Immigration - social trouble on its way

[snaw]

Really? or is it just a case that you don't like what they print? As far as your native american indian post goes - do you think that everyone coming into this country legal or illegal wishes us well as a nation?

Nope, it's right wing sensalionalist spin, which cherry picks quotes & stats to further it's own agenda, which is blindingly obvious. I don't like the telegraph much either but at least it don't insult my intelligence by assuming I'm a moron and making my mind up for me, by presenting at least most of the relevent facts, nor sensationalising every story . If you want to defend the Mail be my guest, your welcome to the garbage but you've dropped even further in my estimation in the process.

And nope, I don't think there is a country on earth which has any serious amount of immigration where at least some of those coming in wish them no harm. So we should stop immigration completely then cause some of those coming don't love us as much as we'd like? Not really sure where that line of debate is taking you ...

[BobTheCrate]

...to often people debate over immigration on the basis of some articles and posts in forums like this one...

It is a discussion forum Viktor.

After all everything depends on how you integrate new ones into your existing society

Well said that man - it is a hugely important aspect of immigration all too often never considered properly.

Sustained large scale immigration with little or no regard for the social & economic impact, nearly always leads to a great deal of social tension & strife.

I thought sociology was a fairly well respected study up there with economics. But some here (and all in New Liebour) appear to totally ignore the social implications, let alone pay scant regard to them. Until it adversely affects them, then, they're right there at the front of the queue complaining more loudly than anyone else.

[Hart-floot]

[QUOTE=Viktor]I think the truth is somewhere in between...to often people debate over immigration on the basis of some articles and posts in forums like this one...
After all everything depends on how you integrate new ones into your existing society; have a look at Canada, they actually DEPEND on immigration and seems that no one complains about new arrivals; 2 year visas"? http://www.workpermit.com/news/2006_...on_closure.htm


Your not comparing like with like here. Canada is a huge country with an extremely low population density compared to the UK. Its economy does not depend on immigration but it might benefit from it.

There are some jobs in the UK now that need to be filled but many people here are now seeing their wage rates being reduced to minimum wage or competition for jobs increased, especially White Van man type-jobs and to some extent in the IT arena. At the same time, pressure on housing grows resulting in higher costs, less living space etc etc basic supply & demand. their children can look forward to a worse quality of life.

2 years ago Labour estimated that only 20,000 people from E Europe would come to the UK the reality was its nearer to 600,000 and counting. Fears for next year are probably justified in light of that experience.

I want to see a rich and wealthy Poland & Rumania but not at the expense of this country and its quality of life.

[sasguru]

The problem is that immigration is debated more with the heart than the head.
My personal take on this is that the right type of immigrants i.e. hard-working, intelligent, educated, entreupreunerial are an asset to any country. But under Labour anyone is being let in e.g. those Ethiopians (?) who tried to emulate the London bombings 3 weeks later. Why the feck were they let in? Their former colonial master was Italy and if they were seeking asylum (yeah right!) that's where they should have gone.

[DimPrawn]

We must vote Labour as it's the only way we are going to get the required 10,000,000 people we need to prop up house prices.

HTH.

[snaw]

Sustained large scale immigration with little or no regard for the social & economic impact, nearly always leads to a great deal of social tension & strife.

I thought sociology was a fairly well respected study up there with economics. But some here (and all in New Liebour) appear to totally ignore the social implications, let alone pay scant regard to them.

I'm guessing that's aimed at me, I'm just trying to see where you inferred from my posts that I wasn't aware of the social implications, or indeed was in full agreement with 'large scale immigration'?

BTW I agree with what Sas said, the right kind of immigrants are fine by me. And I am all for a system which doesn't provide benefits or houses to immigrants until they'er citizens of the country and lived and contributed here for a few years (Like in Australia).

[Bagpuss]

the only solution is to make sure all immigrants are white. Any black ones already here will just have to be painted.

[DaveB]

the only solution is to make sure all immigrants are white. Any black ones already here will just have to be painted.

Bagpuss is the bastard child of Jim Davidson and Bernard Manning and I claim my £5.

[BobTheCrate]

I'm guessing that's aimed at me ...

You guessed wrong. It wasn't aimed specifically at you snaw.

It was aimed at those who only concentrate on their view that sustained large scale immigration can only be good because in their opinion, 'we need the labour'.

That belief/opinion in their minds, should override all other considerations.

[snaw]

You guessed wrong. It wasn't aimed specifically at you snaw.

It was aimed at those who only concentrate on their view that sustained large scale immigration can only be good because in their opinion, 'we need the labour'.

That belief/opinion in their minds, should override all other considerations.

Ahh, well it was your prefacing the comment with "But some here" and since I don't see any other 'likely' candidates my paranoia got the better of me.

So who are you talking about then (the 'some here')?