that our culture is and always has been a direct result of masses of immigration and intermingling of cultures and cultural icons. It has to be, as we have been a trading/maritime nation for centuries. Basically his argument boils down to wanting to stall our culture at a certain point in history, that he probably believes was the pinnacle of being British. Just like the people complaining in the 60s when the caribbeans came over, and the 1800's and the 1700's... etc etc...
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2010
- Posts
- 6,316
The 'strangulation' approach causes detriment; the overly-regulated migration (remember we banished slavery and other such sources of flexible labour, including child labour) approach (tens of thousands) will cause more problems than it solves under economic conditions today.
GD poster renowned for public display of chipped shoulder fails to see obvious joke, news at 10
Taking only the Poles:
- Marks & Spencer
- The Heart of Darkness
- The Miliband Brothers
- Rapid advances in cryptology and formal logic; indeed the continental approach to mathematics in general, which up till Hardy and his advance was derided in the UK but progressed at a healthy clip in Poland!
- 16 Polish RAF squadrons during WW2 and Polish migrants that helped in the reconstruction, forming first significant communities of that origin in the UK after the war
- Numerous academics and FRSs, including those who contributed to early design of computers, development of Bayesian statistics and AI; actors and filmmakers; MPs; novelists and artists; religious leaders from Judaic and Christian traditions
- Polish shops and restaurants contributing not just economic activity but decent cuisine to boot, from soups to dumplings to spirits
And that's a small selection of stuff that I'm intersted in; Poles get up to other stuff too: http://www.polishculture.org.uk/.
Now if under Eastern European you include everyone east of Germany, including Russians, by Gove, the list would be endless!
Yes, yes... Well obviously all that... but what else have the
Illegal of course.
Anywhere that has an official embassy or consulatory facilitation should do the trick.
There should be indeed, I'm hoping sven256 comes along any moment to post some facebook pics of it
similar to the ones that crushed the argument made in the Daesh thread a few weeks ago.Failing that there are embassies in very close countries: Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, Bahrain, UAE, Qatar, Oman, Turkey and I'm sure you get my drift.
The reason American culture permeates British culture so much is mainly down to a shared language, which historically has allowed Hollywood, American music and TV shows easy access to British airwaves. American culture has of course permeated the whole world (with mixed responses) but nowhere moreso than in places where English is the main language.
Eastern / Central Europe has plenty of culture to share. It's just that in the UK we're less exposed to it and immigration from that part of the world to the UK is relatively new. Plus the language barrier. Asian and Afro-Caribbean culture didn't percolate into British culture straight away either, it took decades, but was also helped by a common language.
There's nothing fundamentally different about Eastern European culture that makes it incompatible with British culture, there's a whole lot of shared values, sense of humour and traditions. Language barriers are the biggest problem, but the longer immigrants are here the less that becomes a problem. Most of the Poles and other Eastern Europeans I know speak excellent English and it'll only get better with time.
Bottom line, people are people once you get past prejudices.
Yes, yes... Well obviously all that... but what else have theRomansPoles ever done for us?!
Replumbed the aqueduct?
I apologise for assuming that other posters would have common sense and realise that a refugee is normally from a country that is either unstable or somewhere they had to get away from...
Especially when the context is taken into account - a reply to Roah's post about completely banning anyone trying to enter a country from trying to claim asylum.And lets clarify a point here. Many of the refugees that have come into Europe have not gone through Turkey, or have gone through countries that have refused to allow them to stay (so called trust countries). Yes there are some that come through multiple safe countries, and try and claim asylum in a specific country, having no real asylum requirement, but the majority are genuine refugees, as seen by the number given the right to stay in the UK when they get here.
Either way, as has been pointed out EVERY time people try and conflate illegal immigrants, asylum seekers and EU citizens coming to work in the UK, this has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with membership of the EU and Brexit. It's just a shame this point has to be continually reiterated to people - a prime example of why referendums are not a great idea...
And amp lets not forget some very real refugees in the form of Yazidi christians and other religious minorities being holed up in Turkey without being given passage.
One only has to look at what Terdogan (I hope you are reading this Turkey) is doing to minorities and dissidents within and around its borders.
Priority should be given to women and children. Something I've always maintained and also the first priority to religious minorities from ISIS held areas (fleeing from just to prevent it being twisted).
80-87% of the refugees coming are male. This paints a few unsettling images. Sceptics such as me are described as fear mongering or racist for stating why but as we are finding out on a very regular basis my views have the backing of evidence from events that have occurred.
One only has to look at what Terdogan (I hope you are reading this Turkey) is doing to minorities and dissidents within and around its borders.
Priority should be given to women and children. Something I've always maintained and also the first priority to religious minorities from ISIS held areas (fleeing from just to prevent it being twisted).
80-87% of the refugees coming are male. This paints a few unsettling images. Sceptics such as me are described as fear mongering or racist for stating why but as we are finding out on a very regular basis my views have the backing of evidence from events that have occurred.
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2010
- Posts
- 6,316
As for 'biggies', I agree that there is no accurate way in social sciences to predict them or the rate at which they'll occur for a particular demographic. But looking at things like Noble Prize tables, past contributions and cultural permeation is helpful: countries that are more restrictive do not produce as much impact proportional to their size and economy. A good example of top developed economies would be UK vs Japan. We trounce them in these stakes, with our multiculturalism in tow.
Illegal of course.
Anywhere that has an official embassy or consulatory facilitation should do the trick.
There should be indeed, I'm hoping sven256 comes along any moment to post some facebook pics of it
Failing that there are embassies in very close countries: Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, Bahrain, UAE, Qatar, Oman, Turkey and I'm sure you get my drift.
So do these British embassies have the capacity to process and hold tens of thousands applicants? Out of interest what about those people that don't want to cross "enemy" territory to try and make their way into Damascus, only to find the British Embassy is shut:
I get your drift, you appear to just be naming embassies/consulates in the general area, which isn't particularly relevant to this point is it? Not everybody would have come through these countries, or been able to get to them. Remember here that Turkey and Jordan have taken the major bulk of the refugees from Syria, the UK on the other hand has hardly taken any.
Either way I'll reiterate the point again:
Either way, as has been pointed out EVERY time people try and conflate illegal immigrants, asylum seekers and EU citizens coming to work in the UK, this has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with membership of the EU and Brexit. It's just a shame this point has to be continually reiterated to people - a prime example of why referendums are not a great idea...
What countries stop all immigration and how do they do it?
Off top of my head:
North Korea: Shoot the invaders!
Saudi Arabia: Create random charges resulting in death
Qatar, UAE, Kuwait, Bahrain: Army on shoot to kill
Israel: Wall and army
Off top of my head:
North Korea: Shoot the invaders!
Saudi Arabia: Create random charges resulting in death
Qatar, UAE, Kuwait, Bahrain: Army on shoot to kill
Israel: Wall and army
I'm not against the idea of helping refugees, whether they be men, women, children, Yazidi, Sunni, Shia or any denomination, colour, creed or sex. Priority should be given to those most in need, fullstop.
I'm also all for the idea we should be pumping more money and aid into helping the refugees in surrounding countries as, by all accounts, life in the refugee camps is squalid. I'm also certainly not against the idea of processing refugees in the camps and bringing them over to the UK.
I am pointing out however that your idea of just banning any chance of someone claiming asylum because they entered a country illegally is just unworkable and almost certainly illegal under international law.
All this should really be in another thread however, as it has nothing to do with Brexit.
I apologise for assuming that other posters would have common sense and realise that a refugee is normally from a country that is either unstable or somewhere they had to get away from...
Which fails when you're talking about the uk as you have to pass through numerous safe countries with british embasies to get here first.
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2010
- Posts
- 6,316
A pretty good way is to install a murderous dictator and crash the economy. You don't even need a draconian points system for that or any other additional measures to take effect.
It's virtually possible, but unless you're a protected tribe somewhere in the Amazon, not practised. Even dictators need to go to school and leave for good medical treatment, from time to time; technically that's migration.
Nope, the law states that refugees cannot be treated differently/negatively for corssing illegally from an unsafe country to a safe one.
It does also say that they CAN be treated differently if they pass illegally from a safe country to another safe country before claiming asylum
Syria to UK: 1,500-1,800 miles?
Syria to Saudi and Emirate kingdoms: ~1,000miles
Saudi Arabia: Safe
UAE: Safe
Bahrain: Safe
Qatar: Safe
UAE: Safe
Turkey: Safe enough.
Now apply the same test for Yazidi christians and other minorities. Are they safe in the above countries? I'm gonna answer as you wont: No.
Embassies have the capacity to proves tens of thousands: Yes. Look at India. I can imagine we receive 10-20,000 requests each year from India alone. Googlefu is weak on this.
You are also assuming every one is going to apply to the UK also.
- Status