D-Day

Vinty said:
Its a Ponzi scheme, immigrants arrive to service the needs of the existing population, however who services the needs of the new immigrants, they don't live in bubble.
Immigrants also need homes, health care, food shops, transport ect.
So as the population expands that creates the demand for more immigrants to service the needs of the recently arrived immigrants.
Click to expand...

The economy us a ponzi scheme - banks create money out of thin air. Our money is backed by debt created out of thin air.
 
SirGalahad said:
The economy us a ponzi scheme - banks create money out of thin air. Our money is backed by debt created out of thin air.
Click to expand...
There is probably an element of truth in that.
However i don't know how that relates to the problem of mass immigration.
Whether you love or the hate the Tories, you have to admit that the anti immigration shtick is their ace card.
 
Vinty said:
There is probably an element of truth in that.
However i don't know how that relates to the problem of mass immigration.
Whether you love or the hate the Tories, you have to admit that the anti immigration shtick is their ace card.
Click to expand...

The issue with immigration is this - if you don't want to train or pay British workers then you need to import them. Legal migration is multiples more of illegal migration -

www.gov.uk

Summary of latest statistics

www.gov.uk www.gov.uk

Visas
Study 606k
Work 616k
Family 81k

Asylum 84k

How is it their ace card when immigration has gone up? They are brilliant at blaming everything on immigraion then not tackling it and then blaming everyone else.

These guys are used car salesmen.
 
Vinty said:
That isn't the point.
People believe that if Labour win the election that immigration will go up even further.
Click to expand...

You mean Daily Turd, GB News etc voters will believe the moon is made out of cheese.

Immigrations has always been higher when Tories have ruled. They love cheap workers.

What are you trying to protect? Big business owns pretty much everything.

What do we make?
 
Vinty said:
How would you make it easier to apply for asylum? .
If the UK had offices beside the beach, it would make it easier and safer to apply for asylum rather than risk their lives in a boat across the channel.
Once they fill the asylum application form in they just have to wait for a decision.
I am assuming that the majority of these would be asylum seekers are not claiming that there lives are in danger in France.
Click to expand...
How about in France?
 
Random fact: the Allied Airforce dropped over 1700 tons of bombs over the Normandy beaches on D-Day...but due to low cloud covering the area, not one hit the target. No German soldier was even scratched, but they may have been worried when they saw Allied rocket ships approaching the beach. They needn't have been. Not one reached the shore, dropping short into the surf. Most of their heavy weapons and armour sank in the Channel and some units landed far from their intended combat zone: American casualties in the first wave were 50%, and in one sector reached 92%...when you analyse the events leading up to D-Day it's hard to see how they got off that beach at all. Mostly, it's down to the counter-measures of Paratroopers landing behind the lines and disrupting German response to the Invasion and the counter-intelligence activities of agents in the build-up.
One of these was a woman who became a double-agent, sending false reports back to her handler in Berlin. She was brought over long before the events of that day unfolded and had to leave her pet dog behind in Gibraltar due to strict quarantine laws. She whined about it for months on end until the sad news broke that the animal had met an unfortunate end under the wheels of an army truck. Not happy about this at all she considered revealing her deception to the German Abwher. Fortunately, she did not do so, but all she had to do was slip an extra dash into the line of code and all would've been revealed. If she had done so, it's quite possible the landings would've been a failure. Was the driver following orders? We'll never know for sure because those records are still not declassified but for the sacrifice of a small dog, the world could've been a very different place in 1945.
 
Harry Bloomfield said:
I only have to think back to mine, and my parent's living conditions, when I was growing up - so your statement is absolute nonsense. We struggled in a two up, two down, no bathroom, toilet down the street, no TV, just the radio, and no garden, no car, no running hot water, just one cold tap. Cooking was via a cast-iron range
Click to expand...
How did your 170th birthday celebrations go?
 
Odds said:
Random fact: the Allied Airforce dropped over 1700 tons of bombs over the Normandy beaches on D-Day...but due to low cloud covering the area, not one hit the target. No German soldier was even scratched, but they may have been worried when they saw Allied rocket ships approaching the beach. They needn't have been. Not one reached the shore, dropping short into the surf. Most of their heavy weapons and armour sank in the Channel and some units landed far from their intended combat zone: American casualties in the first wave were 50%, and in one sector reached 92%...when you analyse the events leading up to D-Day it's hard to see how they got off that beach at all. Mostly, it's down to the counter-measures of Paratroopers landing behind the lines and disrupting German response to the Invasion and the counter-intelligence activities of agents in the build-up.
One of these was a woman who became a double-agent, sending false reports back to her handler in Berlin. She was brought over long before the events of that day unfolded and had to leave her pet dog behind in Gibraltar due to strict quarantine laws. She whined about it for months on end until the sad news broke that the animal had met an unfortunate end under the wheels of an army truck. Not happy about this at all she considered revealing her deception to the German Abwher. Fortunately, she did not do so, but all she had to do was slip an extra dash into the line of code and all would've been revealed. If she had done so, it's quite possible the landings would've been a failure. Was the driver following orders? We'll never know for sure because those records are still not declassified but for the sacrifice of a small dog, the world could've been a very different place in 1945.
Click to expand...

What was the dogs name?
 
Vinty said:
Why isn't it approved?
Click to expand...
There are approved/legal safe routes and that isn't one of them. The Government could make it so but have refused.

www.france24.com

France urges UK to open legal migration route amid Channel crisis

French Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin urged Britain on Monday to open a legal route for asylum seekers in order to prevent people risking their lives by taking small boats across the Channel to England.
www.france24.com www.france24.com

A Fair and Effective Immigration Policy: Building UK Immigration Centers in Mainland France / Britain in the world / Policy Commissions / Labour Policymaking

policyforum.labour.org.uk policyforum.labour.org.uk
 
84,000 claimed asylum in UK last year 100,000 in 2022 , doesnt look like its a problem getting in to do so
 
gas112 said:
84,000 claimed asylum in UK last year 100,000 in 2022 , doesnt look like its a problem getting in to do so
Click to expand...
The problem is processing and action.

Making it easier to process will help.

Or we could just keep doing what we are doing, nothing.
 
SirGalahad said:
The issue with immigration is this - if you don't want to train or pay British workers then you need to import them. Legal migration is multiples more of illegal migration
Click to expand...
This is a salient part of the challenge. Some people might desire less migration, however how do businesses and organisations that rely on them continue to function?

We either accept the fact there are some roles UK workers by and large don't want to do (and we therefore need migrants for) or we need to come up with a more defined strategy re getting UK workers into these roles.

It's ironic to think there could be a UK family with e.g. an unemployed son and they collectively want less migrants. However if you suggested to the family/son going to work on the local farm to harvest fruit/veg for close to minimum wage they'd likely be very reluctant to that suggestion. So we can't have it both ways. And the farmer I'm sure would have a view re upping wages to make the work more appealing to UK workers.

We also have scenarios where wages are generally ok but we still rely on migrants e.g. NHS, health and social care. So again, unless we have a more defined strategy to get more UK workers into these roles, what do we do?

There surely needs to be a balance?

And before anyone starts, by typing the above I'm not advocating an open door come one come all policy ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top