That's what I'm saying, the immigration problems of the UK, are with working migration, notably the EU working migrants (specicifcally being used to keep wages low, and thus unemployment artificially high).

If you ask me, that's the kind of immigration policy I could get behind, one where we restrict the intake of cheap labour from overseas, for corporate profit, rather than ensuring UK based companies and government focus on employment of the UK unemployed to fill those vacancies.

Win for everyone, except the people who oppose migration for reasons of race and xenophobia.

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

I'm from an Psychology background, so I can tell you that 'intuitive logic' isn't reliable or valid as a means of determining 'truth'.

The figures are based on information from the Immigration service via the ONS. I think they're probably reasonable. What they show is that Asylum has always been manageable within the number of people leaving the UK.

Actually this also is a misconception, most of Africa is massively under populated as a rule, the problem is to do with dispersion, and is related to infrastructure to support distributed populations. The problems in Africa isn't population sizes, but concentration. A good example of this can be seen in China, which has massive population centers, with vast amounts of uninhabited country.

The UK has a massive population, but it also has the infrastructure in place for it to be distributed across the entire country (where as if it was in Gambia, everyone outside the major cities and towns would probably starve).

Not really true though, all the figure needs to be sustainable is to fall below the figure of emigration. Which is the salient point, presently around 300,000 people emigrate each year, but 500,000 migrate in each year. Ideally you want those figures to more or less balance.

This isn't really supported by evidence either, the growth of population in the UK from Birth rates isn't so dramatic as to be a major problem (the rate of births to deaths is around 80,000 more births). The major factor in UK population stems from the difference between emigration and immigration not accounting for Asylum).

So between them Births and Asylum accounted for around 104,000 people in the UK extra, compared to 'economic migration and working' which contributed 500,000. Emigration accounted for the reduction of the UK population by 300,000.

The problem isn't Asylum, its corporate profiteering from using cheap migrant labour to fill vacancies in the UK (which incidently has led to wage stagnation).

Yes we should, because the detriment isn't actually real. The problem lies with general immigration (EU and Non-EU) not Asylum or birth rates. The area we need to focus on is the areas where the largest affect can be achieved, to bring the migration and emigration figures together.

We already have a population crisis in terms of sustainability, on a global basis. Have done pretty much since the turn of the 20th century. But that's a separate issue.

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

This is a different argument, because any resolution for such eventualities needs to be targeted at that problem. It doesn't relate to asylum.

The surely part of the solution is to improve the infrastructure and resources in those countries. As I pointed out most of Africa is massively under populated. What is missing is infrastructure to allow the population to spread out over the country, rather than concentrations of large population in the cities and towns.

And that means improving the life expectations and opportunities of the third world (education, health, roads, air transit). A probable knock on from increased standards of living and life expectations is a reduction in birthrates.

Not necessarily, Around 80% of China, for want of an example, is uninhabited, yet its major cities suffer from gross overpopulation etc.

Stopping migration won't affect the worlds population growth, that requires a very different solution. All it does is concentrate the problems, and create greater problems. Pollution for example in China and India, is more dramatic because its focused in concentrated areas of dense population, rather than distributed across a whole nation.

It can't but it has no bearing on refugees. Its a separate problem that will increasingly impact the UK, simply because no one is actually ever interested in addressing the problems, notably to do with inequality in the global community.

In terms of the consumption of resources, its not the people in African nations that are the problem. Its our demand that drives the problems. The average American will consume 43 times as many natural resources as a third world citizen.

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

Every country in the top 50 odd are African or middle eastern bar two groups of Pacific islands.

The UK, US and Germany for example are all outside of the top 150 countries for highest birth rates.

Optimistic as ever

The ones trying to get to western Europe went the Turkey route....This needs to be recognised.

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

Sorry can't do lnks ....but if you look on the Migration Watch website it does supply the information on the net migration.

always a Norwood boy, where ever I live.