Nobody on here has suggested that any immigrants of any origin are responsible for the financial crash. That would be a ridiculous suggestion and so I am not sure why you felt the need to inform anyone of this.marknorthfield wrote:A brief aside: the population of Poland is 38.5m, Bulgaria and Romania combined about 27.3m. 500,000 Poles came here over several years, and while it may have led to some problems in certain areas, they also contributed a great deal economically. They are most certainly not the reason we had a financial crash. Let's not kid ourselves that a million new people are likely to turn up in January, or indeed that they are somehow the biggest threat to our prosperity. They're just ordinary people trying their best in a crazy screwed-up system. There are far more important battles for us to fight, and people who are far more deserving of our ire.
Secondly, please define how the last major wave of immigration over the last tens of years has benefited our economy as you have implied? What exactly do you mean by "benefited"?
In terms of how many people come from Bulgaria and Romania, you are in no more of a position to say how many will come than anyone else. It is probably reasonable to suppose, however, that it will be in at least the hundreds of thousand unless there are serious impediments to their arriving. The reason is simple; no matter how much our pay and conditions are deteriorating here, those pay and conditions are still a lot better than where many of those Romanian and Bulgarians immigrants are coming from. They would be daft not to come. I would do the same if I were in their shoes. All of the people I know would not blame them for coming. However, if they do come in large numbers and end up undercutting and undermining pay and conditions yet further in the process, then there are plenty of people in this country who will come to blame them, as irrational as that may be.
It's easy enough for upper white collar professionals to look down on the complaints of everyone else to such immigration because they will be the least affected by it or, to the extent they are affected, will be in the best position to globally relocate themselves in response if they need to. For everyone else, they have nowhere else to go and so if there is a mass influx of people who economically undercut them, they're screwed. This has already been happening and is certain to worsen in this next wave of immigration.
The plain fact is, the people of this country (the majority of whom fall into the "nowhere else to go" category) have not been asked for their permission to allow this to happen and so, irrespective of what you (or I) may or may not consider reasonable, who are you (or I) to deny the people of this country the right to say no to such an influx of new mass immigration?
Finally, you are erecting a false dichotomy when you imply that the choice is between allowing this immigration to occur or not recognising who our real enemies are. It is entirely possible to hold both positions since I consider it is both imperative that we halt further mass immigration and also recognise any potential or actual immigrants are not our enemies, but that the people who orchestrate and manipulate the lives of both us and those immigrants are.
It is the lack of a rational immigration policy that is in the interests of the majority of the people who already live and work in this country that is leaving a dangerous political vacuum that is being filled by the deeply unpleasant right wing UKIP and is also causing the arsehole Cameron to jump on the UKIP bandwagon in the hope of bleeding some of their votes from them.