Kaimani Posted August 27, 2011 Share Posted August 27, 2011 The UK became wealthy and has supplied us with our hugely above average standard of living through the exploitation of resources across the globe. That is why I post that some people don't know their history, had 'Donkey' said "Some people in the UK became wealthy" it would have shown the 'Donkey' knew what it was on about. you're both right. the country benefited massively.taxes etc. cheap labor to build roads, rails etc. all raw materials gotten from 'the empire'. and other intangible things as well. you can't deny. some individuals got stupidly rich. he can't( and don't think he does) deny that. it's not an attack to say this happened. it did. fact. to deny that it did is unhelpful. and to use it as an excuse(sp) for what's happening now (though it contributed) is equally unhelpful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Sidney Posted August 27, 2011 Share Posted August 27, 2011 he could have been talking about shady oil deals with despots, unfair trade practices, weapons deals...among other things. colonization might have given the start but exploitation didn't end with the fall of empire. The problem with that theory is that the general public didn't benefit from those shady deals. The government and big business might have though. But why should the general public be punished, by accepting the pro immigration line, just because of dodgy politicians and oil barons... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Sidney Posted August 27, 2011 Share Posted August 27, 2011 Furthermore to the ridiculous claim that the indigenous Brits are not white. To claim to be indigenous, in my opinion, you will have to have some connection with the country going back 100s of years. Recent immigrants can't do this so are not indigenous. Here's a list of the 100 most famous Brits. 10 house points for anyone who can spot what they have in common... http://www.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk/customs/questions/famous_people.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncocker Posted August 27, 2011 Share Posted August 27, 2011 .......................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaimani Posted August 27, 2011 Share Posted August 27, 2011 The problem with that theory is that the general public didn't benefit from those shady deals. The government and big business might have though. But why should the general public be punished, by accepting the pro immigration line, just because of dodgy politicians and oil barons... i answered the same question a couple of post above, i think. some made individual fortunes but the ccountry also benefited. no denying that. and you don't have to be pro or anti immigration to say the resources can't take any more or they can. if there was enough for a billion more in country there wouldn't be any of this discussion. and if the jobs etc were there it'd be the same. my personal problem with how the immigration discussion tends to go is how everything becomes the blame of the immigrants...not the incompitent jack-asses in number 10 and elsewhere, the layabouts who won't take jobs given to them, the oppotunistic oplititians etc...as well as some immigrants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncocker Posted August 27, 2011 Share Posted August 27, 2011 Today's headline - 'Immigration soars by 20% in a year.' So much for Cameron's promise. ]Australia has a sensible system why can't we adopt it here? australias sensible system :loopy:is .when thay reach a quota of 800" boat people",(ilegal migrants)usually at christmas island, they are sent back to malaysia for processing:loopy:. they then recieve 4000 who have been waiting in camps in malaysia. who are are usually cashed up . afghans,iraqis,sri lankans and iranians . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bassman62 Posted August 27, 2011 Share Posted August 27, 2011 you're both right. the country benefited massively.taxes etc. cheap labor to build roads, rails etc. all raw materials gotten from 'the empire'. and other intangible things as well. you can't deny. some individuals got stupidly rich. he can't( and don't think he does) deny that. This picture in this weeks 'Sheffield Star'. Do you recognise this place, It was taken in 1970 and could well have been taken in 1910 This is the "hugely above average standard of living" that 'donkey' posted:- The UK became wealthy and has supplied us with our hugely above average standard of living through the exploitation of resources across the globe. I grew up in districts like this from the 1940s, so everytime anyone posts about how "We" exploited the colonies this picture will appear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bassman62 Posted August 27, 2011 Share Posted August 27, 2011 my personal problem with how the immigration discussion tends to go is how everything becomes the blame of the immigrants. Nobody is blaming the immigrants, the thread is entitled "Can't Britain just close and say we are full up?" Nothing to do with blaming immigrants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bassman62 Posted August 27, 2011 Share Posted August 27, 2011 Furthermore to the ridiculous claim that the indigenous Brits are not white. To claim to be indigenous, in my opinion, you will have to have some connection with the country going back 100s of years. Recent immigrants can't do this so are not indigenous. Here's a list of the 100 most famous Brits. 10 house points for anyone who can spot what they have in common... http://www.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk/customs/questions/famous_people.htm Brilliant post, but I'm sure someone will brand you racist or whatever. Also what these appologists don't seem to realise is that every immigrant coming here and working for peanuts is only doing the employer a favour not the customer or the country because someone is still on the dole and the EU worker sends money home and out of the country so the issue is then compunded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azazel666 Posted August 27, 2011 Share Posted August 27, 2011 My question here is, does anyone think that large population increase on these islands is a GOOD thing? And if it's not a good thing, then surely steps have to be taken to slow it? Right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.