Migrant watch (merged topic)

[jonny2mad]

The better side of humanity
http://www.theguardian.com/voluntary-se ... re-helping

I come back to powerswitch and you post stuff like this, basically blokes overloading a lifeboat thats about to sink, and you say "the better side of humanity"

You could cheer anyone up with your antics thats for sure


"the better side of humanity" if only they could have a reality tv show about you and folks that think like you on a overloaded lifeboat .

If my old dad was still alive I would have phoned him up just to tell him about that the better side of humanity qoute, he'd have loved it .

[jonny2mad]

you could just encourage these developed world countrys to have more children that would be easier than importing alien people .

But they dont want that, they want fractured unhappy countrys, what they are basically talking about is genocide get rid of the current inhabitants of europe and replace them with something else .

[UndercoverElephant]

Then there's the migration problem. To make the OECD's central growth scenario* work, Europe and the USA have to absorb 50 million migrants each between now and 2060, with the rest of the developed world assimilating another 30 million. Without them, theworkforce and the tax base of the west shrinks so badly that states go bust. The risk is that the populations of the developed world will not accept it.

* http://www.oecd.org/eco/lookingto2060.htm

Why have you posted this?

[biffvernon]

Because it chimes with my next post, Laurie Penny's piece in the New Statesman.

Europe shouldn’t worry about migrants. It should worry about creeping fascism.
The greatest threat to our “way of life” is not migration. It is that we will swallow the lie that some human lives matter less than others.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/20 ... ng-fascism

[jonny2mad]

So your daughter if you have ones drowning and a strangers drowning and what do you do toss a coin on which one to save first .



your wonderful

[UndercoverElephant]

Come on Biff - use your brain buddy!

It would be good if all posts went beyond personal abuse and added new ideas to the discussion.

New ideas?

Your post was stupid, Biff. You were quoting from an article claiming that capitalism is doomed, and was saying that one of the reasons it is doomed is that it requires never-ending growth, and that given that native western populations aren't growing, large amounts of immigrants would have to be imported, which the existing population wouldn't accept.

You did not accompany the quote with any sort of argument, and given the content of the quote and the context of the discussion, one can only conclude that you did not use your brain before posting it. In order to draw attention to this, I asked you why you posted it. You have not answered.

Presumably, it was some sort of poorly-thought-out attempt to justify mass immigration, regardless of the facts that

a) you know perfectly well that endless growth is impossible anyway, not because of lack of internal population growth but because it is ecologically unsustainable.

b) the article you quoted from was arguing that the capitalist system is dying anyway and needs to be replaced with something more appropriate for the modern world. It was written by an ex-capitalist who was using the need for immigration as an example of why capitalism DOESN'T WORK.

c) you've been called out on exactly this bullshit before, on numerous occasions.

and

d) not only will the existing population of the western world not accept further mass immigration, if the idiots who are running the show don't put a stop to it then they will eventually be replaced by people from the far right who will put a stop to it. So unless you want to be ruled by the J2Ms of this world, I advise you to get a bit smarter, ASAP.

I'm going to make the same request AE did. Will you please start using your brain? Because right now you are making yourself look considerably more stupid than you actually are.

If you don't want to be "insulted" like this, then for heaven's sake grow up and stop posting rubbish like this. Instead, try admitting that some of your dearly-held beliefs need to be re-assessed, and help to move the discussion onwards instead of continually dragging it backwards and poisoning it with pseudo-moralistic claptrap.

[Little John]

Yes to all of this.

[biffvernon]

Your post was stupid, Biff. You were quoting from an article claiming that capitalism is doomed

Actually I was quoting from a book, Paul Mason's Postcapitalism. I suggest you read it as I have a hunch you would like a good deal of it.

[Little John]

Your post was stupid, Biff. You were quoting from an article claiming that capitalism is doomed

Actually I was quoting from a book, Paul Mason's Postcapitalism. I suggest you read it as I have a hunch you would like a good deal of it.

And, as per usual, you have not addressed a single point put to you in UE's immediately previous post or, indeed, any of the other previous posts in this thread. We all know where the quote comes from in terms of the broader argument of which it is a part. The point put to you by UE and others, was that the quote, in the context of this thread, is stupid since it is actually one of the reasons given by Mason for why capitalism does not work. Your posting of this quote in the way that you have is either evidence of very poor thinking or it is evidence of a contempt of the intelligence of other posters on here by attempting to baffle with bullshit. Your claimed politics may be different to, say, the likes of John Hemming. Your lack of intellectual honesty and tendency to cheap debating tactics bear exactly the same politician's hallmarks, however.

Address the specific points put to you by UE and others.

Don't worry, I wont hold my breath.

[UndercoverElephant]

Your post was stupid, Biff. You were quoting from an article claiming that capitalism is doomed

Actually I was quoting from a book...

I've seen plenty of clips of him talking about it, and articles he's written about it. And yes, it does look interesting.

The question you were asked is WHY you were quoting him. Presumably you thought/think it backs up your position on something relevant to this thread? If so, it is very hard to see what, which is why you are being asked this question. If anything, the quote refutes/undermines/destroys your argument, rather than supporting it.

[biffvernon]

Another article that says something relevant to this thread:

When confronted with the relentless media coverage of the Calais migrant “crisis”, it is easy to forget that some of those living in the camps around Calais are unaccompanied minors seeking asylum.

While the UK government says it welcomes genuine refugees as opposed to “economic migrants”, the reality is that even those young people with strong asylum claims who eventually make it to the UK are faced with a climate of hostility and suspicion.

https://theconversation.com/young-asylu ... tain-45811

[johnhemming2]

The fact that they claim to be under 18 does not mean that they are.

[biffvernon]

The fact that they claim to be under 18 does not mean that they are.

Indeed, but the Home Office wrote "There were 1,986 asylum applications from Unaccompanied asylum-seeking children (UASC) in the year ending March 2015".

And who are we to question such opinion?

souurce: https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... march-2015
Section 8.6
Section 8.7 tells of the additional but much smaller number where there was a dispute of age.

The Red Cross is another organisation that might be taken seriously.

http://blogs.redcross.org.uk/refugeesse ... -near-you/

[UndercoverElephant]

Another article that says something relevant to this thread:

When confronted with the relentless media coverage of the Calais migrant “crisis”, it is easy to forget that some of those living in the camps around Calais are unaccompanied minors seeking asylum.

While the UK government says it welcomes genuine refugees as opposed to “economic migrants”, the reality is that even those young people with strong asylum claims who eventually make it to the UK are faced with a climate of hostility and suspicion.

https://theconversation.com/young-asylu ... tain-45811

And as usual, you are missing the point.

What happens if we just let all unaccompanied minors in?

Answer: it will encourage more people in the world's troublespots to send their children, unaccompanied, here.

Think, Biff, please. Not just "here is a person in distress, we must help" but "what are the likely consequences of my actions?"

[biffvernon]

"what are the likely consequences of my actions?"

Someone gets helped. And one day we may get the opportunity to help someone else. Sounds a plan that confirms our humanity.