Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
Corbyn Saying The Usa Should Open Their Borders.
Not content with say we should have unfettered immigration he thinks America should be doing the same.
http://
Dave
http://
Dave
Answers
Mikey, ‘Unfettere
08:10 Mon 14th Nov 2016
“The vast majority of them just want to work and earn more money than they can at home, ..”
That’s what is said of many of the migrants arriving in Europe, Eddie. It is not (or should not be, if borders are properly policed) an option open to them.
“…they are NOT criminals.”
If they have entered the country illegally then they are.
“it's strange that when it's the USA needing "migrants" to run its economy, posters on here are of the opinion that companies with a business model that relies on illegal undocumented labour (and the starvation wages this offers) are deemed perfectly acceptable.”
I would not be among those posters.
“…yet I'm sure the same wouldn't be the case if Mike Ashley were to recruit directly from the Stalingrad camp in Paris, and paid his workers 50p per hour. why shouldn't he? apparently the world needs illegal migrants. doesn't it?”
No, the world (and in particular the UK, which is all I am concerned about) does not need illegal migrants. Western governments need to create an economic model that does not depend on a constantly rising population (however that increase is created). They need to optimise their affairs to handle a stable or preferably slightly declining population. The idea that the population must increase to cope with an ageing population (the usual reason given for such illogical statements) is ridiculous. Incredible as it may seem the extra people brought in themselves eventually age and they will need er… more people to support them. Eventually (as is already becoming evident in some places) the increase becomes unsustainable particularly if it consists of people earning low pay, who pay very little in the way of taxes and whose withdrawals from the nation’s coffers (in terms of housing, healthcare, education) is considerable.
“Should I remind the liars and the crazy delusionals that after 6 years, the Conservatives recorded the highest net immigration figure ever with 333,000?”
This is not a party matter, Gromit. It’s far too important for that childishness. Successive governments of all colours have presided over mass immigration which certainly is unfettered as far as entries from the EU are concerned.
Western economies are reaping what they have sown over the past forty years. Consistently concerns about immigration have been brushed aside either with arguments such as “We cannot survive without it” or “You’re racist to even raise such an issue”. Well, the chickens are coming home to roost. People do not take kindly to being told what they should like or dislike and what they should think. This is particularly so when they are told it by the usual suspects who masquerade as their elected representatives. Eventually the worm turns. It’s turned in the UK with Brexit, it’s turned in the USA with Trump. Stand by for more worms to turn in Europe next year when elections are held. When people have tried to get the usual suspects to listen to them without success, however unpalatable the alternatives seem, for many they are the only alternative.
That’s what is said of many of the migrants arriving in Europe, Eddie. It is not (or should not be, if borders are properly policed) an option open to them.
“…they are NOT criminals.”
If they have entered the country illegally then they are.
“it's strange that when it's the USA needing "migrants" to run its economy, posters on here are of the opinion that companies with a business model that relies on illegal undocumented labour (and the starvation wages this offers) are deemed perfectly acceptable.”
I would not be among those posters.
“…yet I'm sure the same wouldn't be the case if Mike Ashley were to recruit directly from the Stalingrad camp in Paris, and paid his workers 50p per hour. why shouldn't he? apparently the world needs illegal migrants. doesn't it?”
No, the world (and in particular the UK, which is all I am concerned about) does not need illegal migrants. Western governments need to create an economic model that does not depend on a constantly rising population (however that increase is created). They need to optimise their affairs to handle a stable or preferably slightly declining population. The idea that the population must increase to cope with an ageing population (the usual reason given for such illogical statements) is ridiculous. Incredible as it may seem the extra people brought in themselves eventually age and they will need er… more people to support them. Eventually (as is already becoming evident in some places) the increase becomes unsustainable particularly if it consists of people earning low pay, who pay very little in the way of taxes and whose withdrawals from the nation’s coffers (in terms of housing, healthcare, education) is considerable.
“Should I remind the liars and the crazy delusionals that after 6 years, the Conservatives recorded the highest net immigration figure ever with 333,000?”
This is not a party matter, Gromit. It’s far too important for that childishness. Successive governments of all colours have presided over mass immigration which certainly is unfettered as far as entries from the EU are concerned.
Western economies are reaping what they have sown over the past forty years. Consistently concerns about immigration have been brushed aside either with arguments such as “We cannot survive without it” or “You’re racist to even raise such an issue”. Well, the chickens are coming home to roost. People do not take kindly to being told what they should like or dislike and what they should think. This is particularly so when they are told it by the usual suspects who masquerade as their elected representatives. Eventually the worm turns. It’s turned in the UK with Brexit, it’s turned in the USA with Trump. Stand by for more worms to turn in Europe next year when elections are held. When people have tried to get the usual suspects to listen to them without success, however unpalatable the alternatives seem, for many they are the only alternative.
Naomi,
I have read your link and Corbyn does not say he wants unfettered immigration.
He says he will not offer false promises. I expect he means lies such as:-
// We will cut immigration to tens of thousands from hundreds of thousands // and then let in 333,000. That is a lie.
By saying he will not offer the same false promoses, he is not saying it will be any different than it is now.
I suggest you read your own links more carefully in the future, and then you will not i tentionally pist lies.
I have read your link and Corbyn does not say he wants unfettered immigration.
He says he will not offer false promises. I expect he means lies such as:-
// We will cut immigration to tens of thousands from hundreds of thousands // and then let in 333,000. That is a lie.
By saying he will not offer the same false promoses, he is not saying it will be any different than it is now.
I suggest you read your own links more carefully in the future, and then you will not i tentionally pist lies.
-- answer removed --
Naomi,
It is clear that you do not understand Corbyn's approach, which is worrying.
// Mr Corbyn, said that tackling wage undercutting and worker exploitation would lead to lower migration, rather than controls on numbers. //
He is saying that just picking a number is unrealst, as May has proved again and again, with the unachievable "tens of thousands" number. He could pledge to say Labour will halve immigration, but he won't because that will harm the country. Instead, he saying tackling enforcing the minimum wage will mean British workers are not done out of a job by cheaper foreigners under cutting their pay. He does not want unfettered immigration, he wants immigration to be managed differently than it is at present. It is quite simple, and the existing approach is clearly not working.
It is clear that you do not understand Corbyn's approach, which is worrying.
// Mr Corbyn, said that tackling wage undercutting and worker exploitation would lead to lower migration, rather than controls on numbers. //
He is saying that just picking a number is unrealst, as May has proved again and again, with the unachievable "tens of thousands" number. He could pledge to say Labour will halve immigration, but he won't because that will harm the country. Instead, he saying tackling enforcing the minimum wage will mean British workers are not done out of a job by cheaper foreigners under cutting their pay. He does not want unfettered immigration, he wants immigration to be managed differently than it is at present. It is quite simple, and the existing approach is clearly not working.
"If people say Corbyn wants unfettered immigration, they are liars. "
Anybody who supports the UK's membership of the EU supports (though not necessarily wants) unfettered immigration. You cannot have one without the other. Corbyn never did support EU membership (nor indeed the EU per se) until he started supping at the top table. Now he says he - or at least the party he leads - does so I'm not completely sure. If we could establish whether he supports the UK's membership of the EU we could perhaps establish whether the people you are calling liars are indeed so.
Anybody who supports the UK's membership of the EU supports (though not necessarily wants) unfettered immigration. You cannot have one without the other. Corbyn never did support EU membership (nor indeed the EU per se) until he started supping at the top table. Now he says he - or at least the party he leads - does so I'm not completely sure. If we could establish whether he supports the UK's membership of the EU we could perhaps establish whether the people you are calling liars are indeed so.
New Judge,
Whilst we have agreed to free movement of EU citizens, the majority of immigration is from outside the EU. These non-EU immigrants do not have free access and so cannot be unfettered immigrants.
We may have agreed to some unfettered immigration under our membership of the EU, but that is a minority, so it is false to claim immigration is unfettered, a minority is.
Not sure if you deliberately meant to lie, but your answer is clearly not true.
Whilst we have agreed to free movement of EU citizens, the majority of immigration is from outside the EU. These non-EU immigrants do not have free access and so cannot be unfettered immigrants.
We may have agreed to some unfettered immigration under our membership of the EU, but that is a minority, so it is false to claim immigration is unfettered, a minority is.
Not sure if you deliberately meant to lie, but your answer is clearly not true.
// "Leave the doors open and let somebody else deal with the result later (after I've sailed off into the sunset to spend more time with my money)" //
And here is Cameron/May's record on immigration...
2016 - 337,000 (provisional)
2015 - 333,000
2014 - 298,000
2013 - 243,000
2012 - 176,000
2011 - 153,000
2010 - 252,000
And here is Cameron/May's record on immigration...
2016 - 337,000 (provisional)
2015 - 333,000
2014 - 298,000
2013 - 243,000
2012 - 176,000
2011 - 153,000
2010 - 252,000
"...the majority of immigration is from outside the EU."
Quite so, Gromit, but you do seem to have it in for "liars" today. I was speaking about Mr Corbyn's attitude to unfettered immigration. If he believes in the UK's membership of the EU (and I expressed my doubts earlier, but never mind) then he accepts unfettered immigration from the EU. It doesn't really matter that migration from the rest of the world is fettered. The UK has borders which are open to around 500m people and to me that is unfettered enough! I don't believe I told lies (which I do not knowingly do, even to win an argument) and it's a little unkind to have such a suggestion made. If anything we are talking semantics but in my view if 500m people have the right to settle here then that is as unfettered as I'd like to consider.
Quite so, Gromit, but you do seem to have it in for "liars" today. I was speaking about Mr Corbyn's attitude to unfettered immigration. If he believes in the UK's membership of the EU (and I expressed my doubts earlier, but never mind) then he accepts unfettered immigration from the EU. It doesn't really matter that migration from the rest of the world is fettered. The UK has borders which are open to around 500m people and to me that is unfettered enough! I don't believe I told lies (which I do not knowingly do, even to win an argument) and it's a little unkind to have such a suggestion made. If anything we are talking semantics but in my view if 500m people have the right to settle here then that is as unfettered as I'd like to consider.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank0 min ago
Quizzes & Puzzles3 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles9 mins ago
Would You Have Heard Of Mada Pasa
News13 mins ago
You've Got To Laugh Haven't You?
News41 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.