Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Trampa501

Are There Any Good Reasons To Keep Out Immigrants?

Recommended Posts

Very few lucid reasons pro, but there is a lot of virtue signalling going on. If that's the argument 'for' then I despair.

Of course we need some but our current policy is utterly idiotic. I have a number of friends who came from abroad - Japanese, Russian, American - who have all been told to get out of the country, which eventually they had to do. All educated, would assimilate and be excellent citizens, one of whom had an employer who was willing to ask the Home Office on his behalf for a visa (no joy, get out).

Meanwhile we import ISIS terrorists en masse. Madness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess my argument would always boil down to the 'demographics is destiny' viewpoint. While I dont think its necessary to have a completely racially pure society - whatever that may mean, once the non-indigenous population grows beyond a few percent, it starts demanding 'its' views and ways are considered...at the cost of the host society. This wouldnt be a problem in a free, post democratic world, but in democracies, groups matter, individuals do not...hence the rise of identity politics creating new divisions.

Its always seemed wise to me to maintain a racial or ethnic 'homeland' where any given race can be safe from the persecution of others. In a world where many are demanding just this...think the split of Sudan and the demands for a Kurdish homeland, it seems insane we are willing to simply throw away ours.

Im not too bothered about South Africa reverting to 100% black for example, as it seems likely to do, even though without european culture I think it would be far worse off, but for us to allow the growth of non-europeans in Europe to being a majority within a few decades, seems the height of arrogance...this idea we can continue to expect liberal western values are still relevant when liberal westerners are a minority.

Im not sure how anyone can really have lived through the past few years of news, be it Rotherham, Tower Hamlets, or the general atmosphere of it being not if, but when the muslims decide to blow something up and cause mass devastation on the streets, and think there's no downside to immigration. You import people from backward culture, you are going to end up with some of that backward culture.

I am very cautious of who I let into my home, I will want to know them first and conduct detailed research onto their past. I am very cautious of who is moving into my neighbourhood, again I will search their details as best I can and decide whether I make their acquaintance accordingly. I don't see why it should be any different for who we admit into our nation. Perhaps this wouldnt be a problem if we had freedom of association and could self segregate...but we cant, so if the home office decides to put a bunch of 'refugee' ex-jihadi's next door to you, there isnt much you can do about it.

I must say im interested if the open borders crowd are just as carefree when they choose where to live or who is living there when they buy a house, or if they just choose where is cheapest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A really weird question does anyone really think that all immigrants are the same? Some are useful, some useless (pro single parents) and some are dangerous (Glasgow airport bombers) the debate should be which ones are useful, how to house them and how to stop the rest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is easier to blame the symptom rather than the cause. The causes of unwanted immigration both from within the EU and from outside are many and varied but much is within the control of the UK itself. For example why does the UK not impose s 4 year residency teest for benefits? Why does the UK pay child benefit for children not living in the UK? Why does the UK continue to use housing benefit to prop up it's Ponzi hpi economy? Why does the UK not have id cards? Why does the UK choose to have a low wage/low skill economy. Factors such as these are entirely within the gift of the UK to sort out, it is easier not to though and to use immigration and the EU as scapegoats to blame instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is easier to blame the symptom rather than the cause. The causes of unwanted immigration both from within the EU and from outside are many and varied but much is within the control of the UK itself. For example why does the UK not impose s 4 year residency teest for benefits? Why does the UK pay child benefit for children not living in the UK? Why does the UK continue to use housing benefit to prop up it's Ponzi hpi economy? Why does the UK not have id cards? Why does the UK choose to have a low wage/low skill economy. Factors such as these are entirely within the gift of the UK to sort out, it is easier not to though and to use immigration and the EU as scapegoats to blame instead.

Blaming immigration and the EU and immigration for our woes is wrong, wanting to be able to control immigration without the EUs interference is another matter though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The UK is not the most densely populated country in Europe - although it's true that the open spaces of Scotland and Wales skew the average.

If England were independent of Scotland then yes it would be the most densely populated country, but then so would be the Ruhrland if that were independent...

There is a strong argument that cities like London and New York that welcome migrants from various sources, thrive over the long run. It doesn't seem to work when one particular ethnic or religious group dominate the figures, otherwise Liverpool would have been a great success post-war (instead it lost half a million in population). Bradford would be another example. Anyone have recent figures on their local economy?

Strangely it's not been mentioned much on this thread, but surely security would be a big reason to keep out immigrants? The rejoinder to that I suppose is that we take in 30 million tourist visitors every year, so the bad guys will always find a way in... In either case it's creating a lot of work for the security forces.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The UK is not the most densely populated country in Europe - although it's true that the open spaces of Scotland and Wales skew the average.

If England were independent of Scotland then yes it would be the most densely populated country, but then so would be the Ruhrland if that were independent...

There is a strong argument that cities like London and New York that welcome migrants from various sources, thrive over the long run. It doesn't seem to work when one particular ethnic or religious group dominate the figures, otherwise Liverpool would have been a great success post-war (instead it lost half a million in population). Bradford would be another example. Anyone have recent figures on their local economy?

Strangely it's not been mentioned much on this thread, but surely security would be a big reason to keep out immigrants? The rejoinder to that I suppose is that we take in 30 million tourist visitors every year, so the bad guys will always find a way in... In either case it's creating a lot of work for the security forces.

I can only speak for Newham, east London where I vaguely recall some figures from a few years ago. It seemed to be hit by the quadruple whammy of being one of the poorest boroughs in the country, where average salaries were decreasing, house prices were rocketing and the council boss was one of the best paid in the country. It was, of course, one of the first to where BMEs were in a majority. I dare say things have improved a tad wealth wise since the Olympics and gentrification.

I do wonder how much of this is causation v correlation though. It's hardly surprising that the poorest areas have most immigrants because they tend to be asset and cash poor - and those areas tend to be the cheapest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The UK is not the most densely populated country in Europe - although it's true that the open spaces of Scotland and Wales skew the average.

If England were independent of Scotland then yes it would be the most densely populated country, but then so would be the Ruhrland if that were independent...

That's why the EU measure it on as regional basis, and on that level SE England population density beats any other region in the EU. And that's where the majority of immigrants in the UK head.

Agree with earlier poster - UK could easily sort this with or without EU membership. Have contribution based system with residency test, like most nations.

Even if it did not reduce numbers it would save a hefty amount of money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   58 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.