Are our inner cities isolating the remaining indigenous populous?

[Mister M]

I think they are probably the least of the issues but they're an easy target aren't they.

 

I disagree. The chiche is correct that 'children are our future', so how can we expect people of different faiths to integrate if from an early age we divide them up based on difference???

I don't think they are an easy target either - lots of faiths (Jewish, Muslim, Catholic, CofE) have a vested interest in keeping them going.

I think their effect is pernicious and divisive.

 

As I said earlier in the thread people can hardly complain about inner cities isolating the indigenous population, when the views expressed by the indigenous population are as hostile as shown by some people on here.

[mort]

Keep it civil please.

[boyfriday]

As I said earlier in the thread people can hardly complain about inner cities isolating the indigenous population, when the views expressed by the indigenous population are as hostile as shown by some people on here.

 

I think this should be my new signature, excellently put.

[retep]

You make statements claiming that the study commissioned by the University of Sheffield is untrustworthy because of vested interests and then cite evidence from MigrationWatch to substantiate your point of view.

 

Seriously? Are you having trouble with the word credible?

 

Have a look here - http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/mar/21/themarsbarhasa

 

All that tells us is that someone missed a 0 or miscalculated by 10pence.

 

"But the problem with immigration statistics is that one person's fact is another's guesstimate - witness the witless government predictions of the number of Polish people arriving in the past two years. Even the allegedly scrupulous MigrationWatch can get its statistics in a twist. Back to that Mars bar briefing. On government figures, MigrationWatch calculated that "the benefit in terms of GDP per head is minimal - about 0.01% of GDP or just 4p per head per week." This month, Coleman wrote: "A number of studies show that the net economic benefit of immigration per head of population is about 0.1% of GDP. Per head, among 60 million people in the UK that amounts to about £22 each per year or just under 50p each per week." Damn those pesky noughts."

[boyfriday]

All that tells us is that someone missed a 0 or miscalculated by 10pence.

 

"But the problem with immigration statistics is that one person's fact is another's guesstimate - witness the witless government predictions of the number of Polish people arriving in the past two years. Even the allegedly scrupulous MigrationWatch can get its statistics in a twist. Back to that Mars bar briefing. On government figures, MigrationWatch calculated that "the benefit in terms of GDP per head is minimal - about 0.01% of GDP or just 4p per head per week." This month, Coleman wrote: "A number of studies show that the net economic benefit of immigration per head of population is about 0.1% of GDP. Per head, among 60 million people in the UK that amounts to about £22 each per year or just under 50p each per week." Damn those pesky noughts."

 

I'd hate to be relying on your last Rolo.

[Parvo]

I think they are probably the least of the issues but they're an easy target aren't they.

 

No if children learn to integrate young they are more understanding of differnce

[SevenRivers]

No if children learn to integrate young they are more understanding of differnce

 

Only a minority of kids go to faith schools. Taking away faith schools won't solve the problem of different communities not integrating.

 

Distinct communities are formed along ethnic/nationality/religious lines because it is human nature to want to be among your own, exactly why you have China Towns, Little Italys, Toremolinos etc.

 

Would banning faith schools reverse human nature?

[mikem8634]

All that tells us is that someone missed a 0 or miscalculated by 10pence.

 

"But the problem with immigration statistics is that one person's fact is another's guesstimate - witness the witless government predictions of the number of Polish people arriving in the past two years. Even the allegedly scrupulous MigrationWatch can get its statistics in a twist. Back to that Mars bar briefing. On government figures, MigrationWatch calculated that "the benefit in terms of GDP per head is minimal - about 0.01% of GDP or just 4p per head per week." This month, Coleman wrote: "A number of studies show that the net economic benefit of immigration per head of population is about 0.1% of GDP. Per head, among 60 million people in the UK that amounts to about £22 each per year or just under 50p each per week." Damn those pesky noughts."

 

I notice you neglected to mention a few key items from the article.

 

Not only are MigrationWatch's maths a little suspect their clear agenda and fondness for negative spin led the Home Affairs Committee stated "You chose to present your statistics in the most sensational and pejorative way." Hardly objective.

 

Now, the personnel -

 

David Coleman - asked, in 2003, what the cultural benefits of migration were, he replied that they were "rather difficult to specify beyond a wider range of ethnic restaurants for the middle classes and new kinds of pop music for youth"

 

Sir Andrew Green - the Home affairs Committe compared him to the mentally disturbed Lieutenant Commander Philip F Queeg in the 1954 classic, The Caine Mutiny and accused him of being negative, obsessive and paranoid in his views about immigration.

 

Baroness Cox - argues that Palestinians don't really want, and certainly don't deserve, a state and that the way to deal with the problem is to give $100,000 to each family to make them go away and settle permanently elsewhere in the Arab Muslim world.

 

James Duguid - believes the UK's population should be reduced by half, to its 1881 level of 30m, over the next 100 years by discouraging teenage pregancies, cutting financial support for families with more than two children and adopting MWUK's and UKIP's policies of zero migration growth.

 

 

I think it is fair to say that the article tells us a lot more about MigrationWatch than, as you suggest, someone missed a 0 or miscalculated by 10pence. It tells us that their objectivity and impartiality is questionable and that, therefore, their credibility is severely diminished.

 

To stand in MigrationWatch's glass house and hurl stones at the University of Sheffield is laughable.

 

---------- Post added 14-03-2013 at 00:05 ----------

 

As I said earlier in the thread people can hardly complain about inner cities isolating the indigenous population, when the views expressed by the indigenous population are as hostile as shown by some people on here.

 

Well said. I wouldn't blame anyone for not wanting to, or not even feeling like they could, integrate with such entrenched hostility.

[harvey19]

Well said. I wouldn't blame anyone for not wanting to, or not even feeling like they could, integrate with such entrenched hostility.[/quote

 

I posted earlier asking how many posters live in areas where the indigenous population feel isolated.

It is one thing theorising what should happen when one is not affected and another living with the situation.

[boyfriday]

I posted earlier asking how many posters live in areas where the indigenous population feel isolated.

It is one thing theorising what should happen when one is not affected and another living with the situation.

 

Mister M replied earlier saying they lived on the outskirts of such an area..and they have far from a hostile view towards immigrants. I've also lived in areas with high numbers of new immigrants (Nether Edge, Broomhall, Firvale). To spin your post back to you, there's no indication as yet that those with a hostile view live in these areas either.