This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
cryrst The garden of England 09 Jan 19 7.52pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by steve1984
To his credit, Stirling pointed out that whilst it's true that immigrants tend be younger and more economically active and so help to pay for the care of our ageing population in a few years time they'll be old and we'll need to bring a bunch of teenage Eskimos or some such to pay for them. So where does it all end? He's right of course. Which is why I found Theresa's new 10 year plan for the NHS so amusing as it majors on prevention. The idea being that we stop people from getting heart disease and cancer by keeping them healthier. Call me old fashioned but the only way to really help the NHS (without spending serious money) would be to take all of the unhealthy tossers to a quarry somewhere and shoot them. Otherwise you're just kicking the can, which seems to be Theresa's preferred option for most things. Edited by steve1984 (09 Jan 2019 5.08pm) What exactly is the nhs for.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
steve1984 09 Jan 19 7.53pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by PalazioVecchio
that is a shocking thing to say. Didn't shock me. Moslems don't drink. But a universal wage would mean less incentive for everyone to work not just those who already don't.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
steve1984 09 Jan 19 7.54pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by cryrst
What exactly is the nhs for. I was being sarcastic.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
cryrst The garden of England 09 Jan 19 8.00pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by steve1984
Didn't shock me. Moslems don't drink. But a universal wage would mean less incentive for everyone to work not just those who already don't. Muslims dont drink.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
cryrst The garden of England 09 Jan 19 8.07pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by steve1984
I was being sarcastic. Yes of course you were steve1984.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Spiderman Horsham 09 Jan 19 8.15pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Mapletree
I agree with number 1 but remember the asylum process is pretty thorough. It is before successfully completing that process where there is an issue. But number 2 I have previously opined upon. If you want to move your family you send a man first. Women are in real danger on the journey. It only takes one member of the family to successfully claim asylum for the rest of the nuclear family to be allowed to join that person in the UK. Regarding 3, immigrants historically are far less demanding on the NHS and on housing than indigenous people but pay more on average in taxes. So it is they that are funding the established population. We need to adjust the system to the demand they bring, they easily pay for themselves. And they are also highly over-represented in NHS employees. Edited by Mapletree (09 Jan 2019 3.50pm) Not the illegal entrants who arrive daily. I cannot go into detail for obvious reasons but having just retired after 30 years in the Immigration Service/Border Force unfortunately the vast majority of asylum seekers are not genuine (different to legal immigrants). If you heard their demands upon arrival I feel that you may have a different view of this topic.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Spiderman Horsham 09 Jan 19 8.19pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by becky
Yup, whilst polygamy is illegal in this country, if the marriages have taken place in countries where it is legal, then they may bring the additional wives here. The limitation is that they can only claim the married couple's allowances for the first wife,but any others are treated as single parents and, as such, are entitled to housing benefit, child benefit et al. Having worked as a Visa Officer in a country that allows polygamy you are not correct. Under UK Immigration Law a person is only be allowed to bring in 1 wife (legally)
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Spiderman Horsham 09 Jan 19 8.27pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Mapletree
For me to gauge the scale of the problem, do you have statistics on the numbers? I have never come across such an example. Do you have a source? This is from the House of Commons Library Immigration issues Edited by Mapletree (09 Jan 2019 7.32pm) Is correct, see my previous post
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
becky over the moon 09 Jan 19 8.45pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Mapletree
For me to gauge the scale of the problem, do you have statistics on the numbers? I have never come across such an example. Do you have a source? This is from the House of Commons Library Immigration issues Edited by Mapletree (09 Jan 2019 7.32pm) Whilst they do try to prevent this happening, if you look at Section 3, they admit that polygamous spouses are admitted, albeit under a different category of asylum - they also state that no records exist of numbers of this.
A stairway to Heaven and a Highway to Hell give some indication of expected traffic numbers |
|
Alert a moderator to this post | Board Moderator |
ChrisGC Wantage 09 Jan 19 9.07pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Spiderman
Of course it is their preference and their desire. Does this make it acceptable? Absolutely not, we cannot sustain the numbers that are arriving, it is not just the odd inflatable from France. They are arriving everyday at Gatwick/Heathrow/Dover/Newhaven. For those who feel my reply is that of a racist/xenophobe you could not be further from the truth, just that of someone who has been dealing with these people over many years Well said.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
dannyboy1978 09 Jan 19 9.25pm | |
---|---|
For the people who welcome refugees ,what are your thoughts on people traffickers? What I can't understand is if a people trafficker is caught it's illegal but the refugee is legal? Surely if one is illegal they both are?
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Pussay Patrol 09 Jan 19 10.31pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by dannyboy1978
For the people who welcome refugees ,what are your thoughts on people traffickers? What I can't understand is if a people trafficker is caught it's illegal but the refugee is legal? Surely if one is illegal they both are? Perhaps it's the reason we don't work together with other countries and have a common policy which allowed the the problem in Calais to fester. We should agree to the UN Migration pact the it should solve the problem
Paua oouaarancì Irà chiyeah Ishé galé ma ba oo ah |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.