Pet Shop Boys Community

JSDOUVRES wrote:Britain is full, Schools, hospitals and housing are at breaking point...

Good job we have all those young immigrants, then, since they contribute at least a third more to the Treasury than they take in benefits or services.

Danny C wrote:

JSDOUVRES wrote:Britain is full, Schools, hospitals and housing are at breaking point...

Good job we have all those young immigrants, then, since they contribute at least a third more to the Treasury than they take in benefits or services.

You actually believe that? And even if it was true (which it absolutely isn't, although Cameron wouldn't want you to know that obviously) Britain is still full. Or am I wrong? Highest population density in Europe and one of the biggest in the world. Half of children born nowadays with foreign born parents. And I wouldn't care if they took no benefits and services because that is beyond the point, Britain does not exist to benefit immigrants and if you are saying that everybody willing to work should deserve a place here then you are nuts. There is not place, plain and simple but if that is not important to you then good luck...

Corina wrote:

JSDOUVRES wrote:Lets put this into perspective, imagine a cleaner in Romania that is told they can earn 10 times the wage in Britain plus better living standards, now wouldn't anybody want that? Now look at it from a British cleaners point of view, 10 times less per hour. Now imagine if there was a country that paid 10 times the British minimal wage somewhere in Europe, so call it £65 per hour plus it's living standards were higher than in Britain, I'd move for that money and I know many that would too but not for the right reasons.

Romania is not full of cleaners, so don`t worry. Whereas there are lots of British pensioners here being happy to have a decent standard of life.

Arrivederci.

The cleaners was an example obviously but sorry if you didn't get that.

So are the pensioners taking jobs, reducing wages, claiming benefits and having children? Or are they actually helping the Romanian economy by investing in property, spending money and even creating jobs? Your example is poor but good try. And also, lets be honest, there aren't many pensioners there now are there. Anyway, you just continue to prove my point that you really don't give a shit about Britain. Britain is full, so what would you do about that? Open up the borders to Africa?

JSDOUVRES wrote:

Danny C wrote:Good job we have all those young immigrants, then, since they contribute at least a third more to the Treasury than they take in benefits or services.

You actually believe that?

That's the beauty of facts, chief. They don't require belief.

JSDOUVRES wrote:And even if it was true (which it absolutely isn't, although Cameron wouldn't want you to know that obviously) Britain is still full. Or am I wrong?

It shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone that you are wrong.

JSDOUVRES wrote:Highest population density in Europe and one of the biggest in the world.

No, this is untrue. Off the top of my head, in Europe the Netherlands, at least, has a higher population density.

Of course, population density isn't uniform across the entire country, and parts of the UK are very much under-occupied.

JSDOUVRES wrote:Half of children born nowadays with foreign born parents.

It's actually about a third of babies have at least one foreign parent, and anyway, big deal. You make it sound like they're fifth columnists or something.

JSDOUVRES wrote:And I wouldn't care if they took no benefits and services because that is beyond the point

No, it isn't beyond the point. Immigrants are net contributors to the economy, which means that removing immigrants from the equation would make the rest of us all very much poorer off.

JSDOUVRES wrote:Britain does not exist to benefit immigrants and if you are saying that everybody willing to work should deserve a place here then you are nuts.

I don't think anyone has said that, so that is a rather feeble straw man.

And Britain exists, I would hope, to benefit everyone who lives here, whether they were born on one arbitrary patch of land or another.

You are behind the times when it comes to "facts". England has taken over Holland when it comes to population density. And please tell me where you get your "facts" about immigrants contributing at least a third more to the Treasury than they take in benefits or services.
I remember these supposed "facts" which like most facts from the current government are way off the mark.

And as for us being less well off without immigrants, once again "facts" that are well off of the mark, but then again if you believe that immigrants contribute more to the treasury than take out I am not surprised at all. So we would be poorer without all this cheap labour? Absolute rubbish. The richest might be but certainly not the working class. The fact that wages have been pushed right down is enough proof of that, although you would argue that no doubt, people like you normally do. Anyway, I would rather Britain be poorer than over populated by economic immigrants, obviously not you though.

Anyway, it's the huge numbers which are changing the British way of life and are tearing societies apart. And the majority of British people don't want it, they see their communities changing and being turned into foreign countries. Look at the results of UK polls from people on Europe, most people want out, whether you like it or not. We are not in control of our borders, laws and more which is not right. I am not against immigration, far from it, but it must be controlled where necessary to stop economic immigration which is exactly what is happening. If not then Britain will change for the worse as it already is. I want people here who love Britain and who want to contribute for a future here, not people just here because conditions are so bad in their own country, that is wrong and it is not for Britain offer a future to people from poor countries who don't have one, absolutely not and I don't see how you can disagree with that.

I just don't understand the people with the mindset that Britain is some kind of haven for people from poor countries, it is not, British people have worked for years to get us this quality of life and quite how you believe we owe it to people from poor countries that are only here for that one reason I just don't know.

Britain is full, plain and simple and it cannot go on like this. I walk down my high street and it is like a foreign country, I remember when I was a young kid when hearing a foreign voice was something special and intriguing, now the young people only hear about how these people are here to do the jobs they are apparently "too lazy" to do, absolutely disgusting. I say no more.

JSDOUVRES wrote:You are behind the times when it comes to "facts". England has taken over Holland when it comes to population density.

"England" isn't a sovereign state.

JSDOUVRES wrote:And please tell me where you get your "facts" about immigrants contributing at least a third more to the Treasury than they take in benefits or services.

There are studies all over the place which demonstrate the benefit from immigration. Dozens of them. Here's a recent one.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24813467

Immigrants to the UK since 2000 have made a "substantial" contribution to public finances, a report says.

The study by University College London said recent immigrants were less likely to claim benefits and live in social housing than people born in Britain.

The authors said rather than being a "drain", their contribution had been "remarkably strong".

The government said it was right to have strict rules in place to help protect the benefits system.

Immigrants who arrived after 1999 were 45% less likely to receive state benefits or tax credits than UK natives in the period 2000-2011, according to the report by Prof Christian Dustmann and Dr Tommaso Frattini from UCL's Centre for Research and Analysis of Migration.

They were also 3% less likely to live in social housing.

"These differences are partly explainable by immigrants' more favourable age-gender composition. However, even when compared to natives with the same age, gender composition, and education, recent immigrants are still 21% less likely than natives to receive benefits," the authors say.

Still, what do these scientists and researchers who have studied the facts know, eh?

JSDOUVRES wrote:I remember these supposed "facts" which like most facts from the current government are way off the mark.

And as for us being less well off without immigrants, once again "facts" that are well off of the mark, but then again if you believe that immigrants contribute more to the treasury than take out I am not surprised at all.

It's fair to say I trust the words of experts in the field more than I trust words from your backside.

JSDOUVRES wrote:So we would be poorer without all this cheap labour? Absolute rubbish. The richest might be but certainly not the working class. The fact that wages have been pushed right down is enough proof of that, although you would argue that no doubt, people like you normally do.

I always argue against untrue nonsense, yes. As The Economist points out, immigrants do not depress wages much at all, and even then any depressive effect is felt mostly by other immigrants.

JSDOUVRES wrote:Anyway, I would rather Britain be poorer than over populated by economic immigrants, obviously not you though.

Yes, oddly enough, I'd rather Britain was better off. And I don't think you have the first idea about overpopulation.

JSDOUVRES wrote:Anyway, it's the huge numbers which are changing the British way of life and are tearing societies apart.

Oh no, the British way of life!

Tearing societies apart, hilarious.

JSDOUVRES wrote:And the majority of British people don't want it, they see their communities changing and being turned into foreign countries.

Oh, I'm quite certain that a majority of British people are just as ignorant of the facts as you are.

JSDOUVRES wrote:Look at the results of UK polls from people on Europe, most people want out, whether you like it or not.

Well, whether you like it or not, you are again spouting fiction, as a recent poll shows.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/03/1 ... TQ20140311

YouGov said its poll of 3,195 adults, carried out on March 9 and 10, found 41 percent would vote for Britain to remain a member of the EU, while 39 percent would choose to leave.

This was the first time the "in" vote had overtaken the "out" since Cameron made his referendum pledge in January 2013.

And of course, once people stop believing the credulous tabloid shit you're parroting, and realise the sheer stupidity of leaving the EU, that figure of 41% is likely to rise considerably.

JSDOUVRES wrote:We are not in control of our borders, laws and more which is not right.

Yes, it certainly isn't right. Quite, quite wrong, in fact.

JSDOUVRES wrote:I am not against immigration, far from it, but it must be controlled where necessary to stop economic immigration which is exactly what is happening. If not then Britain will change for the worse as it already is. I want people here who love Britain and who want to contribute for a future here, not people just here because conditions are so bad in their own country, that is wrong and it is not for Britain offer a future to people from poor countries who don't have one, absolutely not and I don't see how you can disagree with that.

I just don't understand the people with the mindset that Britain is some kind of haven for people from poor countries, it is not, British people have worked for years to get us this quality of life and quite how you believe we owe it to people from poor countries that are only here for that one reason I just don't know.

Once again, it's not about being a haven for poor foreigners. Immigrants make a huge financial contribution to this country.

JSDOUVRES wrote:Britain is full, plain and simple and it cannot go on like this. I walk down my high street and it is like a foreign country, I remember when I was a young kid when hearing a foreign voice was something special and intriguing, now the young people only hear about how these people are here to do the jobs they are apparently "too lazy" to do, absolutely disgusting. I say no more.

The figures show that unemployment is lower among immigrants, so it's quite true that immigrants are doing the jobs that the natives aren't willing or able to do.

Nevertheless, it's quite clear that your opposition to immigration stems from little more than xenophobic ignorance.

The truly funny thing is that 100% of British people are descended from immigrants.

And if Britain truly is overpopulated, I'd start with everyone who's a supporter of UKIP, to be honest.

Danny C wrote:

JSDOUVRES wrote:You are behind the times when it comes to "facts". England has taken over Holland when it comes to population density.

"England" isn't a sovereign state.

JSDOUVRES wrote:And please tell me where you get your "facts" about immigrants contributing at least a third more to the Treasury than they take in benefits or services.

There are studies all over the place which demonstrate the benefit from immigration. Dozens of them. Here's a recent one.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24813467

Immigrants to the UK since 2000 have made a "substantial" contribution to public finances, a report says.

The study by University College London said recent immigrants were less likely to claim benefits and live in social housing than people born in Britain.

The authors said rather than being a "drain", their contribution had been "remarkably strong".

The government said it was right to have strict rules in place to help protect the benefits system.

Immigrants who arrived after 1999 were 45% less likely to receive state benefits or tax credits than UK natives in the period 2000-2011, according to the report by Prof Christian Dustmann and Dr Tommaso Frattini from UCL's Centre for Research and Analysis of Migration.

They were also 3% less likely to live in social housing.

"These differences are partly explainable by immigrants' more favourable age-gender composition. However, even when compared to natives with the same age, gender composition, and education, recent immigrants are still 21% less likely than natives to receive benefits," the authors say.

Still, what do these scientists and researchers who have studied the facts know, eh?

JSDOUVRES wrote:I remember these supposed "facts" which like most facts from the current government are way off the mark.

And as for us being less well off without immigrants, once again "facts" that are well off of the mark, but then again if you believe that immigrants contribute more to the treasury than take out I am not surprised at all.

It's fair to say I trust the words of experts in the field more than I trust words from your backside.

JSDOUVRES wrote:So we would be poorer without all this cheap labour? Absolute rubbish. The richest might be but certainly not the working class. The fact that wages have been pushed right down is enough proof of that, although you would argue that no doubt, people like you normally do.

I always argue against untrue nonsense, yes. As The Economist points out, immigrants do not depress wages much at all, and even then any depressive effect is felt mostly by other immigrants.

JSDOUVRES wrote:Anyway, I would rather Britain be poorer than over populated by economic immigrants, obviously not you though.

Yes, oddly enough, I'd rather Britain was better off. And I don't think you have the first idea about overpopulation.

JSDOUVRES wrote:Anyway, it's the huge numbers which are changing the British way of life and are tearing societies apart.

Oh no, the British way of life!

Tearing societies apart, hilarious.

JSDOUVRES wrote:And the majority of British people don't want it, they see their communities changing and being turned into foreign countries.

Oh, I'm quite certain that a majority of British people are just as ignorant of the facts as you are.

JSDOUVRES wrote:Look at the results of UK polls from people on Europe, most people want out, whether you like it or not.

Well, whether you like it or not, you are again spouting fiction, as a recent poll shows.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/03/1 ... TQ20140311

YouGov said its poll of 3,195 adults, carried out on March 9 and 10, found 41 percent would vote for Britain to remain a member of the EU, while 39 percent would choose to leave.

This was the first time the "in" vote had overtaken the "out" since Cameron made his referendum pledge in January 2013.

And of course, once people stop believing the credulous tabloid shit you're parroting, and realise the sheer stupidity of leaving the EU, that figure of 41% is likely to rise considerably.

JSDOUVRES wrote:We are not in control of our borders, laws and more which is not right.

Yes, it certainly isn't right. Quite, quite wrong, in fact.

JSDOUVRES wrote:I am not against immigration, far from it, but it must be controlled where necessary to stop economic immigration which is exactly what is happening. If not then Britain will change for the worse as it already is. I want people here who love Britain and who want to contribute for a future here, not people just here because conditions are so bad in their own country, that is wrong and it is not for Britain offer a future to people from poor countries who don't have one, absolutely not and I don't see how you can disagree with that.

I just don't understand the people with the mindset that Britain is some kind of haven for people from poor countries, it is not, British people have worked for years to get us this quality of life and quite how you believe we owe it to people from poor countries that are only here for that one reason I just don't know.

Once again, it's not about being a haven for poor foreigners. Immigrants make a huge financial contribution to this country.

JSDOUVRES wrote:Britain is full, plain and simple and it cannot go on like this. I walk down my high street and it is like a foreign country, I remember when I was a young kid when hearing a foreign voice was something special and intriguing, now the young people only hear about how these people are here to do the jobs they are apparently "too lazy" to do, absolutely disgusting. I say no more.

The figures show that unemployment is lower among immigrants, so it's quite true that immigrants are doing the jobs that the natives aren't willing or able to do.

Nevertheless, it's quite clear that your opposition to immigration stems from little more than xenophobic ignorance.

The truly funny thing is that 100% of British people are descended from immigrants.

And if Britain truly is overpopulated, I'd start with everyone who's a supporter of UKIP, to be honest.

You are free to have your own opinion and we will certainly not agree on this.

Have a read, although no doubt you will disagree as it would go against your own "facts".
http://www.migrationwatchuk.co.uk/briefing-paper/1.37

I am happy for you if you are happy with Britain being flooded by immigrants, obviously you are not the most patriotic of people, but that is your choice at the end of the day, and anyway they are doing the jobs that British people refuse to do, although strangely enough these jobs were done before they arrived but I have no idea by whom? Ghosts maybe? And your claim that wages have not gone down is utter nonsense, try telling that to builders for example, one or two may well disagree with you there along with people in many other trades But perhaps they are lazy and didn't deserve the wages anyway, as they are not as amazingly hard working as these immigrants are they?

I like how you finish, Britain is a country of which 100% of people are descended from immigrants, like many countries actually so why not just open up the borders to everyone? That would work well now wouldn't it? Stuff the social impact it would have. Build more houses perhaps? Get rid of the countryside, it doesn't matter because we are all immigrants and these people have a right to be here apparently. Society would work brilliantly then.

And I like your figure about how 41% of people want to stay in Europe as to 39% that want to leave. Like you said only the second positive poll since 2010. People are beginning to realize that UKIP have real potential now aren't they and are getting scared. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proposed_r ... pean_Union

I would say that 2 positive votes to stay up against 32 to leave over the last 4 years pretty much says it all to be honest and I have no doubt whatsoever that the next vote will be to leave. In 99% of polls run by various organisations the vote is to leave so UKIP are not alone. Far from it.

Shame that you don't care about the British way of life but people like you normally don't if it harms the rights of the poor immigrant.

I'd like to know the exact reason you believe it would be stupid for Britain to leave Europe? Are you happy with the ridiculous cost we pay each year? Billions a year and for what? To be told we are not allowed to deport rapists because they have a right to a family life? Or that we have no right to control our borders? Economically Europe needs our trade and that would not stop just because we are not part of the Union. Of course it wouldn't. Quite why people believe it would be a mistake to leave I have no idea? I would say that Britain is more than powerful enough to take care of itself economically, in fact I believe that Britain would be far better off out of Europe.

I do like some of your misleading facts too about how immigrants are a certain percentage less likely to claim benefits and social housing etc. A brilliant political way to mask the facts. So does less likely mean our borders should be open? Does less likely make it OK? And I would dispute these claims anyway. And what about offending? Are there any facts about that? The offending that is known and prosecuted that is. Or is that not important because a higher percentage of Brits offend? Or more likely actually get prosecuted for the same crime that is.

I just don't get your obsession with uncontrolled immigration? Are you seriously going to tell me that we have the jobs, housing, hospitals and schools that can cope? Because we do not. Or do you have another solution? Apart from deporting people from other political parties that you do not agree with that is. Shame. I just do not get how you could claim that we have space in this country to house an uncontrolled amount of people. I'd love to know your views on that. I'm sure some "expert" has proved that it's not a problem!

Here is what is predicted "According to official projections, immigration at current levels will add about 7 million to the population of England by 2027 - equivalent to 7 cities the size of Birmingham. Just over two thirds of this increase will be due to immigration.

According to the government's household projections, a new home for immigrants will need to be built every seven minutes for the next 20 years or so." Is that acceptable and realistic?

Anyway, I can't wait for the Clegg/Farage debate that is coming up. Today at 7pm on LBC radio and tv. Will be worth a listen before the big TV debate on the 2nd April on the bbc.

Peace.

JSDOUVRES wrote:

Deschanel wrote:

JSDOUVRES wrote:And what was this rubbish about the Irish being better at learning foreign languages? Since when does your nationality make any difference in such a matter? Ridiculous.

Well, the Irish did have to learn English at sword-point centuries ago.. I think you're adressing me, without noting my many qualifications that I added. That the Irish have had to travel a lot. That "perhaps, maybe" they have a certain verbal adeptness. That it still takes education, study, immersion in a language, no matter who you are. That my cousins' wide dispersal and immersion in languages and cultures (France, Italy, Switzerland, the UAE, Nepal) went along with their bilingual education in Gaelic from an early age, in NI and the Republic both. I merely suggested that the Irish propensity for travel (from want or from necessity) might possibly have made them more adept at foreign languages than say, stay-at -home sorts. I did not suggest that it was easy, or that anyone else couldn't do it too. I mentioned it stil takes work and study and immersion. But damn if my Irish cousins all over the world freakin' amazing to me at learning new languages. I was just relating my personal experiences, not making a blanket declaration of superiority, and if you want to check my original post, you'd see that. But you have other fish to fry it seems, that UKIP chip on your shoulder.

So because the Irish have travelled they are "naturally" better at learning languages? Since when does learning a language come naturally? Anybody that travels to a foreign country has to learn their language to survive don't they? (Although most Irish people went to English speaking USA as far as I know?)
And I do not have a UKIP chip on my shoulder, however, people like you clearly do.
Thanks.

You clearly did not read my first post correctly, nor my second honest attempt to describe and explain what I meant- no, Irish don't probably have an advantage when it comes to language, not more than anyone else. Just that they had to go eswhere, oftem over centuries. Not just the US, ferfecks sake. I actually like you and have sympathy sometimes for what you have to say- you have strong opinions and you're not completely wrong, I have sympathy for what you're getting at. I was going to apologize for that "UKIP chip on your shoulder" comment but I suppose it makes no difference.

Deschanel wrote: I actually like you and have sympathy sometimes for what you have to say...

JSDouvres, being so passionate about his opinions, makes me smile too sometimes

Cheers, Danny C and Deschanel!

I now declare this thread "Broken Britain: Episode III - Revenge of the Free Speech". Who agrees?

ZiggyPSB wrote:I now declare this thread "Broken Britain: Episode III - Revenge of the Free Speech". Who agrees?

Cheers to you too

Corina wrote:

Deschanel wrote: I actually like you and have sympathy sometimes for what you have to say...

JSDouvres, being so passionate about his opinions, makes me smile too sometimes

Cheers, Danny C and Deschanel!

Yes, I am passionate, the thing that makes me the most annoyed on such topics though is the fact that I am not anti immigration, it just needs to be controlled, that's all and I do not understand how anybody could possibly disagree with that when everybody knows it is important! In Britain we are dealing with overcrowding when it comes to housing, schools, hospitals etc and we have far too many unskilled workers fighting for jobs. I would not stop immigration from Europe, absolutely not and I have never said that. Nobody can tell me that we have the space and services to cope with what has happened and is continuing to happen and people are not happy with the changes they are being forced to go through in their societies and I do not blame them. I see it every day. If you don't understand that then sorry but Britain does not exist in order to service poor countries and why should it? We share similar economies with the likes of France and Germany and have a more or less similar number of people coming and going from each country which is fair and as it should be. Sorry but I do not expect to be sharing a border with a country where as British people cannot expect the same level of rights and quality of life the other way. How is that fair? How is that right? As we all know, there are reasons why so many people are here from Poland etc. That is fact, not fiction.

Or am I wrong? Can anybody actually tell me that they believe Britain is not full? That we have the housing, schools and other public services? I doubt it very much but would like to know. Nobody seems really bothered about this fact it seems.

Highest population density in Europe and 7th highest in the world just about says it all really. But we shouldn't control our borders? Is that not just ridiculous?

JSDOUVRES wrote:then sorry but Britain does not exist in order to service poor countries

Britain does profit a lot from "poor" countries too.

Corina wrote:

JSDOUVRES wrote:then sorry but Britain does not exist in order to service poor countries

Britain does profit a lot from "poor" countries too.

Yes, and that is wrong, although without it you could say that these poor countries would be poorer perhaps? Doesn't necessarily make it right though of course. And is not an excuse for open borders and over population into Britain, and why should it be?

So in what ways do you believe Britain profits then?

JSDOUVRES wrote:

Corina wrote:

JSDOUVRES wrote:then sorry but Britain does not exist in order to service poor countries

Britain does profit a lot from "poor" countries too.

Yes, and that is wrong, although without it you could say that these poor countries would be poorer perhaps? Doesn't necessarily make it right though of course. And is not an excuse for open borders and over population into Britain, and why should it be?

So in what ways do you believe Britain profits then?

open markets, free circulation of capital, the "brain drain", the right to purchase land - to name only a few.