Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Realistbear

B B C: Migrants 1.4 Million In 24 Months

Recommended Posts

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5274476.stm

Last Updated: Wednesday, 23 August 2006, 15:46 GMT 16:46 UK

1,425,000
migrants in two years?
Analysis
By Brian Wheeler
Political reporter, BBC News
When a senior official told MPs he did not have the "faintest idea" how many illegal immigrants there were in the UK it plunged an already battered Home Office into fresh crisis last May.
..../
Significant increases
Over the same period, migration from
outside the EU also reached record levels, something largely overlooked in the coverage of the accession states.
...../
U-turn planned?
In Mr Boleat's view
"more than 100,000" workers have come to the UK who have not registered to work
, although, he adds, the government should know how many are currently working from their National Insurance contributions.
....../
Unemployment
Bus drivers and newly qualified nurses, for example, are finding it
harder to get jobs because employers are bringing in cheap labour from Poland and other countries, he argues.
"It is becoming more difficult for local people to get jobs at a time when the number of jobs is increasing," he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme.
It is no coincidence, he adds, that unemployment has been steadily climbing over the past 18 months and is poised to top the politically sensitive one million mark.

Immigration seems to be Gordon's trump card and his only means, he thinks, to prevent a HPC and economic recession coupled with inflation. But.......will his plan be worth the hardship and destruction of communities that is now occuring? Anyone catch Panoram last night? :o

Edited by Realistbear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just hope Gordon and Labour are in power when it all goes tits up so people know who to blame, and then we can have them tried for treason.

Edited by zoomraker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fantastic.

High debt, no job! I suspect racism, robbery and violence will rise.

Edited by OzzMosiz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have often wondered hoiw Gordon kept HPI going beyond its sell by date in about 2005. The muppets cut in August 2005 and MASS immigration in 2005-2007.

Gordon is a genius we have to admit. But is he serving the interests of the majority of the electorate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have often wondered hoiw Gordon kept HPI going beyond its sell by date in about 2005. The muppets cut in August 2005 and MASS immigration in 2005-2007.

Gordon is a genius we have to admit. But is he serving the interests of the majority of the electorate?

Of course he isn't serving our interests, only his own and the elites that he fawns over.

Our mistake was to believe that there was any justice in the world. We were wrong and the mistake is being heavily punished. Questioning of the party line is not tolerated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gordon is a genius we have to admit. But is he serving the interests of the majority of the electorate?

Britain chose to open its borders immediately to the citizens of the new EU entrants while some other countries decided to 'take advantage' of the delay of, I think, 7 years before creating an open market.

Has Britain gained by its decision? Would it be 'better' if we had accepted a lot less immigrants which, presumably, would mean higher wages all round. Are higher wages for unskilled work 'good' for a country's economy, or bad? Perhaps the very few economists on here could enlighten us?

By opening our borders to everyone in the EU we have 'gained' the services of all those keen individuals from Eastern Europe who were willing to 'get on their bikes' and travel over here to work. Will those other countries which protected their workforces by limiting or delaying the flood only lose out because the best immigrants have come to the UK and they will be left with the dross?

I think those who oppose this free movement of labour need to explain what they would have done instead. After all, a free market in everything is a standard capitalist (and, presumably, Tory) belief. Protectionism, as we all know, is the worst of all worlds - it's a lose-lose situation. Should the government of this country have micro-managed all the businesses in this country and told employers who, exactly, they should employ? What a strange, old-fashioned and state-controlled idea!

p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not against immigration but we simply do not have the room for all these people.

Your point about accepting the best ones is unqualified as we do not have any points system or pre-req's in place so ANYONE can come into the country skilled or unskilled this is a figment of your immagination and love for Gordon Brown and his **** sucking friends in the labour party.

Our infastructure simply does not cope the roads in West London where I reside are permenantly blocked/busy and frankly I am now sick of the amount of migrants we are allowing to come into the country without some control.

I know you will call me a Nazi cos your fond of that but look at my face........bovvered???

Britain chose to open its borders immediately to the citizens of the new EU entrants while some other countries decided to 'take advantage' of the delay of, I think, 7 years before creating an open market.

Has Britain gained by its decision? Would it be 'better' if we had accepted a lot less immigrants which, presumably, would mean higher wages all round. Are higher wages for unskilled work 'good' for a country's economy, or bad? Perhaps the very few economists on here could enlighten us?

By opening our borders to everyone in the EU we have 'gained' the services of all those keen individuals from Eastern Europe who were willing to 'get on their bikes' and travel over here to work. Will those other countries which protected their workforces by limiting or delaying the flood only lose out because the best immigrants have come to the UK and they will be left with the dross?

I think those who oppose this free movement of labour need to explain what they would have done instead. After all, a free market in everything is a standard capitalist (and, presumably, Tory) belief. Protectionism, as we all know, is the worst of all worlds - it's a lose-lose situation. Should the government of this country have micro-managed all the businesses in this country and told employers who, exactly, they should employ? What a strange, old-fashioned and state-controlled idea!

p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DissipatedYouthIsValuable
Britain chose to open its borders immediately to the citizens of the new EU entrants while some other countries decided to 'take advantage' of the delay of, I think, 7 years before creating an open market.

Has Britain gained by its decision? Would it be 'better' if we had accepted a lot less immigrants which, presumably, would mean higher wages all round. Are higher wages for unskilled work 'good' for a country's economy, or bad? Perhaps the very few economists on here could enlighten us?

By opening our borders to everyone in the EU we have 'gained' the services of all those keen individuals from Eastern Europe who were willing to 'get on their bikes' and travel over here to work. Will those other countries which protected their workforces by limiting or delaying the flood only lose out because the best immigrants have come to the UK and they will be left with the dross?

I think those who oppose this free movement of labour need to explain what they would have done instead. After all, a free market in everything is a standard capitalist (and, presumably, Tory) belief. Protectionism, as we all know, is the worst of all worlds - it's a lose-lose situation. Should the government of this country have micro-managed all the businesses in this country and told employers who, exactly, they should employ? What a strange, old-fashioned and state-controlled idea!

p

I don't think it's a terribly bright idea to have no control whatsoever. Decimating the indiginous working class whilst creating house price inflation is only going to cause unrest OR require a lot of bailing out, probably at taxpayer expense, of those unable to compete.

Let's face it, the boomer generation got a little bit scared that they weren't going to have enough kids to look after them in their old age and overreacted. Unless we have wage hyperinflation or a housing crash I imagine most sensible immigrants will take the money back home, and more Brits will leave.

If you happen to be a high earner and need some cheap 'people to do', the current situation probably suits your pocket.

Edited by DissipatedYouthIsValuable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest vicmac64
I just hope Gordon and Labour are in power when it all goes tits up so people know who to blame, and then we can have them tried for treason.

I'm with you there - I would like to see all those that have acted against the interests of the citizens of the UK on trial - the trial of the century..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm with you there - I would like to see all those that have acted against the interests of the citizens of the UK on trial - the trial of the century..

Why waste money on a trial? We know they're guilty - just hang the b@stards!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am not against immigration but we simply do not have the room for all these people.

Your point about accepting the best ones is unqualified as we do not have any points system or pre-req's in place so ANYONE can come into the country skilled or unskilled this is a figment of your immagination and love for Gordon Brown and his **** sucking friends in the labour party.

Our infastructure simply does not cope the roads in West London where I reside are permenantly blocked/busy and frankly I am now sick of the amount of migrants we are allowing to come into the country without some control.

I know you will call me a Nazi cos your fond of that but look at my face........bovvered???

Terribly sorry to disappoint you, FM, but I'm not going to call you a Nazi. (In any case, I prefer the word 'Fascist' - it has a much better ring to it, don't you think?) Neither am I going to make any other insulting comment because, as far as I can remember, this is the first time I've seen your name and you've said nothing particularly memorable or offensive this time.

If you say that 'we have no room for all these people' then, surely, you need to tell us what you mean. Are there not enough rooms in this country to house them? I thought there were 700,000 empty properties at the last census and it looks as if there are now even more bearing in mind the flat-building that's been going on.l

Are there no jobs for them, despite us having being assured that the actual unemployment claims from EE immigrants (when they eventually qualify) is something like 0.00000006784%! Surely, it's not up to you or me to decide who the business people of this country should employ. Should I tell the pea-growing farmer in East Anglia that he must employ the unemployed burger-flipper from West Brom? What about telling the food outlet owner in London that he must employ the nose-picking but unemployed builders' labourer from Bristol?

If there was no work in this country or somewhere half-decent to sleep, then surely the immigrants would stay at home. They'd be better off because their state benefits would be much better.

So, I'm not convinced by your claim that 'we don't have room for them'. We clearly have.

I was sorry to hear that the roads of West London have ground to a standstill solely due to the number of immigrants. I had no idea.

p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Terribly sorry to disappoint you, FM, but I'm not going to call you a Nazi. (In any case, I prefer the word 'Fascist' - it has a much better ring to it, don't you think?) Neither am I going to make any other insulting comment because, as far as I can remember, this is the first time I've seen your name and you've said nothing particularly memorable or offensive this time.

If you say that 'we have no room for all these people' then, surely, you need to tell us what you mean. Are there not enough rooms in this country to house them? I thought there were 700,000 empty properties at the last census and it looks as if there are now even more bearing in mind the flat-building that's been going on.l

Are there no jobs for them, despite us having being assured that the actual unemployment claims from EE immigrants (when they eventually qualify) is something like 0.00000006784%! Surely, it's not up to you or me to decide who the business people of this country should employ. Should I tell the pea-growing farmer in East Anglia that he must employ the unemployed burger-flipper from West Brom? What about telling the food outlet owner in London that he must employ the nose-picking but unemployed builders' labourer from Bristol?

If there was no work in this country or somewhere half-decent to sleep, then surely the immigrants would stay at home. They'd be better off because their state benefits would be much better.

So, I'm not convinced by your claim that 'we don't have room for them'. We clearly have.

I was sorry to hear that the roads of West London have ground to a standstill solely due to the number of immigrants. I had no idea.

p

No one from Lowestoft should have an opinion on immigration.

I've seen my community changed into little Lagos, i've seen what MASS immigration does to communities. My niece goes to school as one of two white English kids in the class. My misses was attacked by people who told her she was white trash, i was threatened with a knife by a group telling me that no whites are allowed in their areas........

Our areas are changed into alien areas so that Red Ken and the other lefties can live their multicultural dream....well, if you actually lived in it, went to school in multicultural area, worked, lived in it, didnt have mummy and daddy in Oxfordshire to escape too when you had finished your urban, vibrant, edgy life, you might feel that this is a issue that needs to be looked at instead of looking down your nose at anyone who speaks out against this total failure of a multicultural society and pigeon holing them as boneheaded, ignorant facists.

It's people like you that are the narrow minded bigots

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Decimating the indiginous working class whilst creating house price inflation is only going to cause unrest ...

I'll have to take your word for 'Decimating the indiginous working class ...', DYIV, because not only have I seen no sign of it, I've no idea what it means!

As to house price inflation, wouldn't higher incomes in the UK (by excluding the cheapy EE migrants) feed the HPI frenzy? We know that while the indiginous live about 2 or 3 to a dwelling, the immigrants live 6 or 8 so they use up a relatively small portion of the housing stock. (If last night's Panorama is anything to go by, then they all live in 'sheds' at bottom of gardens so they don't have any effect on the housing shortage!)

p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Pat,

You seem to be saying that the only way the UK can compete economically on a global scale is to become the cheap labour sweat shop of the EU, is that correct ?

I notice other European countries don't have this level of immigration or debt and appear to have a higher standard of living generally, do you have an explanation for this ?

One thing really amuses me is the government and their supporters harping on about global warming and recycling and any other green issue, whilst yet encouraging more and more people to come to the UK to live a high energy consumerist western lifestyle, wtf ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Britain chose to open its borders immediately to the citizens of the new EU entrants while some other countries decided to 'take advantage' of the delay of, I think, 7 years before creating an open market.

Has Britain gained by its decision? Would it be 'better' if we had accepted a lot less immigrants which, presumably, would mean higher wages all round. Are higher wages for unskilled work 'good' for a country's economy, or bad? Perhaps the very few economists on here could enlighten us?

By opening our borders to everyone in the EU we have 'gained' the services of all those keen individuals from Eastern Europe who were willing to 'get on their bikes' and travel over here to work. Will those other countries which protected their workforces by limiting or delaying the flood only lose out because the best immigrants have come to the UK and they will be left with the dross?

I think those who oppose this free movement of labour need to explain what they would have done instead. After all, a free market in everything is a standard capitalist (and, presumably, Tory) belief. Protectionism, as we all know, is the worst of all worlds - it's a lose-lose situation. Should the government of this country have micro-managed all the businesses in this country and told employers who, exactly, they should employ? What a strange, old-fashioned and state-controlled idea!

p

Yeah lets have free movement of labour and turn the whole of the UK into a delightful neighbourhood like Slough, with uncontrolled building of shanty towns and people crapping in the street (looks like the "dross" came here first). Lets see our infrastructure collapse whilst our benefits system and NHS are slowly screwed. The native Indians of North America found out what happens when you fail to control immigration. No-one is blaming the immigrants here, they are just trying to survive, but if it's at the expense of the indigenous population and their country then things will have to change. Is it really too much to ask for some accountability from the imbeciles currently "running" the country who no doubt have their own vested interests with these highly destructive policies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bit of a wide generalisation... many are here to milk the country for all they can get, at any cost. Plenty more are here to destroy it.

In other words, they behave just like much of the indigenous population.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You seem to be saying that the only way the UK can compete economically on a global scale is to become the cheap labour sweat shop of the EU, is that correct ?

No, don't worry - we're fine, you see. The Chinese can't do brain work:

Who in the UK is competing with India and China? Whoever it is, would be a total and utter fool! Let them do the low tech, manual work and we can do the high value 'brain' work.

Hurrah!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah lets have free movement of labour and turn the whole of the UK into a delightful neighbourhood like Slough, with uncontrolled building of shanty towns and people crapping in the street (looks like the "dross" came here first). Lets see our infrastructure collapse whilst our benefits system and NHS are slowly screwed. The native Indians of North America found out what happens when you fail to control immigration. No-one is blaming the immigrants here, they are just trying to survive, but if it's at the expense of the indigenous population and their country then things will have to change. Is it really too much to ask for some accountability from the imbeciles currently "running" the country who no doubt have their own vested interests with these highly destructive policies.

I believe it happened something like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhEl6HdfqWM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Britain chose to open its borders immediately to the citizens of the new EU entrants while some other countries decided to 'take advantage' of the delay of, I think, 7 years before creating an open market.

Has Britain gained by its decision? Would it be 'better' if we had accepted a lot less immigrants which, presumably, would mean higher wages all round. Are higher wages for unskilled work 'good' for a country's economy, or bad? Perhaps the very few economists on here could enlighten us?

By opening our borders to everyone in the EU we have 'gained' the services of all those keen individuals from Eastern Europe who were willing to 'get on their bikes' and travel over here to work. Will those other countries which protected their workforces by limiting or delaying the flood only lose out because the best immigrants have come to the UK and they will be left with the dross?

I think those who oppose this free movement of labour need to explain what they would have done instead. After all, a free market in everything is a standard capitalist (and, presumably, Tory) belief. Protectionism, as we all know, is the worst of all worlds - it's a lose-lose situation. Should the government of this country have micro-managed all the businesses in this country and told employers who, exactly, they should employ? What a strange, old-fashioned and state-controlled idea!

p

no,micromanagement is for dummies.

What SHOULD have happened is a bit of tough love,and raise the bar in terms of education and work ethic.

...the opposite happened,with benefits handed to all and sundry,so taxation was high and it was more profitable to skive off and have 4 kids by 4 different partners.As for education,hmmph....our kids can't read and write properly,have no manners and their verbal communication is abysmal.....what do you expect employers to do...our stock isn't up to the job.

think of it in the same terms as giving kids sweets....if you keep on giving them what they want they get fat and lazy.

The welfare state is OBESE.....time for a currency-controlled diet...not nice but it works.

Edited by oracle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Immigration seems to be Gordon's trump card and his only means, he thinks, to prevent a HPC and economic recession coupled with inflation.

It is what exactly he thinks but he is wrong. Immigrants don't get paid enough to support his miracle economy neither do they support BTL as they rent 8 or 10 a home or pay 20p a night to sleep in public toilets!

Immigrants also remove the money out of economy by transferring it back home as they won't stay here longer when the sh*t hits the fan. Miracle Gordon is actually shooting himself in the foot, by allowing open door immigration policy, in order to keep the wages down but he doesn't understand that his corrupted plan will fail as today's 'I want it now' society don't care whether they earn enough or not, as they nicely build the unsustainable debt mountain that not only will bring house prices on its knees but also the miracle government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest d23
they won't stay here longer when the sh*t hits the fan.

when the sh*t hits the fan Poland etc will be equally if not more f*cked; IIRC if they've been here 2 years they can claim unemployment benefits. I reckon a large % will have been here that long by the time any recession really gets going and they may well be better off staying here than their home country, which I'm guessing won't be so generous with their unemployed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hello Pat,

You seem to be saying that the only way the UK can compete economically on a global scale is to become the cheap labour sweat shop of the EU, is that correct ?

I notice other European countries don't have this level of immigration or debt and appear to have a higher standard of living generally, do you have an explanation for this ?

One thing really amuses me is the government and their supporters harping on about global warming and recycling and any other green issue, whilst yet encouraging more and more people to come to the UK to live a high energy consumerist western lifestyle, wtf ?

So, what do you want to do about immigration from both inside and outside the EU?

p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah lets have free movement of labour and turn the whole of the UK into a delightful neighbourhood like Slough, with uncontrolled building of shanty towns and people crapping in the street (looks like the "dross" came here first). Lets see our infrastructure collapse whilst our benefits system and NHS are slowly screwed. The native Indians of North America found out what happens when you fail to control immigration. No-one is blaming the immigrants here, they are just trying to survive, but if it's at the expense of the indigenous population and their country then things will have to change. Is it really too much to ask for some accountability from the imbeciles currently "running" the country who no doubt have their own vested interests with these highly destructive policies.

So, what do you want to do about immigration from both inside and outside the EU?

p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 355 The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:

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


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



×
×
  • Create New...

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.