Immigration,immigration,immigration..

[tibilicus]

First of all know this isn't an anti immigration thread or anything, don't let the title deceive you! More to the point it's a focus on something that I find really troubling and that is the myths that surround immigration. I'm going to use my country as an example, the UK but I'm sure your country can just as easily be applied to the debate.

Anyway onwards to my point. My point is why is there such significant number of people who believe that immigration is rampantly out of control? the whole fear factor also links into this. I will use an example of me and my friends to show you what I mean.

I read the paper every day without fail and from about the age of 15 took a keen interest in politics, I'm also well informed in the area. On the other hand a lot of people I hang around with rarely watch the news and their paper consists of tabloid trash like the sun. Anyway at the pub the other night, all though the scene can be replicated most weekends the topic some how went on to politics, or what I like to call politics, a very watered down drunk version of politics. As the debate moved on to immigration some of the things I was hearing were disgusting. Apart from that it was completely in factual. I then went on to ask my friends how many immigrants they thought there was in the country. The guesses raised from 5 million to as high as 10 million which I had to refrain myself from laughing at. The thing is though my friends aren't stupid, they're just not as clever in the area of politics but the frighting thing is they are probably just like every other person in this country. Well obviously not like everyone but at least a majority.

The point im trying to make is when did the fear and facts about immigration become twisted? I know that immigration has been a sensitive issue for centuries but surely in today's society's we should have the resources to dispel such myths. I personally find it mind boggling that people, and by people I mean a lot of people believe the age old myth that immigrants are here to steel "our jobs". The reality of course is that they're here to do the jobs that no one else wants to do as we consider ourselves to good for those jobs. The myths surrounding immigrant crime also makes me feel mind boggled. At the end of the day who deserves to enjoy the benefits of our country more, A hard working immigrant or a lazy sod who thinks he doesn't have to work leaching of state resources?

Anyway to finish what actions do you think can be taken to educate people on immigration? By educate I don't mean change peoples political ideology, I know some people have genuine concerns about immigration not based on myth but based on facts and concerns within their community.

Basically what can be done to get rid of the false idea in many peoples minds that immigration is some how a terrible thing and that it's all a conspiracy to bring our institutions down as well as bringing mass crime with them and religious brain washing.

By the way also note this is my personnel experience in the area I live. Some people may live in area where there is little tension between immigrant populations. My personnel expereince round here has always been that immigration is a big no no.

[rory_20_uk]

To stop fears around immigration IMO is twofold:

Cut benefits that are paid to people. but reduce taxes for the poorest paid. Little is free, you only earn by working. jobs that people turn their noses up at as they get almost the same amount of money for doing nothing would become relatively attractive. There would be far fewer jobs that aren't filled, so less jobs to "steal".

Most of the most inflammatory press is generated by families getting masses on benefits from having masses of children. Suddenly the government "needs" to provide a massive house and pay out thousands of pounds. The newspapers only need to find one example every couple of months to have it almost as a continually running story. If no one is entitled to this the problem will disappear.

The other issue that fills up dead news time is illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. These are often interrelated with illegal immigrants seeking asylum when caught. To diffuse the issue there should be a quick way to return these unwanted to whence they came - if the prevalence and incidence can be reduced, less tabloid anger.

~:smoking:

[Fisherking]

The whole problem of immigration causes fear. For the people who see their country being taken over by others.

They see their way of life changing because others have come. It is compounded when the others form nationalistic communities to preserve their culture in the new place. The locals ask, what did you come here for if you don’t plan on assimilating. The others are in a new place and a bit afraid. They try to cling to what they know while adjusting to the new place and ideas they are encountering. Over time they will form an amalgam of the cultures and both will become afraid when they see a new group coming in, then the whole process starts over again.

Both parties add to the problem and both need time to adjust to the situation. One can but hope that the culture shift that results is clearly for the best.

[Fragony]

If someone fills up a gap fine but we need stricter rules. No use no entry.

[Husar]

The reality of course is that they're here to do the jobs that no one else wants to do as we consider ourselves to good for those jobs.
I tend to think that THAT is a myth just as well. I empty trash cans and collect trash myself in my job and I do not even really need the job to survive at the moment. Of course that means I am unnecessarily taking away an immigrant's job to enrich myself, I can litterally feel the evilness flowing through my veins. :mellow:


The myths surrounding immigrant crime also makes me feel mind boggled. At the end of the day who deserves to enjoy the benefits of our country more, A hard working immigrant or a lazy sod who thinks he doesn't have to work leaching of state resources?
I hope that doesn't mean immigrant violence is justified because they also work harder?
Some of the "lazy sods who are leeching off state ressources" here are forced to do that because they had a job before but their boss decided he could hire an immigrant for the same work, pay him a whole lot less and let the "lazy sod" go into unemployment. Now this "lazy sod" put everything into that career and noone wants him anymore because other bosses did the same thing and already have an immigrant for that job, the "lazy sod" may now be old, lack a proper education for another job and has no chance to get into his old job or a similar job anymore, he goes to the pub because he is bitter and you hear him say the things you heard. Now the immigrant does some kind of slave labour while he feels privileged because for him that is actually a good thing compared with work in his home country, the "lazy sod" is bitter, frustrated and possibly ruined and gets angry at the "dirty immigrant" who has got his job now, you get upset over the stupidity of the "lazy sod" and post some old leftist bile about how all immigrants are the nicest people in the world and most of the western people are lazy xenophobic sods while the former boss of the "lazy sod" laughs his arse off because he raised the prices, lowered the costs, made himself and some rich shareholders even richer, screws over his customers and his employees and is completely ignored by everybody. You know, many of those immigrants may not really have considered coming here before they were recruited by the local companies because those companies saw they could save tons of money, so I blame neither the immigrants nor the local guys who lost their jobs to them, I blame the people who actually do that to make even more profits.

[rory_20_uk]

There is a downward pressure on unskilled jobs. In Europe and most of the West education is free, so only hard work prevents one from being able to obtain skilled work.

Many businesses that don't drive down wages will loose out to those that outsource to countries that have much lower wages.

Businesses saving tons of money. So now it's a sin to have a successful business?

~:smoking:

[InsaneApache]

Anyway onwards to my point. My point is why is there such significant number of people who believe that immigration is rampantly out of control?

Palestine? :inquisitive:


The point im trying to make is when did the fear and facts about immigration become twisted? I know that immigration has been a sensitive issue for centuries

Your falling for propaganda. There has only been significant immigration into the UK in my lifetime (50 years). I can remember seeing my first black man when I was about 7/8 years old. I was fascinated and got a thick ear from pater for staring. :embarassed:

It's the sheer scale of immigration, particularly in the last 12 years that has changed. Anyway with our racist prime minister declaring 'British jobs for British workers' what would you expect from the hoi polloi?

[Furunculus]

To use Britain as an example:

Immigration is out of control, precisely because we do not implement control of immigration, something admitted by GB several years back when he stated that there was no upper limit on immigration, and confirmed by government projections that Britains population will rise to seventy million plus in less than a generation.
To compound matters, because we have not previously controlled immigration we have not been able to select desirable immigrants, we have instead received all manner of dross along with the gold.

This does not mean that Britain at large suffers from problems of immigration, because the majority of immigrants are concentrated in the major cities, and the majority of those immigrants who are poor and minimally educated/skilled end up concentrated in the 'slums' of Britain.
It is those residents of the poor housing estates of Britain who genuinely suffer the ill effects of uncontrolled immigration; the poor with few job prospects, with little ability to move, and little reward to life except the community they live within suddenly find themselves cheek by jowel with people who compete for the same jobs and dilute the same community on which poor Britians depend.

So in short, uncontrolled immigration hurts the most vulnerable, those who are powerless to escape from its effects.
It doesn't effect me, i am educated with a science degree, a business masters, along with five A-levels and ten GCSE's, I have work experience that includes helping setting up a company that was valued at £1.7M by Grant Thorntons, as well as experience working as a skilled 3D artist, and i live in a remote and rural town little affected by immigration with the exception of the polish, one of whom is my girlfriend. If i have a problem i can move, because someone will want my skills in a place i want to live, but not everyone has those options.

I'm guessing that you are in a similar position my young friend, but without the wisdom accrued from age to realise that we are not typical, and that people on council estates really do have hard lives that silly liberals from our 'class' only make worse with all our shiny liberal ideas.

So yes, I am all in favour of strictly controlled and limited immigration in Britian that discriminates between those we want and those we do not.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Immigrants are no bad thing, let me state that right off.

However, the current situation in the UK is untennable. We are full, we are out of space; this is no longer a fact that can be hidden. Oh, we have plenty of free land but if we build houses on it we can't grow crops or raise animals. Being in a situation where we have to import all our food is unacceptable, it would be bad enough if we were still the greatest Empire in the world, as a mere nation-state it would be placing one foot in the grave. Our welfare state is under presure because the baby-boomers are about to retire, so we need a larger work force, says the government.

The government has been trying to grow the workforce like the economy, and we all know how that worked out.

Te immigrants coming into the country are breeding at about ten times the local population, there are taking over whole boroughs, not streets and they are placing an unacceptable stree, not only on our culture, but on our infastructre. As IA says, the pace is unprecedented and the effects are already beggining to tell. Civil unrest, far-right politicians gaining traction, and a general decrease in tollerance for other cultures.

[Furunculus]

The myths surrounding immigrant crime also makes me feel mind boggled. At the end of the day who deserves to enjoy the benefits of our country more, A hard working immigrant or a lazy sod who thinks he doesn't have to work leaching of state resources?


the point about immigrant crime is that a British person has the right to commit crime in Britain (and to be punished for it), but why the hell should we invite a foreign national over here, only for them to make life a misery for the locals!?!?

[Fragony]

However, the current situation in the UK is untennable. We are full, we are out of space; this is no longer a fact that can be hidden.

Oh boy what to say, if you think the UK is full :laugh4:

There are some problems here but it ain't so bad, political correctness isn't fashionable anymore things are going to be fine. The UK, I dunno you guys are insane if I may say so, nobody here would put up with that.

[Papewaio]

50 years ago 4% of the population of UK was born overseas.
Now it is 8%.

Australia is about 25% born overseas.

[Ser Clegane]

But Australia is pretty selective with regard to who may immigrate, isn't it?

[tibilicus]

50 years ago 4% of the population of UK was born overseas.
Now it is 8%.

Australia is about 25% born overseas.

Didn't you have riots in recent years over the immigration issue or something connected to it?

So do most British people here see immigration as "to much" in the UK?

To be honest as long as some one who is hard working and born here can still get a job when they please I see no problem. The day that it starts to change the political landscape however is the day I think there will be a problem. Basically people who immigrate as first generation immigrants being granted British citizenship and then voting for parties which overly favour therm.

[Furunculus]

So do most British people here see immigration as "to much" in the UK?

To be honest as long as some one who is hard working and born here can still get a job when they please I see no problem. The day that it starts to change the political landscape however is the day I think there will be a problem.

yes, see above.

like inner-city working class labour voters changing to BNP?

[tibilicus]

like inner-city working class labour voters changing to BNP?

Sort of like that but also immigrants voting for political parties which will offer lax immigration policies and favourable terms for them as well as a dynamic of people turning to far right parties.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

50 years ago 4% of the population of UK was born overseas.
Now it is 8%.

Australia is about 25% born overseas.

Yes, but Australia is much larger and has a much lower population density, even then there have been problems in recent years. The current Labour government over there has also only just started relaxing immigration, give it another five to ten years and see what happens.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Didn't you have riots in recent years over the immigration issue or something connected to it?

So do most British people here see immigration as "to much" in the UK?

To be honest as long as some one who is hard working and born here can still get a job when they please I see no problem. The day that it starts to change the political landscape however is the day I think there will be a problem. Basically people who immigrate as first generation immigrants being granted British citizenship and then voting for parties which overly favour therm.

Then we have a problem, on both counts. You know, something like 80% of the new jobs created by Labour were filled by immigrants. The government, at least the last three, has led people to expect a certain quality of life. Now, either that is an unrealistic quality of life, in which case stanards for UK workers should fall; or it isn't, in which case immigrants should be offered better deals and the playing field would thus be level.

Currently we are effectively importing an underclass to do our dirty work.

[Husar]

Businesses saving tons of money. So now it's a sin to have a successful business?

~:smoking:

If it's built on the suffering of others I'm inclined to say yes. It's also a bit stupid in the long run because now some businesses wonder why noone is buying their stuff anymore. Maybe because all those potential buyers are unemployed? Well, can always get a bailout from the taxpayers, wait, unemployed people don't pay taxes either, they receive tax money as well. Where could it possibly end?
Even more successful businesses of course. :sweatdrop:

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

That, Sir, is quite a neat point. Unfortunately we need to export in order for the country to become more wealthy. So, either we become more profitable, orwe make our competitors less profitable. Raising standards in the 3rd World would theoretically level the playingfield. The problem with that is that the world economy relies on someone getting screwed over, and always has.

[Papewaio]

But Australia is pretty selective with regard to who may immigrate, isn't it?

http://www.immi.gov.au/media/statistics/statistical-info/visa-grants/migrant.htm :book:

158k people immigrated to Australia last year, not including New Zealanders (Aus Total pop 21 million).

Having a skill is the key way of gaining entry (2/3s) the rest are family members.

Countries of birth for the 4.9 million at the bottom of this wiki entry: Demography of Australia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_Australia)

=][=

As for the riots it was a public shame, and NSW was lampooned by other Australian states for it. Then again we have bigger riots with unemployed housing estate kids who are bored witless or post Christmas sales. :laugh4:

More seriously, yes there are very real frictions between some groups. The interesting thing is the maturity with which the seasoned adults helped cool the heels of the young troublemakers, dialogue opened up and long term solutions were found. Burqini (http://www.slsa.asn.au/default.aspx?s=_newsarticle&id=521)

=][=

Vast majority of Australians live in cities... I think about 90%. Population densities in cities are bout half that of most equivalent cities due to urban sprawl.

[tibilicus]

http://www.immi.gov.au/media/statistics/statistical-info/visa-grants/migrant.htm :book:

158k people immigrated to Australia last year, not including New Zealanders (Aus Total pop 21 million).

Having a skill is the key way of gaining entry (2/3s) the rest are family members.

Countries of birth for the 4.9 million at the bottom of this wiki entry: Demography of Australia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_Australia)

=][=

As for the riots it was a public shame, and NSW was lampooned by other Australian states for it. Then again we have bigger riots with unemployed housing estate kids who are bored witless or post Christmas sales. :laugh4:

More seriously, yes there are very real frictions between some groups. The interesting thing is the maturity with which the seasoned adults helped cool the heels of the young troublemakers, dialogue opened up and long term solutions were found. Burqini (http://www.slsa.asn.au/default.aspx?s=_newsarticle&id=521)

=][=

Vast majority of Australians live in cities... I think about 90%. Population densities in cities are bout half that of most equivalent cities due to urban sprawl.

Australia uses a points system right? Whereby a way of proving your a skilled worker?

[Husar]

The problem with that is that the world economy relies on someone getting screwed over, and always has.

Exactly, and that is why I don't accept anyone telling me not to complain about businesses as I have all the same right to screw over businesses to enrich myself as they do trying to screw me to make more profits. So I do not sympathize with businesses as their undoing is my profit. :2thumbsup:
Including the business I'm working in of course, if they make red numbers because I get too much in wages, it's all for my own benefit. :sweatdrop:

[rory_20_uk]

The world isn't zero sum.

New businesses that recycle waste for a profit are improving the place as well as making money; new technologies often help find new ways of doing things or new things entirely - devices that harness wave power (if they get them to work) will found a new business making, selling and repairing them as well as helping reduce waves which in itself it a positive thing. Other uses have been to help spread nutrients in sea water to help the growth rates of aquatic fauna and flora.

The economy is an ecosystem. Over time it can change, but it is best for all if the components are "healthy". Companies made inefficient in the medium to long term are detrimental to all and in the short term only benefit a few who are the root cause be it leveraged takover or unproductive employees.

~:smoking:

[InsaneApache]

In all the years that I ran a business I never screwed anyone over. I regard it as unprofessional. In fact I looked after my customers, especially the regular ones.

Still, what would I know? :wall:

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I was talking globally, rather than inter-business level. As one country rises, another falls. Britain, then America, now America may be on the slide and Russia has recently taken advantage of that.

I don't like it, I think it sucks, but I'm enough of a realist to recognise that in order for there to be people on top there need to be people on the bottom.

My overall point was that we have been trying to import our bottom rung from places that are even worse off. So bottom rung in Britain is still better than mid-rung where you were.

[rory_20_uk]

True to a point. But in the Phillipines over 10% of GDP is money sent home. People can come to a different country and earn a wage that helps support several people back home. Both gain from the situation.

Of course there is always going to be social inequality. Anywhere that tries to do away with that fails. I had to work bloody hard to get to be where I am. If my salary would have been the same as a postman's, then I'd kick back and take it easy.

~:smoking:

[Papewaio]

I was talking globally, rather than inter-business level. As one country rises, another falls. Britain, then America, now America may be on the slide and Russia has recently taken advantage of that.

Yes on a country to country ladder they might swap places.

But compare the average life span and life style of those people with their parents and their grandparents.

If someone wants to they can have access to more information and understanding of the universe then the emperors of old. They can eat more kinds of foods from far away places then the Roman banquets. Yes Britain may no longer be the center of the British Empire, but its people are far better off then they were as a whole in the Victorian age.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

That just means we have collectively moved up the ladder, it certainly doesn't change the immense suffering in Africa where tribal warfare has become slaughter through the introduction of modern weapons.

[rory_20_uk]

Africa is Africa's problem.

In 100 years time they'll still be blaming everything on the time the Europeans caused all ills.

The Tutsis and Hutus slaughtered 500,000 in c. 10 days with machetes and the like. The problem isn't the weaponry, it's the inhabitants.

Maybe 150 years ago Europe in all its arrogance would have gone to try to "sort out" the problem.

Imposing imperialistic rules and laws isn't the modern way; we should trade with them and leave the politics to themselves.

~:smoking:

[InsaneApache]

Funny you should say that. My dads wife gets a right bee in her bonnet about how the Africans were enslaved by Arabs and Europeans. She blames a lot of this for Africas woes. That was until my dad told her about the Barbary Corsairs who regularly sailed to Cornwall and Devon and plucked villages of men, women and children wholesale. Thousands were taken in this way. Emigration if you like. :laugh4:

A victim mindset is a destructive thing. Look at Mugabe.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Africa is Africa's problem.

In 100 years time they'll still be blaming everything on the time the Europeans caused all ills.

The Tutsis and Hutus slaughtered 500,000 in c. 10 days with machetes and the like. The problem isn't the weaponry, it's the inhabitants.

Maybe 150 years ago Europe in all its arrogance would have gone to try to "sort out" the problem.

Imposing imperialistic rules and laws isn't the modern way; we should trade with them and leave the politics to themselves.

~:smoking:

I don't dissagree, I was merely making the point that while life may be better ofr many it is worse for some.

[rory_20_uk]

I would agrue they were killing each other and starving 500, 300, 100 years ago and at the present time. Some areas move up, as a rule that contient has merely shuffled along.

~:smoking:

[Fragony]

They were killing eachother before us and they will continue to kill eachother but we are responisble for the failed states you just can't just draw a line and call it a border, rediculous to say the western world has no blame there but grow up already.

[Papewaio]

I agree with Fragony, now I'm going to have a cup of tea and a lie down.

[Watchman]

They were killing eachother before us and they will continue to kill eachother but we are responisble for the failed states you just can't just draw a line and call it a border, rediculous to say the western world has no blame there but grow up already.Don't forget the funny "divide-and-conquer" favoritism games the colonial masters played with the various tribes that lie fairly directly behind the structural inequalities and disputes that led to, say, the Rwanda massacres...

Not that the monoculture economies the colonial days left behind particularly helped the things in many of the new states.

[Fragony]

Don't forget the funny "divide-and-conquer" favoritism games the colonial masters played with the various tribes that lie fairly directly behind the structural inequalities and disputes that led to, say, the Rwanda massacres...

Not that the monoculture economies the colonial days left behind particularly helped the things in many of the new states.

Do you ever notice that you want to devide everything into the haves and havenot's?

[Subotan]

Sup, first post outside the EB forums (I'm so scared...)

They were killing eachother before us and they will continue to kill eachother but we are responisble for the failed states you just can't just draw a line and call it a border, rediculous to say the western world has no blame there but grow up already.

Indeed. We imposed nationalism on them, and then drew the borders in such a way so that nations were divided. Uh, smart move imperialists. :wall:

[Watchman]

Do you ever notice that you want to devide everything into the haves and havenot's?In the case you haven't noticed, tensions tend to be high where the populace is starkly divided into the "haves" and "have-nots".

Wont to get ugly if the divider follows ethno-linguistic-religious divisions.

Like it does in a lot of the worse African trouble spots, where more often than not the old colonial adminstration deliberately created such conditions to keep the natives too busy resenting each other to turn wholesale on their masters.

[Fragony]

In the case you haven't noticed, tensions tend to be high where the populace is starkly divided into the "haves" and "have-nots"

The white man's burden is really optimism

[Incongruous]

Like it does in a lot of the worse African trouble spots, where more often than not the old colonial adminstration deliberately created such conditions to keep the natives too busy resenting each other to turn wholesale on their masters.

But there was always an original history of brutal tribal warfare in every African colony, the Zulus of South Africa for one.

[Watchman]

The white man's burden is really optimismThe last I checked it was more of a romanticist excuse for Ye Goode Olde Imperialisme of the late 1800s, actually...

[Watchman]

But there was always an original history of brutal tribal warfare in every African colony, the Zulus of South Africa for one.The Zulus and their short-lived empire were more an exception rather than the rule, though, by what I know of it. Not that Africa had ever been very peaceful even before the Europeans and Arabs started poking their noses in of course, anymore than any other region in the world, but that was the kind of bickering over territory and whatever everybody everywhere has always done - and in the correct circumstances grown out of.

The point here rather is the artificial territorial entities and their deliberately constructed internal tensions created and left behind by the colonial empires, in many cases barely half a century ago - well within living memory.

[Strike For The South]

The Africans need to learn how to be more multi-cultural. Celebrate diversity!

[Fragony]

The last I checked it was more of a romanticist excuse for Ye Goode Olde Imperialisme of the late 1800s, actually...

That is how he sold it actually. King Leoplod II was going to rid africa of the arab slavetraders.

[Watchman]

*snort* Yeah, we know how pleasant an overlord old Leo turned out to be... plus if he was out to "rid Africa of Arab slave-traders" he was working on the wrong half of the continent to begin with.

And I won't even go what the round four centuries of European slave trade had done to the place before that... which was quite considerably more than the Arabs had ever managed.

[InsaneApache]

And I won't even go what the round four centuries of European slave trade had done to the place before that... which was quite considerably more than the Arabs had ever managed.

Not true. The Arabs enslaved far more than the Europeans and still do.

[rory_20_uk]

The country demarcations were placed by European powers. They were there to help us administrate areas, or to get one up on another power. The frequently cross tribal lands, and were not decided by the locals.

So, why don't the African leaders reassign the borders? Start afresh, divide into whatever form they feel suits them best. Religious sectarianism? OK. Ethnic sectarianism. Fine. Tribal? Whatever.

What Has It Got To Do With Us? :inquisitive:

In barely half a century germany was torn in two and restitched together. Eastern Europe was redrawn what, three times? Lands were transferred back and forwards based on wars and political agreements.

The excuse that Africa hasn't had long enough wears thinner by the year.

~:smoking:

[Furunculus]

And I won't even go what the round four centuries of European slave trade had done to the place before that... which was quite considerably more than the Arabs had ever managed.

truly, that was not the impression i got.................

[Husar]

The country demarcations were placed by European powers. They were there to help us administrate areas, or to get one up on another power. The frequently cross tribal lands, and were not decided by the locals.

So, why don't the African leaders reassign the borders? Start afresh, divide into whatever form they feel suits them best. Religious sectarianism? OK. Ethnic sectarianism. Fine. Tribal? Whatever.

What Has It Got To Do With Us? :inquisitive:

In barely half a century germany was torn in two and restitched together. Eastern Europe was redrawn what, three times? Lands were transferred back and forwards based on wars and political agreements.

The excuse that Africa hasn't had long enough wears thinner by the year.

~:smoking:

That's right but I guess one of the problems is exactly the technological one. I mean we had similar skirmish-like conflicts here in europe for centuries until we realized that our weapons had become weapons of mass destruction and then the nukes came etc.
The obvious solution is to give more better weapons to africa, biological, chemical and nuclear, then see what those warlords do when they know the other warlord can wipe them out with the push of a button. There will be lots of dead people but at some point even the powerful will pee in their pants when they see others with similar power get turned into glass or a pile of dirt.

The alternative may be to send more european peacekeepers and have them crack down on every warlord who doesn't want to come to the table to sort things out peacefully. The impression I get is that the loads of small armies and warlord parties keep fighting because there never is a real conclusion and the casualties, despite being numerous, are not enough, sad as it may be.

[Fragony]

And I won't even go what the round four centuries of European slave trade had done to the place before that... which was quite considerably more than the Arabs had ever managed.

European slave trade was really African slave trade, the mainland was unexplored at the time. What happened under Leopold had my vote on the greatest human tragedy of all time thread.

[ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88]

There is nothing wrong with Immigration, nor do I have a problem with it until you start catering to illegal aliens. We got so many crossing the border, yet we got 'safe heaven' towns for them, and some in our wise American government want to give health care to the poor little illegal children and their families. I mean my god. We got legal citizens of the US who don't have health, yet we have to give them to the little Spanish kids who can't speak English or are here legally! I have two ways to stop this problem. #1, I proposed this years ago, and if I did again, I will get warning points for it, however, it would work.

#2, If they hold massive rallies..... Why not round them up and send them back across the fricking border. If they try to re-enter.... Shoot them. Harsh, but trust me, it would work. Come to the US the legal way like my ancestors did, or don't come here at all.

[Strike For The South]

There is nothing wrong with Immigration, nor do I have a problem with it until you start catering to illegal aliens. We got so many crossing the border, yet we got 'safe heaven' towns for them, and some in our wise American government want to give health care to the poor little illegal children and their families. I mean my god. We got legal citizens of the US who don't have health, yet we have to give them to the little Spanish kids who can't speak English or are here legally! I have two ways to stop this problem. #1, I proposed this years ago, and if I did again, I will get warning points for it, however, it would work.

#2, If they hold massive rallies..... Why not round them up and send them back across the fricking border. If they try to re-enter.... Shoot them. Harsh, but trust me, it would work. Come to the US the legal way like my ancestors did, or don't come here at all.

1. They are not "Spanish kids"

2. If you had anyone idea who was actually running the show in Mexico you'd realize that it's a much different suituation than those yanks like to present it on CNN

Thats what really pisses me off TBH. Lou Dobbs gets up on his soapbox and says all the meskins are taking merican jobs and they scurry back to Mexico after they suck on the government tit. That is horse manure. He doesn't bring up the drugs or the corruption or the coyotes (people not animals) or the fact most illegals return home (to the southern part of Mexico)

Illegal immigration is a problem and a major one at that but I'll be damned if someone from New york or New England or Iowa is going to tell me how everything works and how we should solve it.

[Watchman]

Not true. The Arabs enslaved far more than the Europeans and still do.The difference being that their total numbers were accumulated over a very long time period - probably starting with pre-Islamic times actually. The Euro-related sum total came from but three-four centuries.

There's also the detail that AFAIK the Arab slaving operations were quite different in character to the guns-for-slaves pattern the Europeans employed. From what I gather the former operated from the numerous thriving port cities of the eastern seaboard and commonly aquired their merchandise by venturing inland in large armed expeditions to buy and/or capture it themselves "on the scene" so to speak.

Certainly not very pleasant for anyone on the wrong end of such a foray (although at least the more warlike groups were apparently often enough capable of repulsing or even destroying such expeditions), but not much different from the kind of junk that had long been the norm over for example much of Eurasia.

The Europeans worked differently. Normally they met their African suppliers in coastal trading points and exchanged various goods desirable for their business partners for the slaves - the easily most influential being firearms, of which the Europeans were pretty much the sole source of in the region. These directly correlated into military power for whoever possessed them; ergo, the community or chieftain or whatever that could procure the most slaves for trade would gain a clear advantage over its neighbours - and since few rulers want to sell their own tax-paying subjects into slavery (criminals and other undesirables nonwithstanding, natch), the best way to maintain that advantage - or try to coutner it - was to seize your neighbours' populace and sell them off. This led to a rather unpleasant pattern of escalation where ever more tribes and communities ever deeper inland became involved in the slave trade if only to secure the means to defend themselves from the predations of their neighbours...

From what I've read of it, by the time the Atlantic slave trade ended this malign "warp" was ubiquitous across almost the entire western African seaboard and deep into the interior hinterland. (The collapse of the slaves-for-guns power dynamic cannot have much stabilised matters in the region, when you think about it...) Not too long after that then came the colonial empires and their divide-and-conquer policies...

[Furunculus]

so what you really object to is that in the brief period we were engaged in the slave trade we were really efficient at it, a point of greater significance than the facts that the arab slave trade has enslaved more people, has been going on for longer, and still exists today?

[Fisherking]

I agree with Fragony, now I'm going to have a cup of tea and a lie down.

Priceless!



The Africans need to learn how to be more multi-cultural. Celebrate diversity!

:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:




so what you really object to is that in the brief period we were engaged in the slave trade we were really efficient at it, a point of greater significance than the facts that the arab slave trade has enslaved more people, has been going on for longer, and still exists today?


And still exists today is a key point conveniently over looked when talking about the evils of slavery.

Of course rather than make an international fuss over the misunderstood Arabs it is much more politically correct to lambaste the west for what they did about a century and a half ago.

[Watchman]

so what you really object to is that in the brief period we were engaged in the slave trade we were really efficient at it, a point of greater significance than the facts that the arab slave trade has enslaved more people, has been going on for longer, and still exists today?I daresay you just failed reading comprehension. Try again.

[rory_20_uk]

Divide and conquer is not some malign force used against poor Africa. All decent leaders worth their salt used it on their enemies and allies alike.

Again, long time in the past. We in Europe have lost millions of lives to the same principles, and now we've got the EU (not sure if that's an argument for or against).

~:smoking:

[Furunculus]

I daresay you just failed reading comprehension. Try again.

how?

[LittleGrizzly]

so what you really object to is that in the brief period we were engaged in the slave trade we were really efficient at it

Isn't that part of the reason why the holocaust is so horrific

Anyway i think his point was the effects of the way we enacted our slave trade made it much worse... unless i missed the point as well ?

[rory_20_uk]

:hijacked:

~:smoking:

[HoreTore]

so what you really object to is that in the brief period we were engaged in the slave trade we were really efficient at it, a point of greater significance than the facts that the arab slave trade has enslaved more people, has been going on for longer, and still exists today?

Uhm....

We don't engage in slave trade anymore? Just what planet do you live on?

[Furunculus]

we do?

[Watchman]

Anyway i think his point was the effects of the way we enacted our slave trade made it much worse... unless i missed the point as well ?Not "much worse" per se, but rather "had far more profound and longer-lasting effects on the local societies".

Put this way: how much long-term effect did the Barbary Corsair coastal raiding have on Southern European societies ? None too, from what I know of it; especially after the feudal system of territorial defense effectively went defunct. Ditto for the raiding carried out by the various steppe nomads and their neighbours (eg. Russian armies for quite a while - at least still in early 1700s - cheerfully carted off civilians from enemy lands for selling off to the nomads). Similarly, insofar as I'm aware of the comparatively low-intensity trade and raiding connected with the Muslim world never had much long-term impact on the African societies exposed to it.

Quite to the contrary, the specific fashion by which the locals were partially forced to participate in the European slave trade ("get slaves to exchange for guns or suffer from the predations of your neighbours", basically) had quite dramatic impacts on the communities concerned. All the more so given the sheer scale and intensity of the traffic.


Divide and conquer is not some malign force used against poor Africa. All decent leaders worth their salt used it on their enemies and allies alike.

Again, long time in the past. We in Europe have lost millions of lives to the same principles, and now we've got the EU (not sure if that's an argument for or against)."Long time" ? Vous must be kidding me. The successor states of the great old-school Central and Eastern European empires only got done ethnically cleansing their ethnic minorities in the immediate aftermath of the Second World War. Tito ran a tight enough ship in Yugoslavia that had to wait until the Nineties there. Depending on the exact state, African decolonization may have happened only as late as the Fifties or even Sixties (and often involved varying degrees of violence, depending on how futilely stubborn the master-state insisted on being) - and they were then left holding an adminstrative tradition of tribal favouritism, related ethnic grudges, more often than not a structurally monoculture economy deliberately geared for the export of specific products to the former colonial master, all on top of the fun and games of Cold War proxy wars and the end of the postwar "Golden Age of Capitalism" in the early Seventies - until around which quite a few of the postcolonial African states were actually looking fairly promising.

[Incongruous]

Uhm....

We don't engage in slave trade anymore? Just what planet do you live on?

Wewll no,"we" do not, the British government outlawed such practices a long time ago, thus anyone taking part in it is a criminal. Not part of the collective "we", rather they are "they".

[Fragony]

Uhm....

We don't engage in slave trade anymore? Just what planet do you live on?

My guess would be earth, explain?

[Strike For The South]

Who is "we"? There are still plenty of slaves out there.

[HoreTore]

My guess would be earth, explain?

Ever seen a hooker? Ever heard of the pimp with the gun behind her head who kidnapped her from her country of origin?

The sex trade is a slave trade. And we, western men, are the buyers.

[Kralizec]

Colonialism was terrible and immoral, but can any of you honestly argue that an uncolonised, isolated Africa would have been a happier place? Decolonisation was often messy and of course the former occupiers are to blame for that, but this is not an excuse that you can use for domestic problems for the rest of eternity.


Ever seen a hooker? Ever heard of the pimp with the gun behind her head who kidnapped her from her country of origin?

The sex trade is a slave trade. And we, western men, are the buyers.

That's why prostitution ought to be legal and regulated. I'm leaning to the opinion that union membership should be mandatory as well, or at least for those who work for pimps ---> if you employ hookers wich don't have the right papers, you're off to jail :policeman::pimp::policeman:
Other than that, I don't think there's any solution. You can't eradicate the oldest profession.

[Furunculus]

Ever seen a hooker? Ever heard of the pimp with the gun behind her head who kidnapped her from her country of origin?

The sex trade is a slave trade. And we, western men, are the buyers.

being a hooker does make you a slave by default, and being a pimp/running a brothel is already illegal in this country

[Fragony]

Ever seen a hooker? Ever heard of the pimp with the gun behind her head who kidnapped her from her country of origin?

The sex trade is a slave trade. And we, western men, are the buyers.

fair enough

[Banquo's Ghost]

It's been an interesting diversion, but may I suggestion we get back to the topic of immigration?

There is of course, a relationship between illegal immigration and exploitation of workers so it's reasonable to explore that tangent.

Thank you kindly.

:bow:

[KukriKhan]

Is there actually much ILLEGAL immigration in the UK and Europe? Or, is the government-authorized level of LEGAL Immigration just set too high (for those having/perceiving a problem)?

I think we have different immigration troubles here in US than you fellas do.

[naut]

Palestine? :inquisitive:
:laugh4: ~:cheers:

[InsaneApache]

Short answer; No one really knows. There is a lot of anecdotal vidence that there is a lot of illegal immigrants, in the UK at least.

Long answer; Yes. :laugh4:

[Fisherking]

There are still illegal immigrants in Europe. Mostly from African countries I believe but there are some from Easter European countries too.

I don’t know how much or to what extent it is a problem though. (just an American living in Europe)

[Fragony]

Is there actually much ILLEGAL immigration in the UK and Europe? Or, is the government-authorized level of LEGAL Immigration just set too high (for those having/perceiving a problem)?

I think we have different immigration troubles here in US than you fellas do.

A lot of illegal immigrants in Spain, Greece and Italy.

[Watchman]

Not surprising, as they're the geographically easiest to reach from the parts of the world sufficiently crappy that people want to get away. It's only a rather narrow ribbon of water separating them from the lands outside the EU zone, after all.

[Guildenstern]

Is there actually much ILLEGAL immigration in the UK and Europe? Or, is the government-authorized level of LEGAL Immigration just set too high (for those having/perceiving a problem)?
As far as Italy is concerned, my answer to both questions is yes.

The flow of illegal immigrants into the country is immense. Italy does what it can with its coast guard, border control, and police to stop these people from crossing the borders illegally. The Italian government has extensive statistics on the countries from which people are coming. Italy is working together with these other countries to try to stop the flow.

The level of legal immigration is set too high as well. One of the main problems in Italy is its extremely low birth rate, so the work force has been shrinking. This is why Italy has a pressing need for workers from other countries. And this need for workers has been one of the reasons immigration is so high in Italy. The Italian government often goes back and forth between making announcements that it desperately needs foreign workers, and having to crack down and try to get these people out of the country, when there are too many people at the borders looking for employment. We need foreigners to fill in the gaps but it has to be regulated in some way. The government cannot continue to go back and forth on the immigration issue.

[HoreTore]

Is there actually much ILLEGAL immigration in the UK and Europe? Or, is the government-authorized level of LEGAL Immigration just set too high (for those having/perceiving a problem)?

I think we have different immigration troubles here in US than you fellas do.

Most(all?) european countries do not accept any immigration at all. That's why there are a lot of illegal immigration. We don't have a green card like you do, we have a "get-back-to-your-own-country"-card.

The only way to enter a european country, is to apply for asylum or marry someone in said country. A small number of refugees(I think the quota is a couple of hundreds each year here) are also accepted.

[KukriKhan]

So, with the exception of Spain, Italy and Greece, where foreign nationals try to sneak in (which kinda mirrors the US situation), Europe, the UK and Ireland do not have an immigration, problem, per se, but might have an assimilation problem. And a related worker-shortage problem.

Is that about correct?

[rory_20_uk]

After entering Spain, Greece and Italy they then move through the EU. Many like coming to England as English is our first language and comparatively we're a soft touch.

We've also got an assimilation problem as IMO there should be an expectation to join with the existing culture, not live separate from it.

~:smoking:

[HoreTore]

So, with the exception of Spain, Italy and Greece, where foreign nationals try to sneak in (which kinda mirrors the US situation), Europe, the UK and Ireland do not have an immigration, problem, per se, but might have an assimilation problem. And a related worker-shortage problem.

Is that about correct?

Problem-schmoblem. The pro's outnumber the cons. People like to whine about the costs of immigration, like having to school them and give them some welfare, while forgetting that raising a norwegian in this country is bloody expensive, with 10-20 years of education, doctors, dentist, youth activities, etc etc. The pakistani however, comes here as an adult, so all that is already paid for. And, as an added bonus, they move back when they get old, so they're not a burden on our retirement homes either.

[Guildenstern]

So, with the exception of Spain, Italy and Greece, where foreign nationals try to sneak in (which kinda mirrors the US situation), Europe, the UK and Ireland do not have an immigration, problem, per se, but might have an assimilation problem. And a related worker-shortage problem.

Is that about correct?
Italy has an assimilation problem as well. We have a lot of segregation and racism between Italians and immigrants. And crime by poor immigrants that cannot find work. Plus, in relation to this, a great number of unrecognized workers. One last large problem is the amount of deaths occurring in the waters between the Italian coasts and other countries, specifically those northern African countries. Moreover, right now in the country a small amount of foreigners are committing crimes, or are involved in organized crime rings, many times for monetary reasons because they cannot find jobs. These few people involved in crime are creating a negative image of the rest of the legal foreigners in the country who actually have work permits and passports. This crime has increased segregation and xenophobia amongst Italians and foreigners, legal and otherwise.

Many of the jobs the immigrants find are only seasonal, they come over to Italy just for the season to work, usually sending their earnings back to their families at home. If Italy could convince some of the workers to stay permanently, it would help keep the work force strong. In relation to this, whatever steps Italy takes to try to reduce the flow of illegal immigration, it must stick with it. Italy's work force is very small due to the low birth rate. Temporary work permits, like the ones proposed by the Bush administration, would not be a good idea in a place like Italy, where we need to have a steady amount of permanent workers in the country.

[rory_20_uk]

Problem-schmoblem. The pro's outnumber the cons. People like to whine about the costs of immigration, like having to school them and give them some welfare, while forgetting that raising a norwegian in this country is bloody expensive, with 10-20 years of education, doctors, dentist, youth activities, etc etc. The pakistani however, comes here as an adult, so all that is already paid for. And, as an added bonus, they move back when they get old, so they're not a burden on our retirement homes either.

More often after coming bring family including parents and grandparents who then require medical input. Go home to retire - are they mad? No, they stay for the far superior healthcare and pension.

I've seen immigrants come to the UK for their antenatal care and then pop home after the birth to their family. Even if they're doing a job (during pregnancy, not that likely) they're using up a load of resources at the same time.

~:smoking:

[Fragony]

So, with the exception of Spain, Italy and Greece, where foreign nationals try to sneak in (which kinda mirrors the US situation), Europe, the UK and Ireland do not have an immigration, problem, per se, but might have an assimilation problem. And a related worker-shortage problem.

Is that about correct?

Assimilation problem in so far that they don't speak the language and have zero intention to learn it, makes them useless to our economy :daisy:

[HoreTore]

More often after coming bring family including parents and grandparents who then require medical input. Go home to retire - are they mad? No, they stay for the far superior healthcare and pension.

Nope, they go home for the social benefits and warmer climate - while collecting their deserved from the state, of course.

Nobody grows old in this country anymore, really. The Norwegians go to Spain, the Pakistani's go to Pakistan. And I can't say I blame them...

[InsaneApache]

Nope, they go home for the social benefits and warmer climate - while collecting their deserved from the state, of course.

Nobody grows old in this country anymore, really. The Norwegians go to Spain, the Pakistani's go to Pakistan. And I can't say I blame them...

I dont know about Norway but most of the immigrants into the UK in the last 50 years stayed. As did their families. It's a strange notion that they would want to go back to a third world country in their old age. I've never heard that one before.

[rory_20_uk]

10 mins ago I've had a patient asking if her mother can get free healthcare when she pops over from Pakistan. She wasn't impressed when I informed her that there'd be a fee attached. My bet is they'll lie and say she's from out of area. By the time we catch on she'll be off again until the next holiday and a different practice.

[Furunculus]

As far as Italy is concerned, my answer to both questions is yes.

The flow of illegal immigrants into the country is immense. Italy does what it can with its coast guard, border control, and police to stop these people from crossing the borders illegally. The Italian government has extensive statistics on the countries from which people are coming. Italy is working together with these other countries to try to stop the flow.

The level of legal immigration is set too high as well. One of the main problems in Italy is its extremely low birth rate, so the work force has been shrinking. This is why Italy has a pressing need for workers from other countries. And this need for workers has been one of the reasons immigration is so high in Italy. The Italian government often goes back and forth between making announcements that it desperately needs foreign workers, and having to crack down and try to get these people out of the country, when there are too many people at the borders looking for employment. We need foreigners to fill in the gaps but it has to be regulated in some way. The government cannot continue to go back and forth on the immigration issue.

don't i know it, my uncle lives up in the mountains north of italy in the middle of nowhere, and even there they fear the albanian immigrants.

people don't like to report petty crimes committed by albanians because they are too afraid of the retribution that will come in the night courtesy of the local albanian 'community', and the rural areas have little faith in the police to be able to protect their homes and families from that retribution.