Representing CUK Brexiteers

[sasguru]

The context of the discussion as framed by me was an 80% growth in population was due to immigration.

If people come into the country and then have children the sum of those people are due to immigration.

You & WTFH are getting confused as usual. It does not matter whether they are british citizens. or not.

if you get married then have 3 children, divorce and then have 4 children the total number of children you have is 7. It doesn't matter what surname they have or if they are born out of wedlock.

The point which you're trying to wriggle out of, as per fooking usual, when you're cornered like the rat you are, is this:

Most reasonable people would say that people born in the UK to British citizens are British.
The only people who don't are the far right hence my ironic "a dog born in a stable is not a horse" comment, the irony of which shot over your head, as per fooking usual.
That's what the law says.
That's how the ONS counts them which is why its figures differ from MW.
So to count them as immigrants as MW (and you) are doing is wrong and misleading.
I would argue that IS racist, in that you're claiming the race (i.e. background) of someone born in the Uk is the over-riding factor in their identity as opposed to whether they've assimilated and become British.

Is that clear to you or would you like to squirm and twist some more?

[meridian]

Thanks glad you understand and tried to understand.

I'm quite a fan of managed migration. I want the best doctors, scientists etc to come here and stay. However the current migration strategies quality & volume is making people very unhappy. The result will almost certainly be unpleasantness.

Migrationwatch has been attacked regularly however they have consistently proved their figures correct. Even if the devil provides the detail a sensible man tries to understand it.

I'm not sure Migrationwatch is racist here is a glowing report from the Guardian freely admitting that its figures were right despite accusations of racism.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...ounder-peerage


I am often accused of racism here, these and other posters have suggested I am a member of the BNP & EDL frequently. Both WTFH & Sasguru have ,I am assuming deliberately, misunderstood the detail, either that or they are quite stupid.


I think a 12% increase in population in 15 years is something we should talk about regardless of where it comes from don't you?

Only “the best” doctors, scientists, etc? What about average ones that slog it out for 60 hours a week keeping things running?

Or to take it to another step, what about cleaners, chefs and porters, fruit pickers, road sweepers, baristas, teacher’s assistants, etc? They all equally support the country by keeping things running.

Why would I think that an average increase in population is something we should talk about? It’s average, it’s not extraordinary.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...mmigrants.html

The UK's rate of 13.2 is in line with the global average, despite calls for immigration to be reduced in the country.
It is also around the average for the G8 countries, with Japan and Russia having the lowest proportion of immigrants and Germany and Canada having the highest. Several studies have found that immigrants have a proven economic worth to the country.

[vetran]

The point which you're trying to wriggle out of, as per fooking usual, when you're cornered like the rat you are, is this:

Most reasonable people would say that people born in the UK to British citizens are British.
The only people who don't are the far right hence my ironic "a dog born in a stable is not a horse" comment, the irony of which shot over your head, as per fooking usual.
That's what the law says.
That's how the ONS counts them which is why its figures differ from MW.
So to count them as immigrants as MW (and you) are doing is wrong and misleading.
I would argue that IS racist, in that you're claiming the race (i.e. background) of someone born in the Uk is the over-riding factor in their identity as opposed to whether they've assimilated and become British.

Is that clear to you or would you like to squirm and twist some more?

unfortunately you don't understand the argument and are trying to deflect.

It is not about citizenship it is about change. Its too fast.

[sasguru]

unfortunately you don't understand the argument and are trying to deflect.

It is not about citizenship it is about change. Its too fast.

No I understand perfectly. You're the one deflecting.

You're saying that people born in the UK to immigrants must be counted as immigrants i.e. you're saying their race is the most important thing about them.
Which makes you a racist.
We all understand that various groups assimilate differently but your argument has been, and is, a blanket one.

Now that we've established that, I actually agree that the change has been too fast, but that's a different issue.*

*Having said which as Meridian has pointed out, we're average in the EU. Switzerland, which is one country I know having worked there has a much higher proportion of foreign born than the UK.

[vetran]

No I understand perfectly. You're the one deflecting.

You're saying that people born in the UK to immigrants must be counted as immigrants i.e. you're saying their race is the most important thing about them.
Which makes you a racist.
We all understand that various groups assimilate differently but your argument has been, and is, a blanket one.

Now that we've established that, I actually agree that the change has been too fast, but that's a different issue.*

*Having said which as Meridian has pointed out, we're average in the EU. Switzerland, which is one country I know having worked there has a much higher proportion of foreign born than the UK.

Its very clear but you don't want to understand... Accusing people of racism is as usual assbollox.

strange the people i know that worked in Switzerland were very clear they were not Swiss citizens and they were never going to be so.

[vetran]

Only “the best” doctors, scientists, etc? What about average ones that slog it out for 60 hours a week keeping things running?

Or to take it to another step, what about cleaners, chefs and porters, fruit pickers, road sweepers, baristas, teacher’s assistants, etc? They all equally support the country by keeping things running.

Why would I think that an average increase in population is something we should talk about? It’s average, it’s not extraordinary.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...mmigrants.html

that is interesting the average is initially compelling. But people in the UAE were not expected to become citizens especially if they were non western, that does seem to be a common thread.

[meridian]

It is not about citizenship it is about change. Its too fast.

that is interesting the average is initially compelling. But people in the UAE were not expected to become citizens especially if they were non western, that does seem to be a common thread.

?

So now you’ve realised that the facts on immigration don’t fit your narrative, you’re changing it to citizenship (I’m ignoring the snide dig - and you’re wondering why you’re being called a racist occasionally...)

[WTFH]

WTFH has highlighted the press are selling papers based on the problem of migration, the conversation has finally changed from "its racist to challenge migration" to "what are we going to do about migration its obviously not working" I think that is progress. We are still listening to a litany of "all Immigration is good" & "how dare you suggest some immigrants are bad".

No, you are listening to "All immigration is evil", "all immigrants steal jobs", "all immigrants are on benefits", etc, and when challenged, you claim that it's false and that you have to put up with a litany of "all immigration is good".
If you are hearing that "all immigration is good" so often, could you please point to one headline in the Daily Mail which says that. Or any other media outlet that you rely on for your news.

Try the BBC & the Guardian.

I asked you to provide me with a link to a headline not a vague comment about looking at two news sources. Just a link to somewhere that specifically says "all immigration is good".

If you haven't got that link, then that would imply you have been sucked in to the propaganda of the Daily Wail.

I realise you'd prefer to change the subject, or go on the attack in some other direction, but all I'd like is an actual link to an actual headline from the BBC or the Guardian (since you have suggested they have specifically said it) where they have said it.

According to the propaganda man who can't find a link to back up his wildly inaccurate opinion, he expects that anyone born in the UK whose mother is not born in the UK to be treated as an immigrant. Doesn't matter whether his mother is British or not, if she wasn't born in the UK, then the child can never be considered British.

I put plenty of links up and asked you direct questions you ignored them.

You put up zero links to the BBC or Guardian. Then in your last post you linked to think tank reports that accuse the BBC of being pro-immigration but you still have failed 100% to point to a BBC or Guardian headline which states "all Immigration is good" & "how dare you suggest some immigrants are bad".
Until you do so, you are either an innocent person who has been duped by the propaganda machine or you are a liar who refuses to disagree with the propaganda.

[sasguru]

Accusing people of racism is as usual assbollox.

strange the people i know that worked in Switzerland were very clear they were not Swiss citizens and they were never going to be so.

Actually I don't often, if ever, accuse people of racism.
But since you espouse a policy that was last put forward by the BNP (AFAIK even UKIP don't suggest that the British-born British citizens of immigrants should be counted as immigrants) then, if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is a duck.

As usual with you and your irrelevant deflections, the Swiss comment has nothing to do with anything at all. Plenty of people I know have become Swiss citizens.

The problem with you is that you have a low IQ and so constantly make an complete arse of yourself/reveal you true colours.

[vetran]

?

So now you’ve realised that the facts on immigration don’t fit your narrative, you’re changing it to citizenship (I’m ignoring the snide dig - and you’re wondering why you’re being called a racist occasionally...)

I am not changing it to citizenship. AssGuru is.

The point about the original study was that if you counted the increase in population by immigration you should count the children of immigrants. This is not about citizenship, Ass & WTFH were suggesting this was racist because the parents may be naturalised.

If I have a population of pink flamingos e & introduce a number of blue flamingos, then if I want to count the number of flamingos by colour the children of a couple of blue flamingos will be blue, it doesn't matter whether they have a British passport or not.

Its a population study not a citizenship study put forward by a peer of the realm and a group that has managed to steer through a difficult area without being proven racist - you may believe they are, but no reporter has been able to prove it and a number of reputable sources have used their figures so I choose to believe they aren't.

You argued quite reasonably that migration was high in other countries. That was indeed interesting and on reflection the growth of citizenship should also be part of the equation.

For giggles lets see how the Swiss describe immigrant children?

https://www.thelocal.ch/20170831/the...in-switzerland

Are the swiss inherently racist?

Since babies born to foreign citizens in Switzerland do not automatically get Swiss citizenship, the figures in the table below also include Swiss-born foreigners.

Which is what I said and was accused of racism.

So Ass do the Swiss have an opinion on stable births as you seem to be obsessed with this?