High immigration levels prevent 'cohesive society'
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
leggedstruggle  Croydon 06 Oct 15 4.48pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote jamiemartin721 at 06 Oct 2015 4.16pm
Quote bright&wright at 06 Oct 2015 3.50pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 06 Oct 2015 2.01pm
Quote Forest Hillbilly at 06 Oct 2015 1.44pm
How many Palace players are immigrants ? Speroni,...Cabaye,...Bolasie,...CY Lee,... Jedinak, Hangeland,... and even though Palace have one of the highest proportions of English players, that is why the English national side is shlt. Zaha, Souare, Sako, Delanney, Chammakh, Appiah, McCarthy (Paddy - I think).
Congrats. I don't think mass immigration works. For immigration to work, you need to balance the changes across time, rather than have nearly twice as many migrants as emigrants. What should we do about it then?
mother-in-law is an anagram of woman hitler |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
 Hrolf The Ganger 06 Oct 15 5.34pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Quote jamiemartin721 at 06 Oct 2015 3.41pm
Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 06 Oct 2015 3.30pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 06 Oct 2015 1.57pm
Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 06 Oct 2015 12.56pm
Quote Hoof Hearted at 06 Oct 2015 12.18pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 06 Oct 2015 12.10pm
Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 06 Oct 2015 11.57am
Trickle immigration is a good thing for the gene pool but the kind of numbers we have seen in the last 20 years have been insanely large. Shame on the decision makers for putting money before people. I'd agree with this, more or less. The problem isn't really with migration, refugees etc, that's all more or less sustainable. The problem is that around 500,000 migrate to the UK each year, and around 225,000 emigrate each year. That's an unsustainable increase, and needs to be curbed. 42% of that figure comes from inside the EU, 58% from outside - and the vast majority is for work. The problem is that migration to the UK has been adapted by successive governments to fulfill the demands of corporate interests, rather than society, and consequently, this undermines social cohesion (rapid, large scale change, rather than gradual).
Something that many ignore. The fact is that it is immigrants that tend to have the most children and that will change the face of Britain in a very short time. Aside from that, imagine a growing problem where various religious groups carry on their little squabbles reflecting what is happening in the Middle East or Asia for example. It is a scary thought. Interestingly though this only really applies to the first generation, less to the second generation and almost never to the third generation. The whole 60s paranoia of how the Blacks or Indian's or pakistanis will replace the whites as the majority, never materialized. And its because its based on a false concept, the idea that its economically sustainable - usually in terms of first generation migrants, it was - because they entered into family businesses, and children could contribute, and the extended family could provide child care. However their kids generally grew up and went either into the family business or careers and jobs, and then larger families become economically unsustainable. By the third generation, the 'family business' tends to be shunned, because the income from outside is better. Its an issue, but not one to be overly concerned about. Plenty of white people who are British have very large families, usually with multiple partners and no economic sustainability. The US is a poor model of comparison. The US has always had a massive racial and religious problem, even until very recently, on a scale that never was seen here. Its also worth noting that Chinese and Indian migrants have generally intergrated very well, where as those who tend to be the target of the most prejudice, black and Muslim, have the worst. Racism is definitely a two way street, but the kind of prejudice exhibited in the 60s and 70s, against West Indians, well its not surprising that it created communities that were isolated and wanted nothing to do with society. And we're doing the same thing with Muslim communities, by targeting whole groups, because of issues with a few.
The whole concept of tolerance is a wonderful ideal but you cannot expect Westerners to accept female genital mutilation, honour killings, witchcraft or any other absurdity that immigrants bring with them. There are some cultural traits that must not be accepted. Many are unlawful for one thing. Your assertion about numbers is dependent on immigration slowing or stopping. If there is a constant stream of migrants then there will always be a new first generation of migrants to have a disproportionate number of offspring. There are definitely some cultures that integrate better than others and a lesson should be learned from that. Some cultures obviously need to try harder. I think the problem initially stems from the way that people tend to think those horrors are the norm in that community. They exist, and they need to be stamped out, but a lot of people who came here maybe to get away from that, or where victims who've come here so their kids could avoid it, end up being stigmatized by the hate these things inspire, and that is dangerous, because it drives those people closer into insular groups, and the more 'fantatical' minority who retain such practices. Things like honor killings are terrible, but they are fairly rare in the UK, and they aren't the fault of a whole community but of those few who can't let the old world ways go (arguably the least integrated). But the more we as a community isolate and demonise parts of our community, the more those kinds of people hold sway. When you look at the people in a ethnic community, you generally find that those who are least willing to integrate are those who cling to their old identity. Most want a balance, they don't necessarily want to let go of their origins, but they also want to embrace some of the freedoms of their new home. It would be extremely unfair to blame an entire community for certain cultural traits but equally we must not be apologists for unacceptable acts. The acceptable level for honour killings is zero as with all the other horrors mentioned. It would be unrealistic to expect any migrant to give up their identity in one generation as many Brits on the continent would attest and it is not a pride in ones origins that are the problem as much as respecting the culture of the country you now live in and it's laws. The problem with humans is they always find ways to divide themselves. That might be the natural way of things, in which case we are in for a rocky ride.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
tome  Inner Tantalus Time. 06 Oct 15 7.24pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote jamiemartin721 at 06 Oct 2015 4.16pm
Quote bright&wright at 06 Oct 2015 3.50pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 06 Oct 2015 2.01pm
Quote Forest Hillbilly at 06 Oct 2015 1.44pm
How many Palace players are immigrants ? Speroni,...Cabaye,...Bolasie,...CY Lee,... Jedinak, Hangeland,... and even though Palace have one of the highest proportions of English players, that is why the English national side is shlt. Zaha, Souare, Sako, Delanney, Chammakh, Appiah, McCarthy (Paddy - I think).
Congrats. I don't think mass immigration works. For immigration to work, you need to balance the changes across time, rather than have nearly twice as many migrants as emigrants. I wonder whether the main problem as far as social cohesion is concerned is in fact the 'mass migration' that's internal to the UK. I have certainly seen some data which suggests the volume of people migrating within a country tends to exceed transnational migration by a significant margin. It suggests to me that elements like 'generation rent' and the pull of people to London from the rest of the UK is a primary agent of disruption in communities. Transnational migration is merely more visible. If were approaching community building there would need to be a way to spread jobs around the country, greater security for employees and so on. But the fact that we're now part of a global economy mitigates against control because of the range of opportunities opening up for people. How many here know their neighbours?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| serial thriller The Promised Land 06 Oct 15 9.29pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote OldFella at 06 Oct 2015 12.04pm
Quote serial thriller at 06 Oct 2015 9.05am
I can't help but see this as an opportunistic response to the new rhetoric of the opposition. By once more pushing immigration to the front of political debate, Cameron is able to disregard the fact that we are seeing the largest fall in living standards in a century, a further cut in income for the poorest in society via cuts to tax credits, house prices at an all-time high while house building is at a 50 year low. For Teresa May to have the cheek to come out and blame migration on issues from transport to low pay is an astonishing piece of calculated deceit. What's playing a bigger role in the highest train fares in Europe, some Syrian asylum seekers or the fact that private railway firms' shareholders are walking away with the hundreds of billions of profits they make instead of reinvesting it? Is it the extra 30 000 extra migrants' fault that we are the most unequal and least socially mobile country in Europe, or is it perhaps due to governments like ours who have overseen an economy where the majority of people in poverty are actually in work? I look forward to the Tory split on the EU referendum that hopefully spells the beginning of the end for Osbourne and co. Nurse! Nurse! Come and help this deluded soul
Firstly, no need to thank me for helping you out. Secondly it's interesting to analyse just what these astonishing statistics show. People laugh at the notion that we have an establishment or bourgeoisie in this country but actually we lay a greater claim to one than any other country in the developed world, because what family you're born in to, what school/university you attend and ultimately the wealth of your parents determines how successful you'll be in life moreso than in any other country in the developed world. Meanwhile, if you're at the other end of society you will currently be experiencing economic conditions not seen in two generations, you are experiencing declining pay, an increasingly unstable housing arrangement (by 2020 the rented sector of housing will outstrip home ownership), and the young are being told that for the first time in the post war period they will be worse off than their parents. This is why the success of Corbyn (closing the gap on the Tories' lead ever since he got in to office) is really not that surprising. People, especially the young, are becoming more and more aware that the establishment which runs the country doesn't serve their interests. These are very interesting times indeed, it will be very interesting to see what happens in the next few years.
If punk ever happened I'd be preaching the law, instead of listenin to Lydon lecture BBC4 |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Hrolf The Ganger 06 Oct 15 10.25pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote serial thriller at 06 Oct 2015 9.29pm
Quote OldFella at 06 Oct 2015 12.04pm
Quote serial thriller at 06 Oct 2015 9.05am
I can't help but see this as an opportunistic response to the new rhetoric of the opposition. By once more pushing immigration to the front of political debate, Cameron is able to disregard the fact that we are seeing the largest fall in living standards in a century, a further cut in income for the poorest in society via cuts to tax credits, house prices at an all-time high while house building is at a 50 year low. For Teresa May to have the cheek to come out and blame migration on issues from transport to low pay is an astonishing piece of calculated deceit. What's playing a bigger role in the highest train fares in Europe, some Syrian asylum seekers or the fact that private railway firms' shareholders are walking away with the hundreds of billions of profits they make instead of reinvesting it? Is it the extra 30 000 extra migrants' fault that we are the most unequal and least socially mobile country in Europe, or is it perhaps due to governments like ours who have overseen an economy where the majority of people in poverty are actually in work? I look forward to the Tory split on the EU referendum that hopefully spells the beginning of the end for Osbourne and co. Nurse! Nurse! Come and help this deluded soul
Firstly, no need to thank me for helping you out. Secondly it's interesting to analyse just what these astonishing statistics show. People laugh at the notion that we have an establishment or bourgeoisie in this country but actually we lay a greater claim to one than any other country in the developed world, because what family you're born in to, what school/university you attend and ultimately the wealth of your parents determines how successful you'll be in life moreso than in any other country in the developed world. Meanwhile, if you're at the other end of society you will currently be experiencing economic conditions not seen in two generations, you are experiencing declining pay, an increasingly unstable housing arrangement (by 2020 the rented sector of housing will outstrip home ownership), and the young are being told that for the first time in the post war period they will be worse off than their parents. This is why the success of Corbyn (closing the gap on the Tories' lead ever since he got in to office) is really not that surprising. People, especially the young, are becoming more and more aware that the establishment which runs the country doesn't serve their interests. These are very interesting times indeed, it will be very interesting to see what happens in the next few years. It really won't. Radical young people usually grow up and become more conservative when the realities of life dawn on them. There isn't a hope in hell that Corbyn's brand of retro socialism will get elected. He'll be lucky (or unlucky)to make the election.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| bubble wrap Carparks in South East London 06 Oct 15 10.27pm |
|
|---|---|
|
The diverse choice of prostitute these days has bought a unifying of nations many times for me.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| leggedstruggle Croydon 07 Oct 15 7.54am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 06 Oct 2015 5.34pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 06 Oct 2015 3.41pm
Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 06 Oct 2015 3.30pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 06 Oct 2015 1.57pm
Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 06 Oct 2015 12.56pm
Quote Hoof Hearted at 06 Oct 2015 12.18pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 06 Oct 2015 12.10pm
Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 06 Oct 2015 11.57am
Trickle immigration is a good thing for the gene pool but the kind of numbers we have seen in the last 20 years have been insanely large. Shame on the decision makers for putting money before people. I'd agree with this, more or less. The problem isn't really with migration, refugees etc, that's all more or less sustainable. The problem is that around 500,000 migrate to the UK each year, and around 225,000 emigrate each year. That's an unsustainable increase, and needs to be curbed. 42% of that figure comes from inside the EU, 58% from outside - and the vast majority is for work. The problem is that migration to the UK has been adapted by successive governments to fulfill the demands of corporate interests, rather than society, and consequently, this undermines social cohesion (rapid, large scale change, rather than gradual).
Something that many ignore. The fact is that it is immigrants that tend to have the most children and that will change the face of Britain in a very short time. Aside from that, imagine a growing problem where various religious groups carry on their little squabbles reflecting what is happening in the Middle East or Asia for example. It is a scary thought. Interestingly though this only really applies to the first generation, less to the second generation and almost never to the third generation. The whole 60s paranoia of how the Blacks or Indian's or pakistanis will replace the whites as the majority, never materialized. And its because its based on a false concept, the idea that its economically sustainable - usually in terms of first generation migrants, it was - because they entered into family businesses, and children could contribute, and the extended family could provide child care. However their kids generally grew up and went either into the family business or careers and jobs, and then larger families become economically unsustainable. By the third generation, the 'family business' tends to be shunned, because the income from outside is better. Its an issue, but not one to be overly concerned about. Plenty of white people who are British have very large families, usually with multiple partners and no economic sustainability. The US is a poor model of comparison. The US has always had a massive racial and religious problem, even until very recently, on a scale that never was seen here. Its also worth noting that Chinese and Indian migrants have generally intergrated very well, where as those who tend to be the target of the most prejudice, black and Muslim, have the worst. Racism is definitely a two way street, but the kind of prejudice exhibited in the 60s and 70s, against West Indians, well its not surprising that it created communities that were isolated and wanted nothing to do with society. And we're doing the same thing with Muslim communities, by targeting whole groups, because of issues with a few.
The whole concept of tolerance is a wonderful ideal but you cannot expect Westerners to accept female genital mutilation, honour killings, witchcraft or any other absurdity that immigrants bring with them. There are some cultural traits that must not be accepted. Many are unlawful for one thing. Your assertion about numbers is dependent on immigration slowing or stopping. If there is a constant stream of migrants then there will always be a new first generation of migrants to have a disproportionate number of offspring. There are definitely some cultures that integrate better than others and a lesson should be learned from that. Some cultures obviously need to try harder. I think the problem initially stems from the way that people tend to think those horrors are the norm in that community. They exist, and they need to be stamped out, but a lot of people who came here maybe to get away from that, or where victims who've come here so their kids could avoid it, end up being stigmatized by the hate these things inspire, and that is dangerous, because it drives those people closer into insular groups, and the more 'fantatical' minority who retain such practices. Things like honor killings are terrible, but they are fairly rare in the UK, and they aren't the fault of a whole community but of those few who can't let the old world ways go (arguably the least integrated). But the more we as a community isolate and demonise parts of our community, the more those kinds of people hold sway. When you look at the people in a ethnic community, you generally find that those who are least willing to integrate are those who cling to their old identity. Most want a balance, they don't necessarily want to let go of their origins, but they also want to embrace some of the freedoms of their new home. It would be extremely unfair to blame an entire community for certain cultural traits but equally we must not be apologists for unacceptable acts. The acceptable level for honour killings is zero as with all the other horrors mentioned. It would be unrealistic to expect any migrant to give up their identity in one generation as many Brits on the continent would attest and it is not a pride in ones origins that are the problem as much as respecting the culture of the country you now live in and it's laws. The problem with humans is they always find ways to divide themselves. That might be the natural way of things, in which case we are in for a rocky ride. If they want to keep their identity and take a pride in their origins, why don't Muslims migrate in large numbers to other Islamic countries, some of which are the richest in the world. Edited by leggedstruggle (07 Oct 2015 7.55am)
mother-in-law is an anagram of woman hitler |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| oldcodger 07 Oct 15 8.23am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote leggedstruggle at 07 Oct 2015 7.54am
Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 06 Oct 2015 5.34pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 06 Oct 2015 3.41pm
Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 06 Oct 2015 3.30pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 06 Oct 2015 1.57pm
Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 06 Oct 2015 12.56pm
Quote Hoof Hearted at 06 Oct 2015 12.18pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 06 Oct 2015 12.10pm
Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 06 Oct 2015 11.57am
Trickle immigration is a good thing for the gene pool but the kind of numbers we have seen in the last 20 years have been insanely large. Shame on the decision makers for putting money before people. I'd agree with this, more or less. The problem isn't really with migration, refugees etc, that's all more or less sustainable. The problem is that around 500,000 migrate to the UK each year, and around 225,000 emigrate each year. That's an unsustainable increase, and needs to be curbed. 42% of that figure comes from inside the EU, 58% from outside - and the vast majority is for work. The problem is that migration to the UK has been adapted by successive governments to fulfill the demands of corporate interests, rather than society, and consequently, this undermines social cohesion (rapid, large scale change, rather than gradual).
Something that many ignore. The fact is that it is immigrants that tend to have the most children and that will change the face of Britain in a very short time. Aside from that, imagine a growing problem where various religious groups carry on their little squabbles reflecting what is happening in the Middle East or Asia for example. It is a scary thought. Interestingly though this only really applies to the first generation, less to the second generation and almost never to the third generation. The whole 60s paranoia of how the Blacks or Indian's or pakistanis will replace the whites as the majority, never materialized. And its because its based on a false concept, the idea that its economically sustainable - usually in terms of first generation migrants, it was - because they entered into family businesses, and children could contribute, and the extended family could provide child care. However their kids generally grew up and went either into the family business or careers and jobs, and then larger families become economically unsustainable. By the third generation, the 'family business' tends to be shunned, because the income from outside is better. Its an issue, but not one to be overly concerned about. Plenty of white people who are British have very large families, usually with multiple partners and no economic sustainability. The US is a poor model of comparison. The US has always had a massive racial and religious problem, even until very recently, on a scale that never was seen here. Its also worth noting that Chinese and Indian migrants have generally intergrated very well, where as those who tend to be the target of the most prejudice, black and Muslim, have the worst. Racism is definitely a two way street, but the kind of prejudice exhibited in the 60s and 70s, against West Indians, well its not surprising that it created communities that were isolated and wanted nothing to do with society. And we're doing the same thing with Muslim communities, by targeting whole groups, because of issues with a few.
The whole concept of tolerance is a wonderful ideal but you cannot expect Westerners to accept female genital mutilation, honour killings, witchcraft or any other absurdity that immigrants bring with them. There are some cultural traits that must not be accepted. Many are unlawful for one thing. Your assertion about numbers is dependent on immigration slowing or stopping. If there is a constant stream of migrants then there will always be a new first generation of migrants to have a disproportionate number of offspring. There are definitely some cultures that integrate better than others and a lesson should be learned from that. Some cultures obviously need to try harder. I think the problem initially stems from the way that people tend to think those horrors are the norm in that community. They exist, and they need to be stamped out, but a lot of people who came here maybe to get away from that, or where victims who've come here so their kids could avoid it, end up being stigmatized by the hate these things inspire, and that is dangerous, because it drives those people closer into insular groups, and the more 'fantatical' minority who retain such practices. Things like honor killings are terrible, but they are fairly rare in the UK, and they aren't the fault of a whole community but of those few who can't let the old world ways go (arguably the least integrated). But the more we as a community isolate and demonise parts of our community, the more those kinds of people hold sway. When you look at the people in a ethnic community, you generally find that those who are least willing to integrate are those who cling to their old identity. Most want a balance, they don't necessarily want to let go of their origins, but they also want to embrace some of the freedoms of their new home. It would be extremely unfair to blame an entire community for certain cultural traits but equally we must not be apologists for unacceptable acts. The acceptable level for honour killings is zero as with all the other horrors mentioned. It would be unrealistic to expect any migrant to give up their identity in one generation as many Brits on the continent would attest and it is not a pride in ones origins that are the problem as much as respecting the culture of the country you now live in and it's laws. The problem with humans is they always find ways to divide themselves. That might be the natural way of things, in which case we are in for a rocky ride. If they want to keep their identity and take a pride in their origins, why don't Muslims migrate in large numbers to other Islamic countries, some of which are the richest in the world. Edited by leggedstruggle (07 Oct 2015 7.55am)
What would an ordinary muslim on HOL think, someone who is law abiding, friendly, largely assimilated, but still has faith? Realistically they couldn't help but feel less commonality due to the sweeping reductive 'muslims this, muslim that' stuff that's thrown around on here like it's nothing. So do we really want people to assimilate or has the political and media rhetoric been ramped up to such an extent that we are happy to make the situation worse as long as it makes us feel better.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Hrolf The Ganger 07 Oct 15 9.21am |
|
|---|---|
|
This country has bent over backward to make immigrants welcome. The voices of discontent have grown louder recently and that is hardly surprising given the circumstances, but how much effort does the average Muslim make to blend in with our society ? We frown on Brits who move to France and Spain and create little Englands but for some reason some struggle to apply the same scrutiny when the boot is on the other foot.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 07 Oct 15 9.37am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote leggedstruggle at 06 Oct 2015 4.48pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 06 Oct 2015 4.16pm
Quote bright&wright at 06 Oct 2015 3.50pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 06 Oct 2015 2.01pm
Quote Forest Hillbilly at 06 Oct 2015 1.44pm
How many Palace players are immigrants ? Speroni,...Cabaye,...Bolasie,...CY Lee,... Jedinak, Hangeland,... and even though Palace have one of the highest proportions of English players, that is why the English national side is shlt. Zaha, Souare, Sako, Delanney, Chammakh, Appiah, McCarthy (Paddy - I think).
Congrats. I don't think mass immigration works. For immigration to work, you need to balance the changes across time, rather than have nearly twice as many migrants as emigrants. What should we do about it then? Restrict immigration that relates specifically to employment in the UK, ideally we'd need to half it. In response we should also consider relocating people who are long term unemployed to fill vacancies in the UK with a reasonable minimum wage - Initially funded by the tax revenue and then gradually phased out over a period of time. If necessary this might involve leaving the EU, if memberstates resist the idea of restricting the 'Right of Movement' for working to quota figures.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 07 Oct 15 9.43am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 07 Oct 2015 9.21am
This country has bent over backward to make immigrants welcome. The voices of discontent have grown louder recently and that is hardly surprising given the circumstances, but how much effort does the average Muslim make to blend in with our society ? We frown on Brits who move to France and Spain and create little Englands but for some reason some struggle to apply the same scrutiny when the boot is on the other foot. In my experience they generally seem to get jobs, pay tax, open business and do all the general things that most families seem to do. In my experience as well the UK's had a traditional response to migrants over my life time, and that's been racism and prejudice, admittedly by a minority. But if you're going to damn Muslims by those who actively act against the UK, you should judge the UK response to migrants by the minority as well. Yes, there are bad Muslims in the UK, there are terrible people in every ethnic group, many of whom desire power and influence over others and see hate as a means of achieving that. That is by no means a unique Muslim phenomena.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| SwalecliffeEagle Swalecliffe 07 Oct 15 9.49am |
|
|---|---|
|
I loathe migration on a mass scale, and I loathe those who defend it ten times more. That said, I have never thought of migration as being the reason why jobs are hard to come by. Without doubt, that is just blaming others for one's own failings. In any case, foreigners do the jobs we don't want to. It just makes me laugh when certain people harp on about the wondrous economic benefits that migration brings. They are the same sanctimonious, woolly-headed fools who relentlessly complain that the economy fails to benefit the 99%. If that is so, why should I give a flying fudge what migration does for the economy???
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.