Immigration to the UK - do you have concerns?

[danny la rouge]

Been a good distraction from my posts offering an alternative to the immigration policy of this and last governments.

Sorry, yes, we need some self discipline here, Barbies.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I don’t want to be that guy, but he didn’t call ska anything of the sort. He said other people were sniffing ska’s rectum.

Also I don't think that is what earned the banning. The Billionaires thread did for him, I suspect.

It is an odd one. I doubt 'arse-licker' would earn a warning. If anything, rectum-sniffing is a lesser thing to do than actually licking said behind.

 

[cesare]

Every time I like one of ska"s posts now, I'll feel as though I'm sniffing his rectum

 

[krtek a houby]

Seriously, banned for that?.
Did it hit a nerve?, fucking pathetic

Oh?

It simply means effeminate or submissive, its a derogatory term but not exclusively aimed at arse bandits

 

[Edie]

When I have directly asked what in practise a poster wants then what I've found is all I get is silence.

I've made it clear here I don't support immigration controls.

I’m just busy living my life it’s nothing personal. I’m reading and thinking about the issue and actually talking about it to the people around me but just don’t have much time to respond right now.

To be honest having no limit on immigration would be absolutely fine for me now my kids have left their shite state school. I’m not dependent on being housed or supported. If I was I’d probably have more concerns.

Personally I think there would be a pretty high chance of further race riots as like Spymaster says you can’t meet concerns about immigration with more immigration without backlash, and as kabbes points out only half the problem is public sector resources and half is fear about changing culture. But it’d settle down eventually even if it did get ugly for a bit and in Britain I doubt we’d become a fascist state. Given how relatively little social unrest there has been in reality despite the big social changes in the second half of the 1900s maybe it’s a moot point.

And having a lot of migrants, aside from the cultural aspect, would provide plentiful labour both skilled and unskilled.

Now my fella thinks despite this (which would be good for business) the infrastructure of the UK couldn’t support it. The roads are already a nightmare- just moving materials from Birmingham to Brighouse (a relatively short distance by European, American or Chinese standards) is a problem. Housing is a problem. I have doubts the NHS could handle it (because I don’t think the problems are just money or staffing). But maybe if we really seriously invested in public services and infrastructure it could.

I’m open minded about it. The only thing that REALLY pisses me off is an arrogant ‘we know best’ attitude and a dismissal of people’s concerns. Whether that’s by a baroness in Islington or spooky frank or ska etc. But that’s just me. That shit will always piss me off.

 

[_Russ_]

Oh?

Ah the stalker returns, It's like your hobby.
I honestly feel sorry for you

 

[Gramsci]

I’m just busy living my life it’s nothing personal. I’m reading and thinking about the issue and actually talking about it to the people around me but just don’t have much time to respond right now.

To be honest having no limit on immigration would be absolutely fine for me now my kids have left their shite state school. I’m not dependent on being housed or supported. If I was I’d probably have more concerns.

Personally I think there would be a pretty high chance of further race riots as like Spymaster says you can’t meet concerns about immigration with more immigration without backlash, and as kabbes points out only half the problem is public sector resources and half is fear about changing culture. But it’d settle down eventually even if it did get ugly for a bit and in Britain I doubt we’d become a fascist state. Given how relatively little social unrest there has been in reality despite the big social changes in the second half of the 1900s maybe it’s a moot point.

And having a lot of migrants, aside from the cultural aspect, would provide plentiful labour both skilled and unskilled.

Now my fella thinks despite this (which would be good for business) the infrastructure of the UK couldn’t support it. The roads are already a nightmare- just moving materials from Birmingham to Brighouse (a relatively short distance by European, American or Chinese standards) is a problem. Housing is a problem. I have doubts the NHS could handle it (because I don’t think the problems are just money or staffing). But maybe if we really seriously invested in public services and infrastructure it could.

I’m open minded about it. The only thing that REALLY pisses me off is an arrogant ‘we know best’ attitude and a dismissal of people’s concerns. Whether that’s by a baroness in Islington or spooky frank or ska etc. But that’s just me. That shit will always piss me off.

To summarise your for unlimited immigration.

But if immigration is increased this will lead to more race riots in the future.

You said you have been reading up about it.

To get away from the binary debate which isn't getting anywhere I've also read up a bit and posted a reform of the present immigration policies which are a more humane response to immigration

A practical response

See post 942 and 943

What do you think.

 

[krtek a houby]

Ah the stalker returns, It's like your hobby.
I honestly feel sorry for you

Pointing out your gross bigotry isn't stalking.

Neither is your calling me a "terrorist supporter", without any evidence, although it's unusual.

 

[Edie]

To summarise your for unlimited immigration.

But if immigration is increased this will lead to more race riots in the future.

Gramsci I’ve said again and again that I’m unsure. That I’m exploring ideas and thinking about it. That I don’t know the answer. That I can see risks and benefits on both sides.

You seem weirdly insistent on telling me what you think I think. But it’s okay for a person to just not know the answer. I’m not a politician or even a social scientist like kabbes. It’s okay to just think out loud about stuff and listen to other peoples points.

Could you summarise the practical humane controls for me. I’m lazy and cba right now to read documents.

 

[_Russ_]

Pointing out your gross bigotry isn't stalking.

Your basic reply to all the people you stalk

 

[Wkdloz]

To be honest having no limit on immigration would be absolutely fine for me

Sounds like absolute lunacy to me, a recipe for disaster, perhaps not in your lifetime but eventually.

 

[krtek a houby]

Sounds like absolute lunacy to me, a recipe for disaster, perhaps not in your lifetime but eventually.

It will be a humanitarian disaster if people are restricted from migration. It's what humans do and come the inevitable effects of climate change, resource wars, crop failures, famine etc - there's going to be a lot of people on the move.

 

[Gramsci]

Gramsci I’ve said again and again that I’m unsure. That I’m exploring ideas and thinking about it. That I don’t know the answer. That I can see risks and benefits on both sides.

You seem weirdly insistent on telling me what you think I think. But it’s okay for a person to just not know the answer. I’m not a politician or even a social scientist like kabbes. It’s okay to just think out loud about stuff and listen to other peoples points.

Could you summarise the practical humane controls for me. I’m lazy and cba right now to read documents.

I've summarised them in the two posts I linked to.

But you aren't just thinking aloud.

The reason this thread was started by mojo pixy was because you posted up about immigration on the far right racist riots thread.

You wanted the topic discussed. You haven't just listened to peoples posts you made value judgements about them.

Given you started this and have strong opinions about people who get your back up then asking you about alternatives/ improvements to immigration is not unreasonable.

Instead of just accusing people of being fascists or racists I've come up with a proposal based on my reading. And all you can say is that you can't possibly have an opinion yet.

TBF its annoying.

 

[Edie]

I've summarised them in the two posts I linked to.

But you aren't just thinking aloud.

The reason this thread was started by mojo pixy was because you posted up about immigration on the far right racist riots thread.

You wanted the topic discussed. You haven't just listened to peoples posts you made value judgements about them.

Given you started this and have strong opinions about people who get your back up then asking you about alternatives/ improvements to immigration is not unreasonable.

Instead of just accusing people of being fascists or racists I've come up with a proposal based on my reading. And all you can say is that you can't possibly have an opinion yet.

TBF its annoying.

Ok- be annoyed shrug

 

[Gramsci]

Ok- be annoyed shrug

Whatever. Can't be bothered with you any more your going on ignore.

 

[scifisam]

When I have directly asked what in practise a poster wants then what I've found is all I get is silence.

I've made it clear here I don't support immigration controls.

So all I can assume is that the present policy on immigration is fine by those posting here who support controls.

OK, you won't state who said it, so you'll assume that anyone who supports any controls is in favour of the current rules? I haven't seen anyone post in favour of the current immigration rules.

Lots of people in the UK are in favour of them, but we can discuss that point without making false claims about people on here.

 

[scifisam]

I wonder what's so horrifically offensive about 'rectum sniffer' that it gets a warning and a ban when 99% of the cunting people off on these boards remains unmoderated. Has two-tier Kier been made a moderator?

I don't get it. It's clearly a way of saying brown-noser but in a sillier way, and that's really not about gay sex.

 

[redsquirrel]

When I have directly asked what in practise a poster wants then what I've found is all I get is silence.

Perhaps because it is not a useful question.

What do I want? Well for the workers of the world to seize the means of production and institute councils that could resolve questions about migration. But so what? How is concentrating, and aligning people, on the basis of "wants" useful to your political ends?
You say you don't support immigration controls but what does that mean? That you are organising against them? Or simply that you want no controls on immigration?

There are people in the trades council I'm delegated to that spend time, effort and money on organising for better conditions for migrants, campaigning for changes to the laws, especially around working, etc but who would not want no controls on immigration.

The question "Do you want controls on immigration or not?", is no less full of political assumptions than when YouGov ask "Do you believe the level of immigration is too high/low?". I don't consider focusing on wants, or values, sensible, but rather the opposite - it accepts the assumptions of liberalism. One might as well ask, what one would do if a genie appeared and suddenly granted one three political wishes.

Support is fundamentally a material thing, it is based on and requires people organising and taking action.

 

[_Russ_]

I don't get it. It's clearly a way of saying brown-noser but in a sillier way, and that's really not about gay sex.

My take too

 

[brogdale]

Perhaps because it is not a useful question.

What do I want? Well for the workers of the world to seize the means of production and institute councils that could resolve questions about migration. But so what? How is concentrating, and aligning people, on the basis of "wants" useful to your political ends?
You say you don't support immigration controls but what does that mean? That you are organising against them? Or simply that you want no controls on immigration?

There are people in the trades council I'm delegated to that spend time, effort and money on organising for better conditions for migrants, campaigning for changes to the laws, especially around working, etc but who would not want no controls on immigration.

The question "Do you want controls on immigration or not?", is no less full of political assumptions than when YouGov ask "Do you believe the level of immigration is too high/low?". I don't consider focusing on wants, or values, sensible, but rather the opposite - it accepts the assumptions of liberalism. One might as well ask, what one would do if a genie appeared and suddenly granted one three political wishes.

Support is fundamentally a material thing, it is based on and requires people organising and taking action.

Agree with much of what you say here, but there is some context to the questioning that is relevant. I think the “what do you want” line arose from one poster saying that open borders was a bad/wrong-headed response to refugee arrivals. That’s an arguable position, but having proposed what they don’t want, it doesn’t seem unreasonable to invite them to say what their favoured alternative might look like.

 

[redsquirrel]

Alternatives are all too often constrained to those allowed by a certain set of assumptions.
Why should my union branch offer an alternative to the workload model changes the employer wants to impose? To do so is effectively accepting the employers power and control - which is why we are frequently asked to provide an alternative.

The alternatives offered by carpal and the state are going to harmful so choosing between them is a mugs game.

 

[brogdale]

Alternatives are all too often constrained to those allowed by a certain set of assumptions.
Why should my union branch offer an alternative to the workload model changes the employer wants to impose? To do so is effectively accepting the employers power and control - which is why we are frequently asked to provide an alternative.

The alternatives offered by carpal and the state are going to harmful so choosing between them is a mugs game.

Not sure that's a very useful comparison, tbh.

 

[brogdale]

Someone says your idea (open borders) is crap; you ask them what their idea is. Seems fair to me.

 

[brogdale]

tbf, it's probably best if I let Gramsci speak for themselves here.

 

[mojo pixy]

Not dissimilar really to when someone points at JSO protests and says 'they (or we) shouldn't be doing that'. It's valid IMO to ask, well then what do you think they (or we) should be doing?

 

[Pickman's model]

Gramsci I’ve said again and again that I’m unsure. That I’m exploring ideas and thinking about it. That I don’t know the answer. That I can see risks and benefits on both sides.

You seem weirdly insistent on telling me what you think I think. But it’s okay for a person to just not know the answer. I’m not a politician or even a social scientist like kabbes. It’s okay to just think out loud about stuff and listen to other peoples points.

Could you summarise the practical humane controls for me. I’m lazy and cba right now to read documents.

You don't know the answer as it's not something where there is but one solution. And I suspect a refusal to read deeply on the subject hinders your ability to take a meaningful part in this debate other than 'thinking out loud' - your submission there are two sides doesn't really speak to your having given much thought loud or otherwise to the subject

 

[Gramsci]

OK, you won't state who said it, so you'll assume that anyone who supports any controls is in favour of the current rules? I haven't seen anyone post in favour of the current immigration rules.

Lots of people in the UK are in favour of them, but we can discuss that point without making false claims about people on here.

How about reading my posts.

I wasn't making false claims.

I went an looked up alternatives to present system of immigration.

Which gets little interest. Which I specifically put up as a compromise. Someone has concerns about immigration here is one alternative way to do it.

I put someone on ignore for wasting my time and hey presto posters dive in

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Not dissimilar really to when someone points at JSO protests and says 'they (or we) shouldn't be doing that'. It's valid IMO to ask, well then what do you think they (or we) should be doing?

Not if you think what they're doing is counterproductive. If that's what you think then 'nothing ' is a valid answer.

 

[mojo pixy]

Not if you think what they're doing is counterproductive. If that's what you think then 'nothing ' is a valid answer.

Other, more imaginative answers are available

But to follow that logic, if I'm opposed to open borders and someone asks me what I'd like to see instead, it'd be valid to say nothing - close the borders completely.

 

[Gramsci]

Perhaps because it is not a useful question.

What do I want? Well for the workers of the world to seize the means of production and institute councils that could resolve questions about migration. But so what? How is concentrating, and aligning people, on the basis of "wants" useful to your political ends?
You say you don't support immigration controls but what does that mean? That you are organising against them? Or simply that you want no controls on immigration?

There are people in the trades council I'm delegated to that spend time, effort and money on organising for better conditions for migrants, campaigning for changes to the laws, especially around working, etc but who would not want no controls on immigration.

The question "Do you want controls on immigration or not?", is no less full of political assumptions than when YouGov ask "Do you believe the level of immigration is too high/low?". I don't consider focusing on wants, or values, sensible, but rather the opposite - it accepts the assumptions of liberalism. One might as well ask, what one would do if a genie appeared and suddenly granted one three political wishes.

Support is fundamentally a material thing, it is based on and requires people organising and taking action.

Sorry but I do have done and do stuff in my local community..

This reads as iif your implying I don't do anything.

And rbf over years I've had this lecture on what one should be doing otherwise ones a liberal and it's off putting.