EU immigration row / time to get out

[jonny2mad]

Well no at the moment people like you are giving away places like london so other peoples homes.

alien : belonging or relating to another person, place, or thing relating, belonging, or owing allegiance to another country or government

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9L_zEZflFQ

[UndercoverElephant]

although what the hell is green about pushing up population god knows.

I have no idea either.

[biffvernon]

although what the hell is green about pushing up population god knows.

I have no idea either.

It would, of course, be better if the world's population were smaller. Have you checked the Green Party's policy on population? I don't think 'pushing up' features in it.

[biffvernon]

Well no at the moment people like you are giving away places like london so other peoples homes.

Is that in English? I have no idea what it means.

[Little John]

Well no at the moment people like you are giving away places like london so other peoples homes.

Is that in English? I have no idea what it means.

He's referring to the irrelevancy/hypocrisy of you indicating that you are not willing to give away your own home whilst being more than happy to support policies of giving away other people's.

I don't think the point was that hard to discern.

[UndercoverElephant]

although what the hell is green about pushing up population god knows.

I have no idea either.

It would, of course, be better if the world's population were smaller.

It would also, of course, be better for people in the UK if the UK's population were smaller. But you don't want to talk about that, do you?

[clv101]

I have no idea either.

It would, of course, be better if the world's population were smaller.

It would also, of course, be better for people in the UK if the UK's population were smaller. But you don't want to talk about that, do you?

I thought we were all agreed, including biffvernon, that it'd be better if the UK's population was smaller?

[Little John]

It would, of course, be better if the world's population were smaller.

It would also, of course, be better for people in the UK if the UK's population were smaller. But you don't want to talk about that, do you?

I thought we were all agreed, including biffvernon, that it'd be better if the UK's population was smaller?

And how, exactly, is that achieved in the absence of tight borders under the complete control of the democratically elected representative of this country and in the absence of any meaningful immigration policies designed around a population reduction strategy? Hell, even an immigration policy designed around a population stabilisation strategy would do for starters.

It's completely meaningless to state one agrees to something when one's other stated beliefs run entirely counter to that agreement.

[clv101]

My understanding of biffvernon's position, and I may be wrong, is that he'd like to see a lower population density in the UK - BUT - he'd like it to be achieved in the same way that Lincolnshire, for example, has a low population density. Simply through free choice.

It's also probably a mistake to interpret someone's aspirations, or world view as tomorrow's definite policy recommendations.

[UndercoverElephant]

It would, of course, be better if the world's population were smaller.

It would also, of course, be better for people in the UK if the UK's population were smaller. But you don't want to talk about that, do you?

I thought we were all agreed, including biffvernon, that it'd be better if the UK's population was smaller?

He didn't say that though, did he?

His opinion appears to be that it would be better for the UK's population to be smaller, but that an ideological commitment to "no borders" takes priority. This disagreement is about that order of priorities (at least for myself and Steve - for Jonny, the "no borders" thing should not be on the agenda at all, let alone placed above other priorities.) There are at least two reasons why. Firstly, Jonny2Mad, SteveCook and myself all agree that the primary responsibility of the government of the UK is to govern the UK in the interests of the existing population of the UK, whereas BiffVernon appears to believe that the government of the UK has a greater responsibility to govern the UK in the best interests of the population of the whole world. Secondly, there is a question about whether this policy would even work. In other words, if the more advanced (culturally and economically) parts of the world just open their doors to the backwards parts, would this lead us towards a better world, would it make no difference, or could it actually make things worse?

Re: the first question, as far as I am concerned, BiffVernon's expressed opinion is nothing less than treachery, and, quite frankly, were I in charge then I'd throw him to the Jonny2Mad's to do with whatever they think is appropriate. Sorry if this seems harsh, but I have to say this again: it is precisely this sort of attitude which has led to the rise of the far right across Europe. If the "liberal progressives" are going to put their own half-baked ideological dreams above the real-world well-being of people in their own country - especially the poor people in their own country - then they can expect those people to respond by turning to UKIP and Front National to defend their interests. BiffVernon and his ilk quite obviously couldn't care less about them, the nationalists and extreme right and left promise to look after them - and then people like him express their surprise and dismay at the rise of UKIP and the FN! What does he expect to happen? That the people who are already suffering because of the existing level of immigration are going to support him, safe in his ivory tower, in advocating more of it??

Re: the second question: IMO this sort of "open border" policy is actually counter-productive. Will the backwards parts of the world become any less backwards if all the decent people who want a better life p*** off to somewhere else? Would the UK have become a culturally advanced country if all our would-be reformers emigrated instead of contributing towards progress here? In the UK, when these cultural changes took place, emigration to a more advanced nation was not an option. So, generation after generation, step by step, we created a better place to live in.

[UndercoverElephant]

My understanding of biffvernon's position, and I may be wrong, is that he'd like to see a lower population density in the UK - BUT - he'd like it to be achieved in the same way that Lincolnshire, for example, has a low population density. Simply through free choice.

And I'd like to see world peace and the liberation of fluffy bunnies everywhere. Unfortunately, I have to live in the real world.

It's also probably a mistake to interpret someone's aspirations, or world view as tomorrow's definite policy recommendations.

But this is a discussion about politics, not religion. We're talking about the political structure of Europe and the results of recent elections.

[AndySir]

Re: the first question, as far as I am concerned, BiffVernon's expressed opinion is nothing less than treachery, and, quite frankly, were I in charge then I'd throw him to the Jonny2Mad's to do with whatever they think is appropriate.

I have to say I've got a problem with describing an opinion as treasonous - this is the language of totalitarianism.

Brain drain generally occurs because the country of origin cannot take advantage of the skills these individuals possess, and it's obviously of massive benefit to the country the skilled workforce is emigrating to (i.e. us), but it's also beneficial to the origin nation as well. The remittances sent back by the ex-pat workers tends to be of more benefit than the skills which cannot be fully utilised and the existence of a foreign market creates a demand for education at home. Scotland suffered from 'brain drain' for many centuries, and it's probably not a coincidence that we had the Scottish enlightenment around the same time.

[UndercoverElephant]

Re: the first question, as far as I am concerned, BiffVernon's expressed opinion is nothing less than treachery, and, quite frankly, were I in charge then I'd throw him to the Jonny2Mad's to do with whatever they think is appropriate.

I have to say I've got a problem with describing an opinion as treasonous - this is the language of totalitarianism.

I don't care if you think it is "the language of totalitarianism". It's a word that means "betrayal" or "disloyalty", and in this case it means betrayal of, or disloyalty to, the people of your own country (rather than the monarch). As far as I am concerned, that is precisely what Biff Vernon is guilty of. I also believe that you will not find a more pertinent example of why UKIP and the FN just won (that's right - they came first) the euro-elections in the UK and France.

[AndySir]

I don't care if you think it is "the language of totalitarianism". It's a word that means "betrayal" or "disloyalty", and in this case it means betrayal of, or disloyalty to, the people of your own country (rather than the monarch).

So now you're calling people race traitors. Is it possible to be completely shocked and, at the same time, not surprised?

[Little John]

I don't care if you think it is "the language of totalitarianism". It's a word that means "betrayal" or "disloyalty", and in this case it means betrayal of, or disloyalty to, the people of your own country (rather than the monarch).

So now you're calling people race traitors. Is it possible to be completely shocked and, at the same time, not surprised?

No he's no doing that at all, as you well know. Though, your tired attempt, as ever, to mischievously conflate concerns over immigration and it's effect on the citizens of this country, irrespective of race, with racism, is as unsurprising as ever.

You may not have noticed it, but the electoral majority of people here and elsewhere aren't prepared to allow your kind of debate-shutting-down bullshit to shut them up anymore. The problem of course, is that this leaves only the right wing nut-job parties to fill up the vacuum of debate. And the responsibility for this sorry and dangerous state of affairs lays firmly at the feet of people like you and biffvernon.