Priti Vacant has a plan, a deal with migrants plan.

The Light Was Yellow Sir said:
I do think the latest plan is actually going to work and it’s been simple in its working. Make the uk so expensive, turn its people against each other, about almost everything you can and, finally, make it such a shit place to live, nobody will want to come. Brilliant……..
Click to expand...
Loads of spaces in old peoples’ homes come next spring too.
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
Loads of spaces in old peoples’ homes come next spring too.
Click to expand...
Of course, as businesses, no cap on their energy prices. Mind you, that’ll enable most of them to bank even bigger ‘losses’ and ferret even more money off shore for themselves.
Who‘d have thought the Glazers had got their ownership model from English care homes?
 
I doubt there is a single person who believes in 'unlimited immigration' and certainly not a majority in the Labour or any other party.

Let us examine this in detail:

1. Immigration has been going on for centuries. I am myself descended from an Italian marquess whose daughter married an English lord in the late thirteenth century. If there is someone on here without at least some Irish blood, he/she is unusual in Manchester. I have a shit-ton and my family were traditionally strong Protestants. It is simply a natural human process.

2. Economics. The reality is we have an inverted pyramid of old people. This means we have a shortage of labour to perform many tasks. You cannot turn the drug-addled, low-intelligence, underachievers of certain areas overnight into doctors, dentists and nurses. Indeed many are objectively unemployable. So we - or rather our economy, on which all rests - need a certain level of immigration. This need will probably die down as the current 60-85 age group dies off, as the tier below is not as numerous. With luck, we may even learn, over 20 years, to start training enough of our own to perform essential tasks.

3. Refugees. Sadly, this is a growing problem. In part it has been caused by us and our allies bombing the fuck out of places like Syria. We need to stop trying to police the world with bombs as it causes more problems than it creates. Next, this is a problem for all Europe. We need to enter a treaty with the EU to take our fair share and no more, process those taken promptly, give those entitled the right to work and deport those with no proper claim. It really is that easy, although it's not that easy because we need international cooperation, and this country has decided to to stand in the corner and sulk like a little girl told that her dress isn't the prettiest in the room. We need, as a country, to fucking grow up.

4. Control. We need to face the reality - we need ID cards! We had perfectly serviceable immigration controls available to us even when we were in the EU but our government could not be arsed to enforce them! You are not allowed to stay in a EU country, even with so-called 'freedom of movement' unless you are employed or self-supporting within three months. We never enforced this! It was too much trouble, and a major factor was the absence of ID cards.
 
BrianW said:
I doubt there is a single person who believes in 'unlimited immigration' and certainly not a majority in the Labour or any other party.

4. Control. We need to face the reality - we need ID cards! We had perfectly serviceable immigration controls available to us even when we were in the EU but our government could not be arsed to enforce them! You are not allowed to stay in a EU country, even with so-called 'freedom of movement' unless you are employed or self-supporting within three months. We never enforced this! It was too much trouble, and a major factor was the absence of ID cards.
Click to expand...

Yes, I mis-spoke the other day - when I said 'unlimited immigration' and I have accepted I did, but having said that we know generally speaking younger people are more likely to vote Labour whilst older people the Tories. Which is part of the problem Labour have in getting elected right now because of the 'inverted pyramid of old people' of which you speak. Furthermore, young people are more likely to be pro-migration and it is the older ones who get all wound up about it, again generally speaking. That is what I meant.

I totally agree with point 4. In fact if the Tory government pre-2016 (even the tory/libdem coalition one) had enforced the rules that were in place, Cameron might not have lost the Brexit vote. Every time Johnson or some other pro-Brexit person proclaimed 'control immigration/end free movement' he could have said we already do and we already have because if a person is not employed or self-supporting within three months, we send them back. I don't know what the Blair/Brown government were like as regards these EU rules, perhaps someone can tell me.

Not to drag up old stuff again, but as regards the Labour = younger vs Tory = older thing I mentioned earlier, the same was also true of Brexit, generally speaking it was younger people who mostly wanted to stay, it was older people who mostly wanted to leave (and I think I saw some years ago data to prove that). But the trouble was, as you went up the age ranges a bigger and bigger percentage of people voted. In the 18-25 bracket many wanted to Remain, but didn't actually bother to go and put their mark on the piece of paper and analysis showed that if just a small % of young people had gone to the polling station and voted in the same way as their peers, the result would have been different. That's a bit sad really because it will impact on the younger people the longest.
 
Last edited:
El_george said:
Yes, I mis-spoke the other day - when I said 'unlimited immigration' and I have accepted I did, but having said that we know generally speaking younger people are more likely to vote Labour whilst older people the Tories. Which is part of the problem Labour have in getting elected right now because of the 'inverted pyramid of old people' of which you speak. Furthermore, young people are more likely to be pro-migration and it is the older ones who get all wound up about it, again generally speaking. That is what I meant.

I totally agree with point 4. In fact if the Tory government pre-2016 (even the coalition one) had enforced the rules that were in place, Cameron might not have lost the Brexit vote. Every time Johnson or some other pro-Brexit person proclaimed 'control immigration/end free movement' he could have said we already do and we already have because if a person is not employed or self-supporting within three months, we send them back. I don't know what the Blair/Brown government were like as regards these EU rules, perhaps someone can tell me.

Not to drag up old stuff again, but as regards the Labour = younger vs Tory = older thing I mentioned earlier, the same was also true of Brexit, generally speaking it was younger people who mostly wanted to stay, it was older people who mostly wanted to leave (and I think I saw some years ago data to prove that). But the trouble was, as you went up the age ranges a bigger and bigger percentage of people voted. In the 18-25 bracket many wanted to Remain, but didn't actually bother to go and put their mark on the piece of paper and analysis showed that if just a small % of young people had gone to the polling station and voted in the same way as their peers, the result would have been different.
Click to expand...
As people age, they don’t want sweeping changes to happen and any changes that need to happen they will likely want to revert to how things used to be.

Younger people accept change more readily.

This probably has as much to do with how people vote throughout their lifetimes along with how much money they are trying to protect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.