The wonderful EU and Migration thread!

[Hoboh]

High volume, low margin is what lots of our retail sector work to. I'm sure they'd be delighted if they could do 45 points of margin on a toaster.

The argument around diminution of educational qualifications (not just degrees) isn't new. I'm not convinced that it's down to immigration although I agree that the number of people now possessing degrees is much higher proportionally than when you were in shorts. Employers tend to find their own differentiating factors nowadays, such as only accepting for interview, people with 2:1 or higher. I'm all for relevant technical apprenticeships,

I didn't miss the 1.1m figure - You told us not to believe any official figures - I guess you forgot to add "unless it suits you".

The study around dna and genetic origins - that one I missed - hands-up. There'll be another one along tomorrow with a different conclusion. We could argue around the word "race" similarly to no particular end - the point I was making is someone makes the rules and that person is often not of our choosing.

What is your argument here? That the population of the UK has historically been white Anglo-Saxon (in a broad sense) and should therefore remain so?

I cannot find any history to say it was ever Islamic

That didn't answer the question (which didn't mention religion at all)

Islam is more than a religion mate, it's a way of life and culture.

[Worthy4England]

High volume, low margin is what lots of our retail sector work to. I'm sure they'd be delighted if they could do 45 points of margin on a toaster.

The argument around diminution of educational qualifications (not just degrees) isn't new. I'm not convinced that it's down to immigration although I agree that the number of people now possessing degrees is much higher proportionally than when you were in shorts. Employers tend to find their own differentiating factors nowadays, such as only accepting for interview, people with 2:1 or higher. I'm all for relevant technical apprenticeships,

I didn't miss the 1.1m figure - You told us not to believe any official figures - I guess you forgot to add "unless it suits you".

The study around dna and genetic origins - that one I missed - hands-up. There'll be another one along tomorrow with a different conclusion. We could argue around the word "race" similarly to no particular end - the point I was making is someone makes the rules and that person is often not of our choosing.

What is your argument here? That the population of the UK has historically been white Anglo-Saxon (in a broad sense) and should therefore remain so?

I cannot find any history to say it was ever Islamic

That didn't answer the question (which didn't mention religion at all)

Islam is more than a religion mate, it's a way of life and culture.

I see that didn't answer the question either - is your suggestion that we restrict/ban religion (probably unenforceable). That we stop additional muslims coming into the country? That we deport those that are already here?

I'm with you, in that, the cultural differences are significant, and clearly there are areas where "integration" doesn't seem to be an agenda item. I'm not sure I have a "solution" though.

[bedwetter2]

High volume, low margin is what lots of our retail sector work to. I'm sure they'd be delighted if they could do 45 points of margin on a toaster.

The argument around diminution of educational qualifications (not just degrees) isn't new. I'm not convinced that it's down to immigration although I agree that the number of people now possessing degrees is much higher proportionally than when you were in shorts. Employers tend to find their own differentiating factors nowadays, such as only accepting for interview, people with 2:1 or higher. I'm all for relevant technical apprenticeships,

I didn't miss the 1.1m figure - You told us not to believe any official figures - I guess you forgot to add "unless it suits you".

The study around dna and genetic origins - that one I missed - hands-up. There'll be another one along tomorrow with a different conclusion. We could argue around the word "race" similarly to no particular end - the point I was making is someone makes the rules and that person is often not of our choosing.

What is your argument here? That the population of the UK has historically been white Anglo-Saxon (in a broad sense) and should therefore remain so?

I didn't endorse the 1.1m figure. That is what has been reported by the EU and for all I know it could be 0.5m or 2m. So it doesn't suit me sir

My argument is not that the UK should remain exclusively white Anglo-Saxon. My view of immigration is that it should be managed and only those that this country needs should be admitted. It should be a privilege to gain citizenship of the UK, somewhat similar to the Australian model. It is eminently sensible to limit immigration because of the demand on all the services that you and I have contributed to. Population density in the UK is some of the highest in the world and we are reaching saturation point because the proportion of land available to build more houses on is smaller than any other major country because of geography, including hills, flood plains, areas of special scientific interest and the need to feed ourselves, so farmland as well, etc. As we don't have elastic coastlines we can't conjure up more space.

Just to be absolutely clear, Indians whether Hindu or Sikh are high educational achievers whereas Pakistani and Bangladeshi children occupy the bottom rung of the qualification table. If the UK is to be a successful nation we need more qualified entrants to the world of work rather than deadbeats with a questionable attitude. I have no problem with any race provided they are prepared to be loyal, hard-working citizens. In fact one of my friends is Welsh.

Your point about the retail sector is not lost on me. The retail sector is brutal and essentially low margins are down to too much competition because there is a low cost of entry but failure is very expensive. I just wouldn't want to be in the FMCG sectors.

[bedwetter2]

So really without evidence your argument amounts to carry on as before with a little bit of hope chucked in for good measure. I expected no more from a churchman who is required to suspend disbelief and insert "faith" in it's place.

hmmm... when this sort of guff emerges, I'm not sure pursuing this further will be fruitful, which is a shame...

I'm sorry you feel that way, as I feel you are the moral hub of this forum and we are all probably better off for that, although at times you do remind me of the ex-Chair of the Pedants Society. You do realise that a large part of what I write is tongue in cheek?

[BWFC_Insane]

Just to be absolutely clear, Indians whether Hindu or Sikh are high educational achievers whereas Pakistani and Bangladeshi children occupy the bottom rung of the qualification table. If the UK is to be a successful nation we need more qualified entrants to the world of work rather than deadbeats with a questionable attitude. I have no problem with any race provided they are prepared to be loyal, hard-working citizens. In fact one of my friends is Welsh.

And that statement there has all the hallmarks of a raving racist I'm afraid.

Wild and unsubstantiated claims that are generalised across nationalities in a fairly lazy way.

Then followed up with "but I'm not racist, look at my friends...."

[Worthy4England]

High volume, low margin is what lots of our retail sector work to. I'm sure they'd be delighted if they could do 45 points of margin on a toaster.

The argument around diminution of educational qualifications (not just degrees) isn't new. I'm not convinced that it's down to immigration although I agree that the number of people now possessing degrees is much higher proportionally than when you were in shorts. Employers tend to find their own differentiating factors nowadays, such as only accepting for interview, people with 2:1 or higher. I'm all for relevant technical apprenticeships,

I didn't miss the 1.1m figure - You told us not to believe any official figures - I guess you forgot to add "unless it suits you".

The study around dna and genetic origins - that one I missed - hands-up. There'll be another one along tomorrow with a different conclusion. We could argue around the word "race" similarly to no particular end - the point I was making is someone makes the rules and that person is often not of our choosing.

What is your argument here? That the population of the UK has historically been white Anglo-Saxon (in a broad sense) and should therefore remain so?

I didn't endorse the 1.1m figure. That is what has been reported by the EU and for all I know it could be 0.5m or 2m. So it doesn't suit me sir

My argument is not that the UK should remain exclusively white Anglo-Saxon. My view of immigration is that it should be managed and only those that this country needs should be admitted. It should be a privilege to gain citizenship of the UK, somewhat similar to the Australian model. It is eminently sensible to limit immigration because of the demand on all the services that you and I have contributed to. Population density in the UK is some of the highest in the world and we are reaching saturation point because the proportion of land available to build more houses on is smaller than any other major country because of geography, including hills, flood plains, areas of special scientific interest and the need to feed ourselves, so farmland as well, etc. As we don't have elastic coastlines we can't conjure up more space.

Just to be absolutely clear, Indians whether Hindu or Sikh are high educational achievers whereas Pakistani and Bangladeshi children occupy the bottom rung of the qualification table. If the UK is to be a successful nation we need more qualified entrants to the world of work rather than deadbeats with a questionable attitude. I have no problem with any race provided they are prepared to be loyal, hard-working citizens. In fact one of my friends is Welsh.

Your point about the retail sector is not lost on me. The retail sector is brutal and essentially low margins are down to too much competition because there is a low cost of entry but failure is very expensive. I just wouldn't want to be in the FMCG sectors.

Not an unreasonable answer. Although I'm not sure about the generalizations on Hindu/Sikh Vs Pakistani/Bangladeshi. I actually agree that we need some immigration management, I just don't accept that it's out of control "because of our EU membership", when we let more folks in from outside europe, than from inside it (sometimes about the same amount and sometimes slightly more). I'm not going to get into the population density argument - coz that's not really scientific either - some surveys of UK land suggest that less than 2% is built upon - that doesn't make 98% available to build on clearly. If the perceived problem is "muslims" then I suspect we're entirely in control of the vast majority of the immigration problem related to it.

I also agree that in return, they should be loyal, hard-working citizens - no less loyal and hardworking as our current resident UK population - although I'm not sure how you're going to measure either...

Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein have to accept most "freedom of movement" with their EU agreements, Switzerland of course did, but is mid-battle on the problem although they're (by official figures) the second highest foreign born population in Europe after Lichtenstein.

I think that the long term answer is less to do with immigration controls than it is to do with foreign policy and I think Dave's Brake will need to get tested at some point. Whilst there is such a gap between those who have and those who have nowt, by dint of where they happen to be born, the problem will persist whether we're in or out of the EU. The answer has to be more than just "shut the door, I'm alright Jack"

[BWFC_Insane]

When you boil away all the piss and flaps about borders, countries and politics the issue is really very simple.

There are some people who live in very poor conditions around the world. In some countries those conditions are not far off universal and there are few ways those people can improve their lives. This isn't a single scale, it is right from the poorest areas of Africa to depressed Eastern European economies. The challenges and situations are different but the end result is people have shit lives and want something better.

With modern technology people can see the opportunities that in the past they probably didn't even know about. With modern movement and transport people can get across the globe more easily, even those without any money.

At it's core this is a global problem. And whilst short term "shutting up shop" might solve the problem on a localised basis the real challenge doesn't go away. It simply shifts the problem elsewhere briefly until there is some sort of a further issue.

Beyond all that you end up with a broader mixing of cultures, beliefs and values that is bound to have some tensions.

I've always been of the view that people are people. Not matter where they happen to be born. Being born into a particular society does not mean you have "earned" it's benefits (in the loosest sense) any more than someone who isn't but has arrived.

What is a problem is that the places where people can improve their lives are not limitless.

This is a global issue and cannot be tackled by single countries fiddling around with their policies and border controls. This, like global warming and climate change, needs a global solution that begins to address the issue NOW before we get to a stage where it is impossible to stop the direction of travel. Countries need to work together en masse to make the world a better and fairer place. Because otherwise there are billions of people who won't stop wanting better.

[TANGODANCER]

This is a global issue and cannot be tackled by single countries fiddling around with their policies and border controls. This, like global warming and climate change, needs a global solution that begins to address the issue NOW before we get to a stage where it is impossible to stop the direction of travel. Countries need to work together en masse to make the world a better and fairer place. Because otherwise there are billions of people who won't stop wanting better.

Noble sentiments BWFCi. Wherever there is war there are victims. The solution (and if there is one, nobody has found it yet in a few milleniums) is to stop war. Many of those who flee from situations like Syria would probably not do so, way of life regardless, if their lives weren't in danger. Add to that the fact that war doesn't choose between rich and poor, educated and deprived, and that many of those fleeing don't understand that imigration to another country isn't just nipping next door till the danger's past. They don't consider whether or not a country can support clothe and feed them; they're too busy running for their lives. There's also the herd instinct, families etc, as a factor and again, long term consequences don't get considered too much when dodging bombs and bullets. As for the bold bit, have a word with all the band-waggon jumpers, opportunists, dictators, drug barons, bent politicians, greedy oligarchs, slave traders and religious fanatics and I'll agree they are a few problems needing addressing.

When we can't even play nice with those we consider friends, ( Brussels?) what chance with the rest.

[Hoboh]

When you boil away all the piss and flaps about borders, countries and politics the issue is really very simple.

There are some people who live in very poor conditions around the world. In some countries those conditions are not far off universal and there are few ways those people can improve their lives. This isn't a single scale, it is right from the poorest areas of Africa to depressed Eastern European economies. The challenges and situations are different but the end result is people have shit lives and want something better.

With modern technology people can see the opportunities that in the past they probably didn't even know about. With modern movement and transport people can get across the globe more easily, even those without any money.

At it's core this is a global problem. And whilst short term "shutting up shop" might solve the problem on a localised basis the real challenge doesn't go away. It simply shifts the problem elsewhere briefly until there is some sort of a further issue.

Beyond all that you end up with a broader mixing of cultures, beliefs and values that is bound to have some tensions.

I've always been of the view that people are people. Not matter where they happen to be born. Being born into a particular society does not mean you have "earned" it's benefits (in the loosest sense) any more than someone who isn't but has arrived.

What is a problem is that the places where people can improve their lives are not limitless.

This is a global issue and cannot be tackled by single countries fiddling around with their policies and border controls. This, like global warming and climate change, needs a global solution that begins to address the issue NOW before we get to a stage where it is impossible to stop the direction of travel. Countries need to work together en masse to make the world a better and fairer place. Because otherwise there are billions of people who won't stop wanting better.

So, please do tell just wtf happened to all the years of foreign aid that we and others have pumped into these types of places?

Corruption, tribalism, and cultures of sitting around waiting to be spoon fed technology and better way of life seem to be the 'norm' in a lot of these countries.

Oh and the doctrine of certain religions, not just Islam, thinking along the lines of birth control, also have a lot to answer for.

It seems strange that reading interviews with some migrants that the feeling of entitlement is the pervading driving force, the ability to find work is dropping off the scale for some of them.

[Hoboh]

This is a global issue and cannot be tackled by single countries fiddling around with their policies and border controls. This, like global warming and climate change, needs a global solution that begins to address the issue NOW before we get to a stage where it is impossible to stop the direction of travel. Countries need to work together en masse to make the world a better and fairer place. Because otherwise there are billions of people who won't stop wanting better.

Noble sentiments BWFCi. Wherever there is war there are victims. The solution (and if there is one, nobody has found it yet in a few milleniums) is to stop war. Many of those who flee from situations like Syria would probably not do so, way of life regardless, if their lives weren't in danger. Add to that the fact that war doesn't choose between rich and poor, educated and deprived, and that many of those fleeing don't understand that imigration to another country isn't just nipping next door till the danger's past. They don't consider whether or not a country can support clothe and feed them; they're too busy running for their lives. There's also the herd instinct, families etc, as a factor and again, long term consequences don't get considered too much when dodging bombs and bullets. As for the bold bit, have a word with all the band-waggon jumpers, opportunists, dictators, drug barons, bent politicians, greedy oligarchs, slave traders and religious fanatics and I'll agree they are a few problems needing addressing.

When we can't even play nice with those we consider friends, ( Brussels?) what chance with the rest.

Ermmm partners or colleagues at best, friends is stretching it a little.

[BWFC_Insane]

So, please do tell just wtf happened to all the years of foreign aid that we and others have pumped into these types of places?

Corruption, tribalism, and cultures of sitting around waiting to be spoon fed technology and better way of life seem to be the 'norm' in a lot of these countries.

Oh and the doctrine of certain religions, not just Islam, thinking along the lines of birth control, also have a lot to answer for.

It seems strange that reading interviews with some migrants that the feeling of entitlement is the pervading driving force, the ability to find work is dropping off the scale for some of them.

You first have to get over the fact that you think "we" (we isn't even a thing, we're not a collective by anything other than accident) who happen to be born into relatively prosperous situations are somehow better than those who aren't. Or that it is ours to protect. It isn't.

Foreign aid is a drop in the ocean and really isn't the answer to trying to reduce global inequalities. It isn't about pumping a bit of money in and sitting back. This is a huge problem. Possibly not now or in the next few decades but within our grandchildren's lives this could very easily explode on a far larger scale.

We have to address it in a global sense because it is a problem worldwide. We aren't better than an African village, just luckier to be born into a different world. But no longer is the world large enough to protect our "lot" and we should stop thinking in those terms and start thinking how we can solve the major problems around global inequalities instead. And the only way to do that is work together.

[Hoboh]

So, please do tell just wtf happened to all the years of foreign aid that we and others have pumped into these types of places?

Corruption, tribalism, and cultures of sitting around waiting to be spoon fed technology and better way of life seem to be the 'norm' in a lot of these countries.

Oh and the doctrine of certain religions, not just Islam, thinking along the lines of birth control, also have a lot to answer for.

It seems strange that reading interviews with some migrants that the feeling of entitlement is the pervading driving force, the ability to find work is dropping off the scale for some of them.

You first have to get over the fact that you think "we" (we isn't even a thing, we're not a collective by anything other than accident) who happen to be born into relatively prosperous situations are somehow better than those who aren't. Or that it is ours to protect. It isn't.

Foreign aid is a drop in the ocean and really isn't the answer to trying to reduce global inequalities. It isn't about pumping a bit of money in and sitting back. This is a huge problem. Possibly not now or in the next few decades but within our grandchildren's lives this could very easily explode on a far larger scale.

We have to address it in a global sense because it is a problem worldwide. We aren't better than an African village, just luckier to be born into a different world. But no longer is the world large enough to protect our "lot" and we should stop thinking in those terms and start thinking how we can solve the major problems around global inequalities instead. And the only way to do that is work together.

Thanks!

You just made me rethink my position on Trident replacement.

Nonsense, all the things in the Western, civilised world didn't just mysteriously appear one day, society was built by hard graft and invention or are you suggesting Africans are lazy and thick?

[TANGODANCER]

You first have to get over the fact that you think "we" (we isn't even a thing, we're not a collective by anything other than accident) who happen to be born into relatively prosperous situations are somehow better than those who aren't. Or that it is ours to protect. It isn't.

Not having a " let's get BWFCi" morning, honest, but could you make that "some of"? My dad was a general labourer, then full-time soldier, came back from the war with all sorts of health problems and died at 52 still a labourer . My mother spent her working life in a cotton mill before suffering a nervous breakdown that lasted till she died. I left the house of my birth (two-up, two down terraced house) no bathroom, no fridge to get marrried at nineteen on an apprentices wage. Prosperous is stretching it a tad.

[BWFC_Insane]

So, please do tell just wtf happened to all the years of foreign aid that we and others have pumped into these types of places?

Corruption, tribalism, and cultures of sitting around waiting to be spoon fed technology and better way of life seem to be the 'norm' in a lot of these countries.

Oh and the doctrine of certain religions, not just Islam, thinking along the lines of birth control, also have a lot to answer for.

It seems strange that reading interviews with some migrants that the feeling of entitlement is the pervading driving force, the ability to find work is dropping off the scale for some of them.

You first have to get over the fact that you think "we" (we isn't even a thing, we're not a collective by anything other than accident) who happen to be born into relatively prosperous situations are somehow better than those who aren't. Or that it is ours to protect. It isn't.

Foreign aid is a drop in the ocean and really isn't the answer to trying to reduce global inequalities. It isn't about pumping a bit of money in and sitting back. This is a huge problem. Possibly not now or in the next few decades but within our grandchildren's lives this could very easily explode on a far larger scale.

We have to address it in a global sense because it is a problem worldwide. We aren't better than an African village, just luckier to be born into a different world. But no longer is the world large enough to protect our "lot" and we should stop thinking in those terms and start thinking how we can solve the major problems around global inequalities instead. And the only way to do that is work together.

Thanks!

You just made me rethink my position on Trident replacement.

Nonsense, all the things in the Western, civilised world didn't just mysteriously appear one day, society was built by hard graft and invention or are you suggesting Africans are lazy and thick?

The fact you happen to have been born into the UK is pure luck (or bad luck depending upon how we might look at it!).

I'm making the very opposite point. If we'd all been born into a dustbowl where clean water was a struggle I suspect we'd not have the ability to be quite so high and mighty about things.

The notion that the UK is successful because the people are of "better stock" is absolutely laughable.

[BWFC_Insane]

You first have to get over the fact that you think "we" (we isn't even a thing, we're not a collective by anything other than accident) who happen to be born into relatively prosperous situations are somehow better than those who aren't. Or that it is ours to protect. It isn't.

Not having a " let's get BWFCi" morning, honest, but could you make that "some of"? My dad was a general labourer, then full-time soldier, came back from the war with all sorts of health problems and died at 52 still a labourer . My mother spent her working life in a cotton mill before suffering a nervous breakdown that lasted till she died. I left the house of my birth (two-up, two down terraced house) no bathroom, no fridge to get marrried at nineteen on an apprentices wage. Prosperous is stretching it a tad.

Relatively prosperous and comfortable and easy compared to large swathes of the population across the rest of the globe though.

[Hoboh]

The fact you happen to have been born into the UK is pure luck (or bad luck depending upon how we might look at it!).

I'm making the very opposite point. If we'd all been born into a dustbowl where clean water was a struggle I suspect we'd not have the ability to be quite so high and mighty about things.

The notion that the UK is successful because the people are of "better stock" is absolutely laughable.

Okay Sir Bob, we appear to have a difference of opinion.

Oh btw have any rocked up at your place yet after leaving the Italian ferry service?

[TANGODANCER]

You first have to get over the fact that you think "we" (we isn't even a thing, we're not a collective by anything other than accident) who happen to be born into relatively prosperous situations are somehow better than those who aren't. Or that it is ours to protect. It isn't.

Not having a " let's get BWFCi" morning, honest, but could you make that "some of"? My dad was a general labourer, then full-time soldier, came back from the war with all sorts of health problems and died at 52 still a labourer . My mother spent her working life in a cotton mill before suffering a nervous breakdown that lasted till she died. I left the house of my birth (two-up, two down terraced house) no bathroom, no fridge to get marrried at nineteen on an apprentices wage. Prosperous is stretching it a tad.

Relatively prosperous and comfortable and easy compared to large swathes of the population across the rest of the globe though.

I think you should read up a little of British history mate to see how we got that way. We didn't just arrive with a suitcase. The Industrial Revolution was a reality, not a story by Charles Dickens. All the Bronte sisters were dead before forty (Charlotte the longest living at 38, Anne at only 29) from tubercolosis/typhoid fever due to bad water conditions in Haworth, the Yorkshire village they lived in. This had nothing to do with wealth or position as neither did the thousands who died from black lung disease, asbestosis and living in the Potteries. Add two world wars that Britain was involved in, the last only some seventy years back and we haven't all arrived in a Bentley with a picnic basket. I take your points,mate, but let's not get carried too far away from reality. The country we live in didn't just happen.

[Beefheart]

You first have to get over the fact that you think "we" (we isn't even a thing, we're not a collective by anything other than accident) who happen to be born into relatively prosperous situations are somehow better than those who aren't. Or that it is ours to protect. It isn't.

Not having a " let's get BWFCi" morning, honest, but could you make that "some of"? My dad was a general labourer, then full-time soldier, came back from the war with all sorts of health problems and died at 52 still a labourer . My mother spent her working life in a cotton mill before suffering a nervous breakdown that lasted till she died. I left the house of my birth (two-up, two down terraced house) no bathroom, no fridge to get marrried at nineteen on an apprentices wage. Prosperous is stretching it a tad.

Relatively prosperous and comfortable and easy compared to large swathes of the population across the rest of the globe though.

I think you should read up a little of British history mate to see how we got that way. We didn't just arrive with a suitcase. The Industrial Revolution was a reality, not a story by Charles Dickens. All the Bronte sisters were dead before forty (Charlotte the longest living at 38, Anne at only 29) from tubercolosis/typhoid fever due to bad water conditions in Haworth, the Yorkshire village they lived in. This had nothing to do with wealth or position as neither did the thousands who died from black lung disease, asbestosis and living in the Potteries. Add two world wars that Britain was involved in, the last only some seventy years back and we haven't all arrived in a Bentley with a picnic basket. I take your points,mate, but let's not get carried too far away from reality. The country we live in didn't just happen.

No, we built our wealth through colonialism, and now we have it, we don't want to let in people from the places we exploited.

[Hoboh]

You first have to get over the fact that you think "we" (we isn't even a thing, we're not a collective by anything other than accident) who happen to be born into relatively prosperous situations are somehow better than those who aren't. Or that it is ours to protect. It isn't.

Not having a " let's get BWFCi" morning, honest, but could you make that "some of"? My dad was a general labourer, then full-time soldier, came back from the war with all sorts of health problems and died at 52 still a labourer . My mother spent her working life in a cotton mill before suffering a nervous breakdown that lasted till she died. I left the house of my birth (two-up, two down terraced house) no bathroom, no fridge to get marrried at nineteen on an apprentices wage. Prosperous is stretching it a tad.

Relatively prosperous and comfortable and easy compared to large swathes of the population across the rest of the globe though.

I think you should read up a little of British history mate to see how we got that way. We didn't just arrive with a suitcase. The Industrial Revolution was a reality, not a story by Charles Dickens. All the Bronte sisters were dead before forty (Charlotte the longest living at 38, Anne at only 29) from tubercolosis/typhoid fever due to bad water conditions in Haworth, the Yorkshire village they lived in. This had nothing to do with wealth or position as neither did the thousands who died from black lung disease, asbestosis and living in the Potteries. Add two world wars that Britain was involved in, the last only some seventy years back and we haven't all arrived in a Bentley with a picnic basket. I take your points,mate, but let's not get carried too far away from reality. The country we live in didn't just happen.

Aye and lets not forget numerous invasions and wars before you go down the route of colonialism that we had to endure either.
Ha, Ha, see above, knew it was coming!
Please explain how a little Island managed to be where we are when we wouldn't be the size of a garden shed in comparison with Africa and other parts of the world.

[BWFC_Insane]

You first have to get over the fact that you think "we" (we isn't even a thing, we're not a collective by anything other than accident) who happen to be born into relatively prosperous situations are somehow better than those who aren't. Or that it is ours to protect. It isn't.

Not having a " let's get BWFCi" morning, honest, but could you make that "some of"? My dad was a general labourer, then full-time soldier, came back from the war with all sorts of health problems and died at 52 still a labourer . My mother spent her working life in a cotton mill before suffering a nervous breakdown that lasted till she died. I left the house of my birth (two-up, two down terraced house) no bathroom, no fridge to get marrried at nineteen on an apprentices wage. Prosperous is stretching it a tad.

Relatively prosperous and comfortable and easy compared to large swathes of the population across the rest of the globe though.

I think you should read up a little of British history mate to see how we got that way. We didn't just arrive with a suitcase. The Industrial Revolution was a reality, not a story by Charles Dickens. All the Bronte sisters were dead before forty (Charlotte the longest living at 38, Anne at only 29) from tubercolosis/typhoid fever due to bad water conditions in Haworth, the Yorkshire village they lived in. This had nothing to do with wealth or position as neither did the thousands who died from black lung disease, asbestosis and living in the Potteries. Add two world wars that Britain was involved in, the last only some seventy years back and we haven't all arrived in a Bentley with a picnic basket. I take your points,mate, but let's not get carried too far away from reality. The country we live in didn't just happen.

Right and during the industrial revolution we benefitted from our Geography. Were the UK a riverless desert what do you think would have happened?