Absurd? Protecting the interests of your existing population seems to me to be eminently sensible.

mother-in-law is an anagram of woman hitler

I don't think that logic works Jamie. At any point in human history has there been dead children, mass rape, torture and murder.......I'd take in many of the children....It isn't them that cause the cohesion problems.

Now that transportation is enabled who says at what point we stop lowering a standard of living to accommodate people?

It isn't only a standard of living either. It's social cohesion.

This country doesn't have the housing nor inclination.

Personally, I'd only take in those that Christian organizations or the Kurds vouched for under limited asylum. I would only take secularists or religious moderates.....Something you can generally rely on with Kurds and Christians. I would be very hot on Antisemitism ......Something we need to do in this country instead of all the warm words instead.

I wouldn't open our borders using a European imitative. Countries like Germany and Sweden have chosen their path in response to this crises. Let them enact it and reap the consequences.

Immigrants chose western countries where they think they can take the maximum benefits.....whether that's work or state related.

After a taste of the western lifestyle I'm not sure how many would like to go back.

In the meantime how are some of my ex students going to get houses to live in Jamie? British taxpayers should look after their own first.

Edited by Stirlingsays (02 Sep 2015 10.41am)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Give a bone too.

Much prettier and groomed than the usual ragbag munters that invade Europe from the middle east.

I saw her story on the news she was resourceful, clever and able to pay 2000+ euros to get to Sweden, her asylum of choice.

Many many more will now come on the back of her success.

I'm not sure you can have Asylum to a set figure, but effectively the solution to the problem of refugees is for the approach to be centralized, not based on who manages to turn up where.

Economic migration and working migration, should really be based around filling vacancies that cannot be filled, not keeping wage levels artificially low.

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

Yes they should, but that's never been the case has it. Its a struggle to think of any right wing government in the UK that has a great reputation for taking care of its own people.

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

This is a terrible thought and will never be adopted,but the idea of taking an untold number of Muslims into most European countries is not an appetising prospect. Once given citizenship most of them would stay put even when the situation in their mother countries has been stabilised, and of course any children born here would get automatic national status.
Here's the unpalatable bit.Reservations(Concentration Camps!!!) could be established over many European sites where the refugees/immigrants could be fed and sheltered at Europe's expense until it was safe for them to return to their respective countries. They would be screened and monitored 24/7 and shipped back (again at our expense)in due course. Just can't think of a better scheme.