29 million Bulgarians and Romanians will gain the right to live and work unrestricted in our country

matdom said:
if it was the weather then why do africans come here, if it were to do with language why do other people from other countries come here.
Its one reason an that is the standard quality of life, no wars, no famine etc..
people of this country built this country, they developed it to a good standard, the foreign people do not want to build there country they want others to put in the hard word of developing a nation, they want an easy life and leech of another tribe, which would be the British.

Why spend the time developing your country when someone else has spend the time.
Click to expand...

I don't begrudge anyone wanting the same basic quality of life that we have here. Esp people who want to pull themselves out of poverty but can't in their home country. Even tho I know this likely means our (cushy) standard of living dropping a bit.

I do think there are elements of truth in what you said about some cultures/peoples being unable/unwilling to sort their own problems out. I think that mostly applies to African nations tho, not east European ones. Even then it's impossible to brand everyone in this way. Plenty of good people there I'm sure being screwed by their own govts.

Perhaps if we can cut down on those people who choose to live on benefits when they could find work, then we'll have plenty to support immigrants who need a (temporary) helping hand to set up here, who want to work and prosper.

Anyway, who are the 'people of this country who built this country' again? We've been invaded by the Romans, French, etc, etc. Who settled here, built here...
 
Also I think it should be pointed out that we owe low-paid foreign workers a great deal. Without them, we wouldn't have cheap electronics, etc, so we can afford all the crap we have (and mostly don't need).

If as a nation we'd stuck to building everything in this country, employing british labour to make it all, we'd have the moral high ground for closing our borders. We'd also have a lot less stuff as everything would be super expensive, compared to the prices we pay today.

Essentially the system is balancing itself out. We've been able to afford to import a great deal at low cost, but now we have less jobs/manufacturing, the foreign countries/workforces have got richer, and we're now getting poorer.

Eventually people will stop wanting to come here when wages and living conditions equalise.
 
matdom said:
the foreign people do not want to build there country they want others to put in the hard word of developing a nation, they want an easy life and leech of another tribe, which would be the British.

Why spend the time developing your country when someone else has spend the time.
Click to expand...

Were you the one who developed this country? No? You lazy git. :p
 
FoxEye said:
Anyway, who are the 'people of this country who built this country' again? We've been invaded by the Romans, French, etc, etc. Who settled here, built here...
Click to expand...

People keep trotting out this guff about Romans invading and it really needs addressing.

Yes they invaded, then they left and all their technology was forgotten and all their buildings fell into ruin or were salvaged for building. Britain went right back to where they were before, living in mud huts. So it makes absolutely no difference to our current culture if the Romans invaded at all.
The Normans had a greater affect but it's not really that noticeable.

Our culture is mostly defined by the industrial revolution, through the Victorian period up to say late 1960. Almost none of which was affected in the slightest by the culture from other countries

However the past twenty years has seen a change in culture, partly through globalisation, partly as a result of immigration. Although the only culture that seems to have had a negative impact on the UK is the Islamic one, everyone else's culture has been mostly positive or expansive.
 
That's simply untrue, bitslice. The Romans may have left their buildings etc, but the effect they had on our population wouldn't have just left with them. We have them to thank (or not) for Christianity, as a start.

As for your other points, culture builds up over centuries, not decades, despite more obvious changes.
 
dirtychinchilla said:
That's a redundant point. The fact is that Romans brought Christianity to England, as well as building techniques, science, philosophy etc. to say nothing of language.

You're wrong, please just admit it.
Click to expand...

That's not entirely correct either. With the absence of a Roman influence in England, the Anglo Saxon and Viking belief systems began to exert their influence over Southern and Northern and Eastern England respectively (many part of England retained Christianity, although in a myriad of cults and Celtic practices which integrated paganism). In fact Christianity probably predated Constantine in England, although very few in number and even under a Roman Rule, it was largely the ruling class that practiced Christianity...England did not become fully Christianized until long after the Romans and it was as late as the 11th century (****) before Christianization of England could really be called complete. It is thought that Augustine and Mellitus of the Gregorian Mission in the 7th Century who were largely responsible for Christianization of the Anglo-Saxons.

Whether the Romans (as in the legions etc) actually came to England or not, it is highly likely that England would have become Christian regardless, as much of the conversion was outside of the Roman occupation, there is certainly evidence of Christianity prior to Roman Influence and plenty of evidence to suggest the restitution of folk religions as they withdrew from their occupation (Christianity was replaced by Germanic folk religion and Viking paganism in many parts of England) , which led a couple of centuries later to The Gregorian Mission.
 
Last edited:
I just thought Christianity only took off after Augustine arrived after the Romans left. Didn't know the detail.

Buildings did revert back to previous techniques and some roman ideas didn't get reinvented until the 18th century
 
Last edited:
dirtychinchilla said:
That's good to know, I hadn't realised. Religion aside, my point still stands.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't
The language also reverted back.

Language and religion are the main drivers of culture, not a crumbling wall near Scotland

It's just like the middle east, we turn up, kill everything, leave, and it goes right back to being a sandy toilet.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom