Why is there White Flight?

[tzijlstra]

Hey that is convenient! A DailyMail article that isn't related to what we were talking about and was written by a very confused or incredibly malicious journalist! That will alter the perception about the accusation by cardoor about social cleansing policies!

 

So let's deconstruct: Over that period of time (2001-2011) 470,000 immigrants were assigned social housing. Of course it would go beyond the interpretative capabilities of the journalist to decide what sort of immigrants these are. Fortunately he gives us a glimpse of his true agenda later on: a whopping 105,506 were Eastern Europeans and in the next sentence: It gives us an indication of "increased pressure on public services when Romanians and Bulgarians win free access to jobs in this country in January."

 

What he is failing to state is that over 2001-2011 the UK saw 405,000 applications for asylum - guess what, the British system houses asylum seekers in social housing, for whom, one would assume, social housing is indeed intended.

 

So besides having to believe figures with no proper foundation or any understanding over the exact sources of these figures (apart from Migration Watch claiming it is from the census of course) there is also the fact that hardly anybody lives in social housing in this country any more, as a percentage of the total housing stock it is tiny, but let that not detract from a good old dig at them there immigrants!

[retep]

Hey that is convenient! A DailyMail article that isn't related to what we were talking about and was written by a very confused or incredibly malicious journalist! That will alter the perception about the accusation by cardoor about social cleansing policies!

 

So let's deconstruct: Over that period of time (2001-2011) 470,000 immigrants were assigned social housing. Of course it would go beyond the interpretative capabilities of the journalist to decide what sort of immigrants these are. Fortunately he gives us a glimpse of his true agenda later on: a whopping 105,506 were Eastern Europeans and in the next sentence: It gives us an indication of "increased pressure on public services when Romanians and Bulgarians win free access to jobs in this country in January."

 

What he is failing to state is that over 2001-2011 the UK saw 405,000 applications for asylum - guess what, the British system houses asylum seekers in social housing, for whom, one would assume, social housing is indeed intended.

 

So besides having to believe figures with no proper foundation or any understanding over the exact sources of these figures (apart from Migration Watch claiming it is from the census of course) there is also the fact that hardly anybody lives in social housing in this country any more, as a percentage of the total housing stock it is tiny, but let that not detract from a good old dig at them there immigrants!

 

3.8 million households are social renters.

[tzijlstra]

Out of.... 40 million or so? Also we are talking about London, if you are a poor immigrant who comes here for work, not the most obvious place to go to and certainly not the type that can out-buy locals on the property market.

[retep]

Out of.... 40 million or so? Also we are talking about London, if you are a poor immigrant who comes here for work, not the most obvious place to go to and certainly not the type that can out-buy locals on the property market.

 

 

If only,

 

22.7 million households in

England in 2012/13, approximately 3.8 million or 17% were social renters

[Zamo]

Hey that is convenient! A DailyMail article that isn't related to what we were talking about and was written by a very confused or incredibly malicious journalist! That will alter the perception about the accusation by cardoor about social cleansing policies!

 

So let's deconstruct: Over that period of time (2001-2011) 470,000 immigrants were assigned social housing. Of course it would go beyond the interpretative capabilities of the journalist to decide what sort of immigrants these are. Fortunately he gives us a glimpse of his true agenda later on: a whopping 105,506 were Eastern Europeans and in the next sentence: It gives us an indication of "increased pressure on public services when Romanians and Bulgarians win free access to jobs in this country in January."

 

What he is failing to state is that over 2001-2011 the UK saw 405,000 applications for asylum - guess what, the British system houses asylum seekers in social housing, for whom, one would assume, social housing is indeed intended.

 

So besides having to believe figures with no proper foundation or any understanding over the exact sources of these figures (apart from Migration Watch claiming it is from the census of course) there is also the fact that hardly anybody lives in social housing in this country any more, as a percentage of the total housing stock it is tiny, but let that not detract from a good old dig at them there immigrants!

 

It isn't a dig at immigrants but at our immigration policy. As you point out, social housing is a scarce commodity with high levels of demand. Allowing millions of poor immigrants to enter the country to add to demand that already cannot be met is not good immigration policy.

 

It should also be noted that the vast majority of social housing tenants receive housing benefit (which means the majority are in receipt of other benefits too) so we are depriving the indigenous population of low cost housing, causing social division and costing us billions each year.

 

Few would blame immigrants for taking what is on offer but most people do now blame our politicians for offering it.

[Michael_W]

whaahey its a racists love in

 

^^^^^^^^^^^Is utter nonsense as usual ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

---------- Post added 06-01-2015 at 11:49 ----------

 

It isn't a dig at immigrants but at our immigration policy. As you point out, social housing is a scarce commodity with high levels of demand. Allowing millions of poor immigrants to enter the country to add to demand that already cannot be met is not good immigration policy.

 

It should also be noted that the vast majority of social housing tenants receive housing benefit (which means the majority are in receipt of other benefits too) so we are depriving the indigenous population of low cost housing, causing social division and costing us billions each year.

 

Few would blame immigrants for taking what is on offer but most people do now blame our politicians for offering it.

 

^^^^^^^^^^^Is correct as usual ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

There are still some level headed common sense posters still around !

Edited January 6, 2015 by Michael_W

[Mecky]

How would benefit caps help cause white flight?

 

I'm not entirely sute but put it this way, I've never heard a black cockney talking in Sheffield but I've heard loads of white cockneys talking in Sheffield. Here's a question for you: What percentage of benefit claimants in London are white?

[tzijlstra]

Why are white people moving out of areas where there is high ethnicity?

I hadn't actually read the original article, but all that it seems to say is that there are more 'coloured' people living in the UK now.

 

Oh my god! WE ARE BEING OVER RUN!

 

Apologies for not realising the initial post was daft.

 

Also: /sarcasm.

 

Thanks.

[charmer]

I'm not entirely sute but put it this way, I've never heard a black cockney talking in Sheffield but I've heard loads of white cockneys talking in Sheffield. Here's a question for you: What percentage of benefit claimants in London are white?

 

If you aren't entirely sure don't post as fact. I do not know the answer to your question though, it would be hard to get an answer because it is hard to define a) who is white (eg someone who is mixed race? someone whose grandad was black? a dark looking person of spanish origin?) and what do you mean by benefits (tax credits, JSA, HA etc).

 

I would imagine that the vast majority of cockneys in Sheffield came for the Universities (I did). The reason why most of us are white is because disproportionately few children from black backgrounds get the chance to attend University.

 

Do you seriously think that the reason that there are more white londoners in sheffield than black londoners is the benefit cap? I am confused as to what you mean.

[Mecky]

If you aren't entirely sure don't post as fact. I do not know the answer to your question though, it would be hard to get an answer because it is hard to define a) who is white (eg someone who is mixed race? someone whose grandad was black? a dark looking person of spanish origin?) and what do you mean by benefits (tax credits, JSA, HA etc).

 

I would imagine that the vast majority of cockneys in Sheffield came for the Universities (I did). The reason why most of us are white is because disproportionately few children from black backgrounds get the chance to attend University.

 

Do you seriously think that the reason that there are more white londoners in sheffield than black londoners is the benefit cap? I am confused as to what you mean.

 

But it is a fact. The rest of what you typed is all drivel - The chances are if they were booted out of London because of benefits they'd be unlikely attending university