when will the politicians close the gates to immigrants

Dont change the subject. Did this country help poland after the german invasion? Did thousands of our soldiers die in the process? Did we declare war on germany before russia? Mabye your a little confused. For trying to deny the ultimate sacrafices of this nation in the help given to countries like poland its the only defence i can offer you.

Spare me the bullshit . You're the one that needs a History lesson . You do know that hundreds of thousands immigrants died in World War II fighting for Britain/Empire right ? including many Polish for starters to go along with the Indians ECT .

Anser the questions. Are they really that hard? To describe the lose of lives by british serviceman after the nazi invasion of poland as " bullshit" is f*cking disgrasful.

Can't argue with any of that. Where's it taken from?

One thing that has always saddened me, is people who wave flags when the royal family are out and about and then return to their poverty and probably blame "Johnny Foreigner" for it. Very blinkered. Thankfully, we're not all the same.

I think it was an old article from the Guardian, I just did a quick search on pro-immigration. Alot of that is what I believe, and the myths of anti-immigration was what I was attempting to get at yesterday. (Although I admit I could have phrased it better!)

I agree I'm quite happy to admit that I'm anti-monarchy. It seems that many people forget that in reality, there are many expenditures that far outweigh unemployed immigrants. For example Afghanistan, which we should have never entered.

Can't argue with any of that. Where's it taken from?

One thing that has always saddened me, is people who wave flags when the royal family are out and about and then return to their poverty and probably blame "Johnny Foreigner" for it. Very blinkered. Thankfully, we're not all the same.

I think it was an old article from the Guardian, I just did a quick search on pro-immigration. Alot of that is what I believe, and the myths of anti-immigration was what I was attempting to get at yesterday. (Although I admit I could have phrased it better!)

I agree I'm quite happy to admit that I'm anti-monarchy. It seems that many people forget that in reality, there are many expenditures that far outweigh unemployed immigrants. For example Afghanistan, which we should have never entered.

Good man.

Can't argue with any of that. Where's it taken from?

One thing that has always saddened me, is people who wave flags when the royal family are out and about and then return to their poverty and probably blame "Johnny Foreigner" for it. Very blinkered. Thankfully, we're not all the same.

I think it was an old article from the Guardian, I just did a quick search on pro-immigration. Alot of that is what I believe, and the myths of anti-immigration was what I was attempting to get at yesterday. (Although I admit I could have phrased it better!)

I agree I'm quite happy to admit that I'm anti-monarchy. It seems that many people forget that in reality, there are many expenditures that far outweigh unemployed immigrants. For example Afghanistan, which we should have never entered.

I liked the article very good and i agree with most of what you say
im not pro-immigration or anti-immigration just understand there is and always will be a need for immigration one way or another
im pro-monarchy I think the benefits far out way the costs
as for Afghanistan I think we went in for the right reasons and its a just-war but unfortunately like most American wars they dont understand how to rebuild a country and the costs involved and after many failures Iraq being their latest they still dont seem to have learnt their lesson.

Interesting article:
"The anxieties the British public have are understandable given the fact that nobody is communicating the pro-immigration argument. Thus these anxieties are largely based on myths rather than reality. People struggling during the crisis, particularly those at the lower end of the welfare league are wrongly placing the blame on immigrants. Welfare gap in the UK has widened even further under successive Labour governments. Casino banking in this country and elsewhere led tax-payers money to disappear into bankers pockets not only in the last two years but for decades. Similarly, the little Britain pretending to be a superpower alongside the US over the years caused billions of Pounds wasted as well as lives of thousands lost in Afghanistan and Iraq. These are the reasons for increasing poverty, high unemployment and uneven provision of public services across the UK. Detention camps where thousands of asylum seekers kept and a bare room allocated to a refugee couple in a council estate (or ruins) in the most deprived areas of British towns are not and cannot be the source of poverty or any other social problem in todays Britain."

Not the point. A polish worker in britain with 4 kids in poland can send child benefit back to poland. They have no massive overheads here( childcare/morgage ect) so can work for less money to the detriment of local workers. Not they're fault but big industry use it as an excuss to drive down wages in an already stagnent jobs market. This is obviously unfair on people who's family has lived here for generations.

Not the point. A polish worker in britain with 4 kids in poland can send child benefit back to poland. They have no massive overheads here( childcare/morgage ect) so can work for less money to the detriment of local workers. Not they're fault but big industry use it as an excuss to drive down wages in an already stagnent jobs market. This is obviously unfair on people who's family has lived here for generations.

It's the point exactly.

The article suggests that examples such as that are insignificant in the wider context. Furthermore, it argues that you are wrongly blaming the immigrants for the dire economic state that many find themselves in. More substantial targets include the "big industries" that you have mentioned, the bankers and the previous labour government.

Can't argue with any of that. Where's it taken from?

One thing that has always saddened me, is people who wave flags when the royal family are out and about and then return to their poverty and probably blame "Johnny Foreigner" for it. Very blinkered. Thankfully, we're not all the same.

I think it was an old article from the Guardian, I just did a quick search on pro-immigration. Alot of that is what I believe, and the myths of anti-immigration was what I was attempting to get at yesterday. (Although I admit I could have phrased it better!)

I agree I'm quite happy to admit that I'm anti-monarchy. It seems that many people forget that in reality, there are many expenditures that far outweigh unemployed immigrants. For example Afghanistan, which we should have never entered.

so if we don,t fight in afgan etc we can have some more immigrents? look i don,t believe we should be in iraq/afgan but i support the soldiers.i think the immigration debate has missed a point.never mind the jobs/dole impact vast areas of britain have changed without the consent of any local inhabitant because of immigration.if you cannot understand some people don,t want their own culture erased then you will struggle to understand the posts from anybody not pro immigration.for years we had comonwealth immigration which was fine as this was controlled and jobs needed filling.we have always had polish people here.after ww2 they came and worked the mines.i was brought up around them,again invited.who invited the somalis ?and what for.?is the figure 8/9 somali males are unemployed a true/fair one?most areas where immigrants are placed are for political reasons.labour knows most muslim newcomers will go to inner cities to be with fellow muslims.who happen to vote in the main labour.the tories use them for cheap labour to make their mates firms even richer.last year i was on holiday in durham. i took a drive through trimdon colliery.this is where blair would be holed up in the local club at election time trying to keep it real.funnily enough barring a few take aways trimdon colliery was snow like in colour.tone knows that if he dropped say 300 immigrants there then he,d get voted out .imo.the new left(it,s a cultural left not a working class left)reckons white/british people don,t have a culture.well that,s crap.im fine with proper refugees,the uk has always been a save haven for these people.ecconomic refugees?not untill the country is on its feet and we NEED more workers.

so if we don,t fight in afgan etc we can have some more immigrents? look i don,t believe we should be in iraq/afgan but i support the soldiers.i think the immigration debate has missed a point.never mind the jobs/dole impact vast areas of britain have changed without the consent of any local inhabitant because of immigration.if you cannot understand some people don,t want their own culture erased then you will struggle to understand the posts from anybody not pro immigration.for years we had comonwealth immigration which was fine as this was controlled and jobs needed filling.we have always had polish people here.after ww2 they came and worked the mines.i was brought up around them,again invited.who invited the somalis ?and what for.?is the figure 8/9 somali males are unemployed a true/fair one?most areas where immigrants are placed are for political reasons.labour knows most muslim newcomers will go to inner cities to be with fellow muslims.who happen to vote in the main labour.the tories use them for cheap labour to make their mates firms even richer.last year i was on holiday in durham. i took a drive through trimdon colliery.this is where blair would be holed up in the local club at election time trying to keep it real.funnily enough barring a few take aways trimdon colliery was snow like in colour.tone knows that if he dropped say 300 immigrants there then he,d get voted out .imo.the new left(it,s a cultural left not a working class left)reckons white/british people don,t have a culture.well that,s crap.im fine with proper refugees,the uk has always been a save haven for these people.ecconomic refugees?not untill the country is on its feet and we NEED more workers.

No, not at all.

Iraq and Afghanistan have cost over £20 billion and this figure is still rising by the day. We should never have entered either conflict, and this huge amount of money could have been invested wisely in order to create jobs for the people you speak of.

Immigration needs greater control yes, but you must realise that it is not a primary reason for unemployment.

so if we don,t fight in afgan etc we can have some more immigrents? look i don,t believe we should be in iraq/afgan but i support the soldiers.i think the immigration debate has missed a point.never mind the jobs/dole impact vast areas of britain have changed without the consent of any local inhabitant because of immigration.if you cannot understand some people don,t want their own culture erased then you will struggle to understand the posts from anybody not pro immigration.for years we had comonwealth immigration which was fine as this was controlled and jobs needed filling.we have always had polish people here.after ww2 they came and worked the mines.i was brought up around them,again invited.who invited the somalis ?and what for.?is the figure 8/9 somali males are unemployed a true/fair one?most areas where immigrants are placed are for political reasons.labour knows most muslim newcomers will go to inner cities to be with fellow muslims.who happen to vote in the main labour.the tories use them for cheap labour to make their mates firms even richer.last year i was on holiday in durham. i took a drive through trimdon colliery.this is where blair would be holed up in the local club at election time trying to keep it real.funnily enough barring a few take aways trimdon colliery was snow like in colour.tone knows that if he dropped say 300 immigrants there then he,d get voted out .imo.the new left(it,s a cultural left not a working class left)reckons white/british people don,t have a culture.well that,s crap.im fine with proper refugees,the uk has always been a save haven for these people.ecconomic refugees?not untill the country is on its feet and we NEED more workers.

No, not at all.

Iraq and Afghanistan have cost over £20 billion and this figure is still rising by the day. We should never have entered either conflict, and this huge amount of money could have been invested wisely in order to create jobs for the people you speak of.

Immigration needs greater control yes, but you must realise that it is not a primary reason for unemployment.

the money spent in those countries should have been used to open mines and create our own energy again.that would take huge figures off the dole .not just mines.other sectors as well.the fact are that we have minus jobs not plus jobs so how can any more immigration aid the uk ecomany?if we had all jobs filled i,d say bring them in.on visa,s first not passports..also we need tp reeducate some of our british born malingerers of all colours the benefits morally of working for a living.i know why governments make recessions so the wages can get forced down.i know also they are quite happy to let white brits moan about johny forienger .whilst this is happening nobody is watching camerons mob raping the city.what i,m saying is people do not want there towns turned into something they don,t reconise.even alina baig ,the columist from the sun said this happening in bradford in a city where she lives and it,s happening in a city that already given up the ghost of mainstream british culture.who is she refering to?fellow muslims of differing cultures.top and bottom of this is it took us 40 years to get along ok withthe first post war wave of immigrents..then a whole new set of immigrants have been dumped on these shores.is it any wonder people struggle to come to terms with it?

Not the point. A polish worker in britain with 4 kids in poland can send child benefit back to poland. They have no massive overheads here( childcare/morgage ect) so can work for less money to the detriment of local workers. Not they're fault but big industry use it as an excuss to drive down wages in an already stagnent jobs market. This is obviously unfair on people who's family has lived here for generations.

It's the point exactly.

The article suggests that examples such as that are insignificant in the wider context. Furthermore, it argues that you are wrongly blaming the immigrants for the dire economic state that many find themselves in. More substantial targets include the "big industries" that you have mentioned, the bankers and the previous labour government.

It is significant if your on the "ground level" If you re-read my post you will find i state" not they fault" ie polish workers. Whilst i agree with the artical in general it misses the point that mass immigration at this time will do no good for the prospects of the million or so youth unemployed... Excusse grammatical errors/on mobile

the money spent in those countries should have been used to open mines and create our own energy again.that would take huge figures off the dole .not just mines.other sectors as well.the fact are that we have minus jobs not plus jobs so how can any more immigration aid the uk ecomany?if we had all jobs filled i,d say bring them in.on visa,s first not passports..also we need tp reeducate some of our british born malingerers of all colours the benefits morally of working for a living.i know why governments make recessions so the wages can get forced down.i know also they are quite happy to let white brits moan about johny forienger .whilst this is happening nobody is watching camerons mob raping the city.what i,m saying is people do not want there towns turned into something they don,t reconise.even alina baig ,the columist from the sun said this happening in bradford in a city where she lives and it,s happening in a city that already given up the ghost of mainstream british culture.who is she refering to?fellow muslims of differing cultures.top and bottom of this is it took us 40 years to get along ok withthe first post war wave of immigrents..then a whole new set of immigrants have been dumped on these shores.is it any wonder people struggle to come to terms with it?

With the upmost respect, is this a joke?

I'm afraid that mining is archaic. There is no longer sufficent mining materials to sustain the population of Wales, furthermore many people would be extremely reluctant to become a miner considering the alternative blue-collar jobs available.

It would have been wisely spent on encouraging new businesses, or expanding current businesses in order to create jobs. Furthermore, it could have been invested in the creation of further public services. All excellent alternatives to an expensive trivial conflict.

I appreciate that many people want to adhere to British culture. However, this culture originated from immigration. Unfortunately it is the intolerence or organisations such as the BNP and EDL that provokes such ideology. People find it difficult to comprehend that times are changing and Britain is developing. However, as you said, soon enough they'll be classified as British and the cycle will begin once more.

Someday.........................



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DJCYjMQ9qw


It can be done people.......

This is a brilliant organisation with genuine aims.


http://uaf.org.uk/

This is a brilliant organisation with genuine aims.


http://uaf.org.uk/

Ga is missing the point. The reason workers come here is normaly short stay/ high wages to form a better life back home( Cant blame em). It benefits them, it benefits the lucky few who employ them. It does not benefit the 3 million current unemployed. Your idelogical utopia land of everyone holding hands and skipping down the streets with money coming out of ther arses is sadly misplaced.

Ga is missing the point. The reason workers come here is normaly short stay/ high wages to form a better life back home( Cant blame em). It benefits them, it benefits the lucky few who employ them. It does not benefit the 3 million current unemployed. Your idelogical utopia land of everyone holding hands and skipping down the streets with money coming out of ther arses is sadly misplaced.

Who's ideological utopia land is that?

It's a damn sight more realistic then your suggestion to spend £20 billion on mining.

Ga is missing the point. The reason workers come here is normaly short stay/ high wages to form a better life back home( Cant blame em). It benefits them, it benefits the lucky few who employ them. It does not benefit the 3 million current unemployed. Your idelogical utopia land of everyone holding hands and skipping down the streets with money coming out of ther arses is sadly misplaced.

Who's ideological utopia land is that?

It's a damn sight more realistic then your suggestion to spend £20 billion on mining.

Read back. Wrong poster. I suggested nothing of the sort.

. Your idelogical utopia land of everyone holding hands and skipping down the streets with money coming out of ther arses is sadly misplaced.

Does that thought scare you?

. Your idelogical utopia land of everyone holding hands and skipping down the streets with money coming out of ther arses is sadly misplaced.

Does that thought scare you?

Nothing scares me.

Either way, there are more pressing concerns to our government than immigration. Unemployment IS one, and the remedy is not immigration related.

Most economists believe that the current rise in unemployment has little to do with immigration, and more to do with the high costs of employing new workers, or firing old ones. Unemployment rose rapidly in many EU countries during the 1980's when immigration was stable for example.

Furthermore, Most immigrants are of working age, which means they consume less of the services provided by the state, such as health care and education, and pay more in taxes. In the UK, Home Office research suggests that immigrants pay £2.5bn more in taxes than they take in benefits.

AND the Treasury estimates that the economic growth rate has been boosted because of immigration.

To suggest, as you have done, that the current rate of unemployment is a consequence of immigration is false. Yes, it has an effect, but it is not a primary contributing factor.

. Your idelogical utopia land of everyone holding hands and skipping down the streets with money coming out of ther arses is sadly misplaced.

Does that thought scare you?

Nothing scares me.

No sense, no fear?

. Your idelogical utopia land of everyone holding hands and skipping down the streets with money coming out of ther arses is sadly misplaced.

Does that thought scare you?

Nothing scares me.

No sense, no fear?

Possibily/Maybe

I refer you all to my previous post.

Either way, there are more pressing concerns to our government than immigration. Unemployment IS one, and the remedy is not immigration related.

Most economists believe that the current rise in unemployment has little to do with immigration, and more to do with the high costs of employing new workers, or firing old ones. Unemployment rose rapidly in many EU countries during the 1980's when immigration was stable for example.

Furthermore, Most immigrants are of working age, which means they consume less of the services provided by the state, such as health care and education, and pay more in taxes. In the UK, Home Office research suggests that immigrants pay £2.5bn more in taxes than they take in benefits.

AND the Treasury estimates that the economic growth rate has been boosted because of immigration.

To suggest, as you have done, that the current rate of unemployment is a consequence of immigration is false. Yes, it has an effect, but it is not a primary contributing factor.

Again ive suggested no such thing. Where do i state that unemployment is a consequence of immigration? Your suggestioni that unemployment is caused through the inability to" dire old workers" is quote frankly laughable. Maybe you should find yourself another economist.o

Sorry should read " fire old workers"

You sound a proper little tory. As for immigrants paying more taxes, i think your deluded. How much tax has abu hamza and his merry men paid over the last ten years?

Again ive suggested no such thing. Where do i state that unemployment is a consequence of immigration? Your suggestioni that unemployment is caused through the inability to" dire old workers" is quote frankly laughable. Maybe you should find yourself another economist.

You stated that immigration does not benefit the 3 million unemployed (exaggerated figure I may add). However, it has a minimal effect in comparison with other factors. Immigration has actually benefited the economy hugely.

As for that source, I quote:

"Most economists believe that the current rise in unemployment has little to do with immigration, and more to do with the high costs of employing new workers, or firing old ones."

Of course, your knowledge of the economy is far superior to the majority of qualified economists.

Again ive suggested no such thing. Where do i state that unemployment is a consequence of immigration? Your suggestioni that unemployment is caused through the inability to" dire old workers" is quote frankly laughable. Maybe you should find yourself another economist.

You stated that immigration does not benefit the 3 million unemployed (exaggerated figure I may add). However, it has a minimal effect in comparison with other factors. Immigration has actually benefited the economy hugely.

As for that source, I quote:

"Most economists believe that the current rise in unemployment has little to do with immigration, and more to do with the high costs of employing new workers, or firing old ones."

Of course, your knowledge of the economy is far superior to the majority of qualified economists.

You started a thread telling people what not to read,now you quote economists and the treasury. T&ey not right all the time. Youll be quoting david cameron next. Anyway how much tax did hamza and his merry band of immigrant looneys put into the economy again. I must ov missed it.

Figures can be twisted anyway they want to suit whichever side you want to to argue for.

Immigrants pay more taxes than they take benefits you say, but this argument does not take into account the benefits that then have to be paid to British tradesmen who have been forced out of work by immigrants undercutting them.

The same taxes would have to be paid by British workers if they filled these vacancies, probably more tax in fact as they were not selling themselves short, and these same British workers wouldnt then need to be paid benefits. Simple economics.

Yes we are skint because of the previous government, and its not because of immigration, as GA has pointed out the WoA, Banks balls-up, the high borrowing.etc.etc but the fact is we have to now be reactive (as weve missed the chance to be pro-active) and face up to the fact that we have a huge unemployment problem, a major social housing problem, and our NHS is stretched to the max, so logically it makes absolute no sense to keep taking in more immigrants when we are faced with these problems.

Anyone who thinks all immigrants in this country are A. Legal and B. Working need to take a little day trip to Merthyr.

We should adopt a stricter approach, like Germany, wherby we encourage immigrants for areas that we are short of skilled workers. A few years ago Germany had a shortage of skilled IT workers and encouraged immigrants to fill these positions.

They didnt, and dont, encourage any old deadbeat to fill up their country and take advantage of their benefit system.

We almost certainly shouldnt be encouraging them to come here for a "Safe haven" as the WA are proposing. Unless of course they have forest full of money trees.

Figures can be twisted anyway they want to suit whichever side you want to to argue for.

Immigrants pay more taxes than they take benefits you say, but this argument does not take into account the benefits that then have to be paid to British tradesmen who have been forced out of work by immigrants undercutting them.

The same taxes would have to be paid by British workers if they filled these vacancies, probably more tax in fact as they were not selling themselves short, and these same British workers wouldnt then need to be paid benefits. Simple economics.

Yes we are skint because of the previous government, and its not because of immigration, as GA has pointed out the WoA, Banks balls-up, the high borrowing.etc.etc but the fact is we have to now be reactive (as weve missed the chance to be pro-active) and face up to the fact that we have a huge unemployment problem, a major social housing problem, and our NHS is stretched to the max, so logically it makes absolute no sense to keep taking in more immigrants when we are faced with these problems.

Anyone who thinks all immigrants in this country are A. Legal and B. Working need to take a little day trip to Merthyr.

We should adopt a stricter approach, like Germany, wherby we encourage immigrants for areas that we are short of skilled workers. A few years ago Germany had a shortage of skilled IT workers and encouraged immigrants to fill these positions.

They didnt, and dont, encourage any old deadbeat to fill up their country and take advantage of their benefit system.

We almost certainly shouldnt be encouraging them to come here for a "Safe haven" as the WA are proposing. Unless of course they have forest full of money trees.

That's not strictly true, because those figures are factual. It's an easy way out to simply claim they are manipulated in some way.

FACT dictates that immigration has improved the economy. Regardless of whether a Pole from Merthyr fits your new kitchen. Nobody has suggested that all immigrants are legal and employed, it's the majority.