You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > High immigration levels prevent 'cohesive society'
November 22 2024 3.57am

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

High immigration levels prevent 'cohesive society'

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 16 of 24 < 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 >

  

Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards Hrolf The Ganger Flag 24 Feb 16 5.10pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by crystal balls

Well your user name would suggest you were there, perhaps!

Yes Viking is a bit of a "catch-all" term, but Angles, Jutes, Saxons, Danes, Norsemen etc. all arrived in numbers that were sufficient to take over large swathes of the country, and the Celtic populations(who themselves originated from central Europe and arrived much earlier) were often pushed to the "fringes".


I don't see any point in having a historical discussion, but it is clear that both before and after the invaders who settled, Britain has had many, many peoples from all over the Europe and further afield who have settled and intermingled with those who were here already. It has often taken generations for the newcomers to be accepted, usually until the next wave arrives, so they can unite and pick on the next newcomers!

Edited by crystal balls (24 Feb 2016 4.55pm)

You miss the main point.

These people came here in hundreds, at most thousands, and added to a small population. The vast majority of Britons can trace their linage back to those settlers or even further back to earlier settlers that came here as far back as the end of the ice age.
In ten years more people have come here than the population of Britain in the year 1 AD.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards Hrolf The Ganger Flag 24 Feb 16 5.14pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by Kermit8

Between 2001-2011 the average annual net migration was 190,000. The ten million you refer to is attributable to plenty of other factors not associated with immigration also. Old age, etc.

What?

Without immigration the population would have started to fall. The birth rate was at an all time low.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
crystal balls Flag The Garden of Earthly Delights 24 Feb 16 5.15pm Send a Private Message to crystal balls Add crystal balls as a friend

Originally posted by Rudi Hedman

The BBC were in a community hall type place in Manchester at the weekend where Polish and British people were asked about the EU and mainly immigration. A few said most come to work, only very very came to claim and they were not wanted or respected.

A couple of POLES said immigration was getting out of control. Yes, 2 Polish people here for 5 years or maybe a few more said it was out of control. Not 'many generation's it has perhaps taken for some to get over racial prejudice of black and asian people but 5 years or maybe a few more, and they're not British and talking about immigrants from their own country.

We need migration, but we don't need uncontrolled. If they thinks it's out of control now, wait a few more years when more countries join the EU and we've already had our one and only referendum and voted in.

Edited by Rudi Hedman (24 Feb 2016 5.08pm)

This is not uncommon; people often want to pull up the drawbridge after they have crossed over. And they will be amongst the most vociferous in condemning the next group of newcomers.

 


I used to be immortal

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards Hrolf The Ganger Flag 24 Feb 16 5.20pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

Well I'd imagine that there would have been a lot migration from Eastern Europe and the Caribbean. Plus housing in Golders Green would probably be cheaper, and no one would want a Spurs season ticket.

Ha. The trains might run on time but Geoff Hurst's goal would have been disallowed.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Rudi Hedman Flag Caterham 24 Feb 16 5.21pm Send a Private Message to Rudi Hedman Add Rudi Hedman as a friend

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

No he has a good point, you tend to see it in rental and property prices. The difference between 3 and four bedroomed and more properties tends more to be based on the location, than on the additional room - Where as two and three bedroomed properties generally dominate the market.

The most common cause of 'larger sibling families' is through second marriages of couples, rather than people wanting to have four or five kids - Difference is that in many of these cases, there is a big age disparity among children.

Jamie, I know that a 4 bedder tends to be a detached or a large semi in a different plot or road/postcode sector because of original planning/now land worth and etc of the area but he's reducing it down to people not tending to live in groups needing 3 bedroom, therefore only a need for 1 and 2 bedroom properties.... We do without the 3 bedroom properties because there is no need for them. So you either have 1 kid or 2 kids that are the same sex. Lots of people want 2 kids and not just one, or need space before divorced man and woman shack up and need extra room at weekends for fella's kids.

If this theory of no more 3 bedroom houses being needed were in a manifesto, it'd lose virtually all swing seats before an 'x' stroke the ballot paper. Still hope for Corbyn here wanting more immigration and more than likely less disposable income for everyone.

Edited by Rudi Hedman (24 Feb 2016 5.21pm)

 


COYP

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 24 Feb 16 5.26pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

What?

Without immigration the population would have started to fall. The birth rate was at an all time low.

Likely true, and that would have pushed up wages. Big time. Migration needs to be managed in line with emigration and population death trends.

Like any system, the less control you place over the system, the greater and more unpredictable the impacts (positive and negative). Realistically, it wasn't even a problem prior to the Credit Crunch, due to the driving prosperity among the upper working classes and middle classes (People are less inclined to concern about immigration when its not their jobs that are being 'affected'). Problem is of course you can now find all manner of highly skilled EU residents keen to work in finance, technology etc.

For example, Romania, has a thriving IT industry which has resulted in quite an export trade into UK companies (which pay lower for better qualified and educated staff. We had an experienced Developer with Two PhDs from Romania who was being paid only slightly more than Graduate completion rates - around 28k).

Edited by jamiemartin721 (24 Feb 2016 5.30pm)

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
Rudi Hedman Flag Caterham 24 Feb 16 5.32pm Send a Private Message to Rudi Hedman Add Rudi Hedman as a friend

Originally posted by crystal balls

The population has increased by 10m over the last 50 years, but quite a lot of this was caused by an increase in the birthrate between the early 60s and the mid 70s. The number of immigrants is little more than half of that figure, though most of this has occurred since 2004, admittedly.

[Link]

And not all of these stay indefinitely. Of 1.1m Poles who have arrived in the UK some 300,000 have returned.

Oh please. 300k leave, 500k migrate to Britain. a lot return to Poland or wherever permanently with their several £grand and more than those returning add to the 500k to keep the population growing year on year.

That's the reality and it will accelerate with more member countries of the EU. Oh well, doesn't affect my life and it probably doesn't affect those that don't have an issue with it at all.

 


COYP

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards Hrolf The Ganger Flag 24 Feb 16 5.32pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

Likely true, and that would have pushed up wages. Big time. Migration needs to be managed in line with emigration and population death trends.

Like any system, the less control you place over the system, the greater and more unpredictable the impacts (positive and negative). Realistically, it wasn't even a problem prior to the Credit Crunch, due to the driving prosperity among the upper working classes and middle classes (People are less inclined to concern about immigration when its not their jobs that are being 'affected'). Problem is of course you can now find all manner of highly skilled EU residents keen to work in finance, technology etc.

For example, Romania, has a thriving IT industry which has resulted in quite an export trade into UK companies (which pay lower for better qualified and educated staff. We had an experienced Developer with Two PhDs from Romania who was being paid only slightly more than Graduate completion rates - around 28k).

Edited by jamiemartin721 (24 Feb 2016 5.30pm)


.
All very good points.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards Hrolf The Ganger Flag 24 Feb 16 5.34pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

[Link]

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Rudi Hedman Flag Caterham 24 Feb 16 5.37pm Send a Private Message to Rudi Hedman Add Rudi Hedman as a friend

I think after we've voted in if I hear anyone moaning about immigration I'll just ask them what they voted for and if they say 'in' or they didn't vote I'll just tell them they have no right to moan or swerve them altogether.

It seems as though lots of people for immigration live far away from it or live in prosperous areas where pretty much only London office professionals live and so are with like minded people. I can completely understand both views and I'd be the same on the latter but what people fail to grasp is the 'uncontrolled'definition in the argument, not a BNP stop to all immigration.

 


COYP

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Kermit8 Flag Hevon 24 Feb 16 5.39pm Send a Private Message to Kermit8 Add Kermit8 as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

What?

Without immigration the population would have started to fall. The birth rate was at an all time low.

You are mistaken. Births have been steady at around 735-750,000 per year for the last 40 years. The big rise was in the 60's. Deaths, however, have seen a huge dip - around 13% - in those same 40 years.


edit:1975-79 - births and deaths more or less equal

Now - 200,000 more births than deaths.

Edited by Kermit8 (24 Feb 2016 5.48pm)

 


Big chest and massive boobs

[Link]


Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards Hrolf The Ganger Flag 24 Feb 16 5.46pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by Kermit8

.

Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (24 Feb 2016 5.48pm)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

  

Page 16 of 24 < 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > High immigration levels prevent 'cohesive society'