cassity Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 (edited) I am concerned for the many thousands of poor persecuted people of all demographics, the elderly, young, men, women, fit and ill, who are stuck in camps all across North Africa and the Middle East. Many of these I would welcome in the UK. That's easy to say for bigots as a get out clause because it isn't happening. Should it happen, the "I have to agree" lot would soon shift in opinion. You may be unique in your opinion and concern for those you describe but for the bigot it's just pseudo philanthropy. The same said individuals in support of your call are the same said bigots who would be screaming and foaming at the mouth. "Many thousand of young, old, and infirm line up at Calais ready to depart for Dover"...Start that as a thread topic and see where it goes if it were to happen. SF wouldn't have enough bandwidth. Edited August 1, 2015 by cassity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milquetoast1 Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 I think I've just been called a bigot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cassity Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 I think I've just been called a bigot. As long as you only think it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiseOwl182 Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 What a terrible grasp of maths you have. If the working population is 1 million and you add 100,000 to it, the unemployment rate should increase by 10%, instead it is dropping. Your grasp of maths is the terrible one. My example was simplistic but mathematically sound. Changing to larger numbers doesn't change the outcome. You stated that immigrants aren't taking jobs because unemployment is going down. I disproved that theory, as you're comparing stats in a meaningless way. If all the immigrants coming over get jobs, then of course the overall employment rate will average out higher. You need to look at the indigenous unemployment rates before and after to do a true comparison, but that wouldn't be politically correct. ---------- Post added 01-08-2015 at 15:58 ---------- Utter rhubarb. Or basic maths, some would say. ---------- Post added 01-08-2015 at 16:01 ---------- I think I've just been called a bigot. When the do -good brigade don't like a point of view, and/or are losing an argument, they resort to name-calling. I'd take it as a compliment if I were you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hots on Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 Adapted from Huff Post: So here are some facts that you might find useful next time you're thinking about that "swarm" (David Cameron's word, not mine) of migrants crossing the Mediterranean from north Africa. Q.1: Why do they all want to come to the UK? A: They don't. Far more migrants head for Germany and Sweden, which dealt with nearly half of all asylum applications into the EU last year. The ones at Calais are a tiny fraction of the overall number, probably no more than 3,000 out of a total of well over 175,000 who have entered the EU so far this year. Q.2: So why are the numbers higher than ever? A: They're not - according to the EU's own figures, there were 672,000 EU asylum applications in 1992 (when there were only 15 members of the EU), compared to 626,000 last year (when the EU had grown to 28 members with a total population of 500 million). It is true, however, that numbers had dropped substantially in the interim. (Click here for the detailed figures.) Q.3: How many actually apply for asylum in the UK? A: According to the latest government statistics: "There were 25,020 asylum applications in the year ending March 2015, an increase of 5% compared with the previous year (23,803). The number of applications remains low relative to the peak number of applications in 2002 (84,132)." Q.4: Why aren't the migrants just sent back to where they came from if they're not genuine asylum-seekers? A: Because often we have no way of telling where they came from. Many have no documents, either because they have destroyed them, or because they have been handed over to traffickers who have disappeared. Q.5: But they can't all be from Syria, can they? A: No, but about a fifth of the total are. The other main known countries of origin are Afghanistan, Kosovo and Eritrea. The biggest increase in asylum applications last year was from Ukrainians. Q.6: Why don't Syria's neighbours look after Syrian refugees? A: They do. According to the UN, there are more than two million registered refugees in Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt and Iraq, and another 1.7million in Turkey. Q.7: If some of the migrants who enter the EU are genuine refugees, why don't they apply for asylum in the first country they get to? A: Huge numbers do exactly that: the number of applications more than doubled last year in both Italy (the main entry point for migrants who have made it across the Mediterranean) and Hungary (entry point for mainly Asian migrants who originally entered the EU from Turkey). Q.8: So who are the ones in Calais? A: A huge mix of nationalities, most of whom have a particular reason for wanting to get to the UK: they may have relatives or friends who are already here, they may be English-speakers who believe they're more likely to find work here, or they may have heard that there's already a substantial number of others from their home country who have already settled here. Q.9: Isn' t the real reason that they know they'll get benefits as soon as they make it across the Channel? A: No. According to the independent fact-checking organisation Full Fact, most citizens of non-EU countries who come to live in the UK have no recourse to public funds in the initial years after they arrive, nor are asylum-seekers eligible for welfare benefits while their claims are pending. Q.10: So why are the media making such a huge fuss about the migrants in Calais? A: Good question. Partly because they're easy to find and easy to get to - and those long lines of stranded lorries make great TV pictures. So do the desperate images of desperate people risking their lives as they try to leap onto trucks or trains as they head for the Channel Tunnel. And also, of course, because the story feeds into the current debate about the UK's membership of the EU and overall immigration policy. Q.8: Why are they virtually all young men? Q.9: Are their women languishing back home suffering alone? Q.10: Are these men just attempting to get themselves established here then have their family set over at a later date? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cassity Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 When the do -good brigade don't like a point of view, and/or are losing an argument, they resort to name-calling. I'd take it as a compliment if I were you. Is this really the best you can come up with? Please please quote the words where I name called the poster..or even better where I called him a bigot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hots on Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 Is this really the best you can come up with? Please please quote the words where I name called the poster..or even better where I called him a bigot? Oh so you identify as one of the "do-gooding brigade"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cassity Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 Q.8: Why are they virtually all young men? Because they're mobile and able more to navigate the hazards.. Q.9: Are their women languishing back home suffering alone? Because the journey in itself is perilous if not expensive. Would you sacrifice in order for your children to better themselves in turn maybe eventually bettering you? Q.10: Are these men just attempting to get themselves established here then have their family set over at a later date? Amongst other things yes..isn't that the point? ---------- Post added 01-08-2015 at 16:29 ---------- Oh so you identify as one of the "do-gooding brigade"? What are you blabbering on about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hots on Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 Because they're mobile and able more to navigate the hazards.. Because the journey in itself is perilous if not expensive. Would you sacrifice in order for your children to better themselves in turn maybe eventually bettering you? Amongst other things yes..isn't that the point? ---------- Post added 01-08-2015 at 16:29 ---------- What are you blabbering on about? Open border anarchy is in effect what you do gooder's are calling for. Irresponsible idiocy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cassity Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 Open border anarchy is in effect what you do gooder's are calling for. Irresponsible idiocy. Don't you mean 'Do badders'...you seem confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts