The wonderful EU and Migration thread!

[Worthy4England]

Slough??? How dare you. I live in beautiful rural Shropshire.

I am not anti-EU as such but anti-domination of national competences by an unelected Commission, imposition of huge numbers of directives, and most importantly anti-corruption and sclerotic action on such matters as external borders. Regarding internal borders, we are not part of the Schengen area but still have no say over the movement of EU citizens into the UK. If the entire Schengen agreement was rolled back and individual states were able to decide how many people were allowed in to their country the situation would be improved immeasurably. The likelihood that the Euro economy is probably going to implode is neither here nor there.
Running a country is massively difficult, running a "union" of 28 countries with wildly different GDPs and states of economic development is impossible and with or without the UK, the EU is doomed to failure.

In terms of immigration, we have a handle on neither internal EU nor external. EU obviously for the reasons discussed and externally because the UK is still supposedly morally bound to allow families of previous immigrants in. That plus the discrete lobbying of big business to allow cheap labour in and universities to allow as many foreign students as possible in; it all adds up.

I wasn't really accusing you of living in Slough.

So we might have lower immigration in general, if we leave - but at the expense of business competitiveness, university income and we don't know if it will impact any of our Trade Agreements (coz Norway and Switzerland are signed up for free-movement to some extent), but it's not going to dent the "muslim problem" much, because most of those don't come from the EU anyhow?

This is sounding like a sure-fire winner.

[bedwetter2]

Slough??? How dare you. I live in beautiful rural Shropshire.

I am not anti-EU as such but anti-domination of national competences by an unelected Commission, imposition of huge numbers of directives, and most importantly anti-corruption and sclerotic action on such matters as external borders. Regarding internal borders, we are not part of the Schengen area but still have no say over the movement of EU citizens into the UK. If the entire Schengen agreement was rolled back and individual states were able to decide how many people were allowed in to their country the situation would be improved immeasurably. The likelihood that the Euro economy is probably going to implode is neither here nor there.
Running a country is massively difficult, running a "union" of 28 countries with wildly different GDPs and states of economic development is impossible and with or without the UK, the EU is doomed to failure.

In terms of immigration, we have a handle on neither internal EU nor external. EU obviously for the reasons discussed and externally because the UK is still supposedly morally bound to allow families of previous immigrants in. That plus the discrete lobbying of big business to allow cheap labour in and universities to allow as many foreign students as possible in; it all adds up.

I wasn't really accusing you of living in Slough.

So we might have lower immigration in general, if we leave - but at the expense of business competitiveness, university income and we don't know if it will impact any of our Trade Agreements (coz Norway and Switzerland are signed up for free-movement to some extent), but it's not going to dent the "muslim problem" much, because most of those don't come from the EU anyhow?

This is sounding like a sure-fire winner.

I don't buy the business competitiveness argument. The cost of labour cannot be the only factor in being competitive - it certainly isn't in other developed countries. Having run substantial businesses myself in the past, the key to competitiveness is a combination of hard work, innovation and investment in production processes or systems in the case of service sectors. It also helps if your business invests in people at all levels, but sales in particular.
Universities is an odd one. When I went to university, there were far fewer places or institutions. The main foreign students were either Rhodes scholars at Oxford or some places at colleges in Cambridge and technical universities such as Hull, Liverpool, etc.
The whole university sector grew like Topsy and with it the demand for more and more funding for more and more places, some of little significant value. The universities latched onto paying foreign students as a means of supporting the growth of the sector. I believe it is time to reduce the size of the sector, seriously.
Trade Agreements are government to government deals which set out the tariffs or lack of them. They don't prevent trade which is generally company to company and it is highly unlikely that they could to any great degree.
1.1 million muslims entered the EU as illegal immigrants last year from Syria, Somalia, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Nigeria, Chad, Mali, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan and other sub-Saharan countries. A melting pot or a looming disaster, i.e. are they going to import their feuds and intolerance? What about the Turkey question particularly in view of that nice Mr Erdogan. It is an argument to get out as I can't see all being deterred by a bit of wire fencing at Sangatte.

It's probably a bit before your time but do you recall what happened during the fall of the late Roman empire? A very weak series of Emperors dominated by barbarian military advisers allowed the Rhine defences to be degraded in manpower and equipment. First the Goths, then Visigoths, then Vandals and Franks crossed the Rhine, the Lombards the Alps, and quickly started establishing their own kingdoms. Their customs were unrefined and barbaric (as the Romans citizens put it) but the Romans in Gaul, Italy and Spain had to submit or be killed. Many still were. A few pockets of Roman resistance in Gaul remained, e.g. Syagrius in north east Gaul but that was soon snuffed out.

There may be some parallels in that little story. History does have a habit of repeating itself.

[Worthy4England]

I agree that labour price is only one factor in competitiveness also having (and still doing) running significant business. Labour costs, probably aren't going to be a major problem, unless you're out of kilter with your competitors. So if we're higher on core labour costs than our EU competitors, that would be a problem for us, if all other elements were broadly equal.

Indeed, trade agreements don't prevent trade and at a macro economic level, a shift on tariffs of a point or two, might not make the earth shake. At a sector level a couple of points on labour and a couple of points on goods/services starts to add up. When I talk to manufacturers, they'd kill for 1% out of their cost base. When I talk to some of our FMCG sector trading in high volume, low margin goods, then it would also be significantly unhelpful.

Why should we reduce the sector of one particular business, education? I don't get that as an intervention strategy. Should we reduce the arms sector, similarly, to help minimise the number of people displaced by wars?

Given your reticence to accept figures, where's your 1.1m coming from? I know you didn't count 'em. Whatever the number is/was isn't going to alter because we're in or out. Turkey isn't in the EU so allegedly they can control their borders how they want.

It's probably a bit before most people's time, but do you recall that over the years there's been all sorts of changes in our population demographics, including which race held the leadership and control and despite that, we still seem to be here and according to outers would be more than capable of standing on our own two feet.

[thebish]

I will try to answer your questions where I can - you have concentrated on the sub-continent but most of my views and information applies to all selectively constructed and released "official" information, whether immigration, financial or legislative. I live 90 miles from Bolton although I can't really see how that is relevant. From the start of the 1960s when I were a nipper the steady immigration from the Indian sub-continent into areas of Bolton was very noticeable. This I observed whenever I was taken to visit my relatives. Immigration carried on apace from then to the present day and it was obvious (at least to me via innocent eyes) that the majority did not integrate or even try. We now know why in the case of the muslims.

do we? what do we know now that we didn't know before - specifically about Muslims rather than just any immigrant community? (and how do we know this?)

The recent ICM attitude survey about which Trevor Phillips has written about in the Sunday Times and presented on Channel 4 was conducted on a one to one, face to face basis by muslims employed by the research organisation specifically so honest responses could be elicited. They even went as far as asking the interviewees to write down their views and seal them in envelopes if they felt uncomfortable discussing their real attitudes.

There have been previous attempts to get to the bottom of muslim attitudes to living in the UK, one in the late 90s (1999 I think, without looking it up) which showed similar results and when presented to the then Labour Government was buried very quickly.

The survey confirmed that 52% of muslims think homosexuality should be illegal, 39% that a woman should always obey her husband irrespective of circumstances, 18% believe in violence toward anyone insulting the prophet, 4% (100,000 people in the UK) support suicide bombers, 66% would not inform the authorities of anyone involved in supporting terrorism. 53% supported the attack on the Charlie Hebdo offices in Paris.

There was many other responses to questions such as do you meet with non-muslims outside work? Have you ever been in a non-muslim home? Very high no responses from both these questions 92% for have you ever been in a non-muslim home.

Obviously you don't want to admit it or agree, but from all that has recently been gleaned muslims in general are a nation within a nation. Their dismissive anti-democratic views (probably explains their gerrymandering of votes in elections) and subserviance only to their prophet makes them a clear and present danger, in my opinion.

on the integration, question though - which I highlighted - the survey gives us no evidence that Muslims are any less likely to integrate than any other defined group... on the integration questions - you'd probably get very, very similar answers from "ex pats" living in Spain... "have you ever been in a non ex-pat home? do you mix socially with non ex-pat spanish-speaking locals?" I don't think this is summat that a poll has discovered about MUSLIMS pers se - we haven't learned anything new - this isn't a "now we know..." situation (as you described it) - it's just what most people do...

[Bijou Bob]

I will try to answer your questions where I can - you have concentrated on the sub-continent but most of my views and information applies to all selectively constructed and released "official" information, whether immigration, financial or legislative. I live 90 miles from Bolton although I can't really see how that is relevant. From the start of the 1960s when I were a nipper the steady immigration from the Indian sub-continent into areas of Bolton was very noticeable. This I observed whenever I was taken to visit my relatives. Immigration carried on apace from then to the present day and it was obvious (at least to me via innocent eyes) that the majority did not integrate or even try. We now know why in the case of the muslims.

do we? what do we know now that we didn't know before - specifically about Muslims rather than just any immigrant community? (and how do we know this?)

The recent ICM attitude survey about which Trevor Phillips has written about in the Sunday Times and presented on Channel 4 was conducted on a one to one, face to face basis by muslims employed by the research organisation specifically so honest responses could be elicited. They even went as far as asking the interviewees to write down their views and seal them in envelopes if they felt uncomfortable discussing their real attitudes.

There have been previous attempts to get to the bottom of muslim attitudes to living in the UK, one in the late 90s (1999 I think, without looking it up) which showed similar results and when presented to the then Labour Government was buried very quickly.

The survey confirmed that 52% of muslims think homosexuality should be illegal, 39% that a woman should always obey her husband irrespective of circumstances, 18% believe in violence toward anyone insulting the prophet, 4% (100,000 people in the UK) support suicide bombers, 66% would not inform the authorities of anyone involved in supporting terrorism. 53% supported the attack on the Charlie Hebdo offices in Paris.

There was many other responses to questions such as do you meet with non-muslims outside work? Have you ever been in a non-muslim home? Very high no responses from both these questions 92% for have you ever been in a non-muslim home.

Obviously you don't want to admit it or agree, but from all that has recently been gleaned muslims in general are a nation within a nation. Their dismissive anti-democratic views (probably explains their gerrymandering of votes in elections) and subserviance only to their prophet makes them a clear and present danger, in my opinion.

on the integration, question though - which I highlighted - the survey gives us no evidence that Muslims are any less likely to integrate than any other defined group... on the integration questions - you'd probably get very, very similar answers from "ex pats" living in Spain... "have you ever been in a non ex-pat home? do you mix socially with non ex-pat spanish-speaking locals?" I don't think this is summat that a poll has discovered about MUSLIMS pers se - we haven't learned anything new - this isn't a "now we know..." situation (as you described it) - it's just what most people do...

So believing that homosexuality should be illegal, advocating domestic violence against women and failing to recognise their equality inside marriage is integrating is it?? Are you suggesting almost 1 in 5 Christians would advocate violence against anyone who insulted Jesus? That 66% of expats would fail to notify the authorities about an imminent terrorist attack or that half the indigenous population watched the carnage in London with a big smile playing on their lips?

[thebish]

So believing that homosexuality should be illegal, advocating domestic violence against women and failing to recognise their equality inside marriage is integrating is it??

eh?? I haven't said Muslims ARE integrating... merely that is is not something special or particularly unique to muslims - and not summat that a survey has just uncovered or worked out why...

there are, of course, in my living memory non-integrating white brits who resorted to terrorist outrage - blowing people up and shooting people... they still aren't integrating - so adamantly not integrating that there is still a huge 10ft wall between their respective communities and closable iron road barriers - the "peace wall"...

[Hoboh]

http://www.theguardian.com/education/20 ... ool-places

The latest data reveals that the councils facing shortfalls in places by 2019-20 are Bolton, Manchester, Oldham, Leeds, Leicester, Birmingham, Walsall, Bexley, Greenwich, Richmond upon Thames, Sutton and Slough.

I wonder what most of these places have in common?

No doubt the usual response will apply, "we'll have to build more".

One day someone might hit upon the answer being, control whose in or out.

I think they'll have the following in common:

1) Significantly white English demographic.
2) Reasonably high Indian and Pakistani communities (Non-EU) - so an immigration aspect within our control (12.1% for Bolton at last census)
3) Reasonably small populations with a country of origin within the EU or elsewhere other than India and Pakistan (4.9% for Bolton at last census)
4) Lots of school-age children

So from last census it's been entirely within the UK's control for 95.1% of Bolton's demographic...

Do you really still believe 'official' figures?

Depends on which figures they are - when it comes to understanding how many Chinese people live in Bolton, it's notoriously difficult to do (or appears to be). We could of course make our own figures up for everything - that usually makes a sound basis for debate.

What do you think are the Indian and Pakistani numbers for Bolton (can't remember whether you live in Bolton or not)?
What are the numbers of other migrants?
Where are you getting your information from?

How many Eastern Europeans are there in Bolton that weren't on any census?

There is one hell of a lot that passed through the charity shop I work at.

[Worthy4England]

They come into a charity shop and you ask 'em if they filled in a census? Wow.

[bedwetter2]

So believing that homosexuality should be illegal, advocating domestic violence against women and failing to recognise their equality inside marriage is integrating is it??

eh?? I haven't said Muslims ARE integrating... merely that is is not something special or particularly unique to muslims - and not summat that a survey has just uncovered or worked out why...

there are, of course, in my living memory non-integrating white brits who resorted to terrorist outrage - blowing people up and shooting people... they still aren't integrating - so adamantly not integrating that there is still a huge 10ft wall between their respective communities and closable iron road barriers - the "peace wall"...

Look, you are losing sight of the main point in all this - should we accept and indeed continue to accept immigrants who are known to hold incompatible views in comparison to the existing population? We should be considering very carefully what implications for the future such a relaxed attitude will bring.
Nothing that has been said by you or anyone else on your side of the argument lessens the implications of such a policy.

'White brits'? I take it you are referring to republicans from Ireland. They would never class themselves as Brits and nor would I.

As for you saying it is not something special or unique to muslims is certainly at odds with the sudden shock it seems to have inflicted on Phillips and by extension many of the liberal brigade, even including some of the Guardianista writers who have taken to print.

[thebish]

'White brits'? I take it you are referring to republicans from Ireland. They would never class themselves as Brits and nor would I.

nahh... the peace wall is in Northern Ireland - I am referring to the white Brits on either side who refuse to integrate and resorted to bombs and bullets... they still adamantly hold several degrees of separation...


A couple of things about the survey..

1) it is notoriously difficult to accurately poll opiions of muslims in Britain - not because they are all liars and dissemblers - but because they are a small (yes!) community and dispersed... the two ways of doing it - in order to get a decent sample (age/gender etc.) would be to do a random phone poll and undertake a massive number of phone calls... this is cost/time-prohibitive. The other way of doing it - which is the way this survey chose - is to go to areas where there are lots of muslims and knock on doors... Both methods have their weaknesses. The obvious weakness of the second approach is that the people in the poll all live in areas of high muslim density - and that will skew questions about integration and possibly also questions about attitudes...

2) about attitudes... I think that the question of multiculturalism and attitudes that seem incompatible is a real one. I don't think it is a simple case of muslims=backward attitudes, native white english= progressive liberal attitudes...

without the need for muslim attitudes we have a horrifically bad record on domestic violence (largely against women) in this country - and also Paedohilia and child-abuse... (plus - we're not very good at integrating - we are a very divided society...)

however - that having been said - I am as keen as anyone to find ways to help muslim communities contextualise their faith in this country - learn how to be faithful muslims in the UK-specific context - and I think this is possible.

the survey suggests that there is a significant generational difference in muslim social attitudes... I think this is a reason for at least SOME optimism - that over time, 2nd and 3rd and 4th generation muslims having been brought up in the UK will become a more dominant muslim voice within the UK muslim community - and the UK will be all the richer for that...

[bedwetter2]

I agree that labour price is only one factor in competitiveness also having (and still doing) running significant business. Labour costs, probably aren't going to be a major problem, unless you're out of kilter with your competitors. So if we're higher on core labour costs than our EU competitors, that would be a problem for us, if all other elements were broadly equal.

Indeed, trade agreements don't prevent trade and at a macro economic level, a shift on tariffs of a point or two, might not make the earth shake. At a sector level a couple of points on labour and a couple of points on goods/services starts to add up. When I talk to manufacturers, they'd kill for 1% out of their cost base. When I talk to some of our FMCG sector trading in high volume, low margin goods, then it would also be significantly unhelpful.

Why should we reduce the sector of one particular business, education? I don't get that as an intervention strategy. Should we reduce the arms sector, similarly, to help minimise the number of people displaced by wars?

Given your reticence to accept figures, where's your 1.1m coming from? I know you didn't count 'em. Whatever the number is/was isn't going to alter because we're in or out. Turkey isn't in the EU so allegedly they can control their borders how they want.

It's probably a bit before most people's time, but do you recall that over the years there's been all sorts of changes in our population demographics, including which race held the leadership and control and despite that, we still seem to be here and according to outers would be more than capable of standing on our own two feet.

High volume, low margin goods is not a particularly good place to be. Generally, the only reason to be in that sector is for the advantages of positive cashflow (at least in some cases). Others than that, companies which are in the FMCG sector could often be viewed as busy fools. That, of course, is up to them.

Regarding Universities, I was making the point that adult education has been over-expanded leading to a diminution of the value of most degrees. The technical apprenticeships by comparison are in dire need of expansion to equip this country for the future. By technical, I do not mean hotel management, etc.

The 1.1m figure came from the EU Commission and has been widely reported in the media. Surprised you missed it in all the BBC news, ITVs equivalent, and not forgetting Sky. As I understand it the Commission asked the point of entry countries, i.e. Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal to count or estimate the numbers of people who passed through on their way to the centre of the Fourth Reich. If the figure is wrong, it will be like so many other things in life be down to the EU bureaucrats.

There have been some changes to our demographics over the years but recent studies of dna for genetic origins have pointed to the larger part (up to 98% but as low as 70%) being from the original base settlement of this land after the last ice age. Belgic, Roman, Angles, Saxons, Jutes, Normans and their brothers the Vikings have slightly changed the genetic makeup Anglo-Saxon more than others, but not significantly above 10% for most people. Certainly, rulers changed for a time but that doesn't change the entire population. You used the word "race", but that is not really correct as all invaders were of west European origin, certainly not from the middle east or Africa.

[bedwetter2]

'White brits'? I take it you are referring to republicans from Ireland. They would never class themselves as Brits and nor would I.

nahh... the peace wall is in Northern Ireland - I am referring to the white Brits on either side who refuse to integrate and resorted to bombs and bullets... they still adamantly hold several degrees of separation...


A couple of things about the survey..

1) it is notoriously difficult to accurately poll opiions of muslims in Britain - not because they are all liars and dissemblers - but because they are a small (yes!) community and dispersed... the two ways of doing it - in order to get a decent sample (age/gender etc.) would be to do a random phone poll and undertake a massive number of phone calls... this is cost/time-prohibitive. The other way of doing it - which is the way this survey chose - is to go to areas where there are lots of muslims and knock on doors... Both methods have their weaknesses. The obvious weakness of the second approach is that the people in the poll all live in areas of high muslim density - and that will skew questions about integration and possibly also questions about attitudes...

2) about attitudes... I think that the question of multiculturalism and attitudes that seem incompatible is a real one. I don't think it is a simple case of muslims=backward attitudes, native white english= progressive liberal attitudes...

without the need for muslim attitudes we have a horrifically bad record on domestic violence (largely against women) in this country - and also Paedohilia and child-abuse... (plus - we're not very good at integrating - we are a very divided society...)

however - that having been said - I am as keen as anyone to find ways to help muslim communities contextualise their faith in this country - learn how to be faithful muslims in the UK-specific context - and I think this is possible.

the survey suggests that there is a significant generational difference in muslim social attitudes... I think this is a reason for at least SOME optimism - that over time, 2nd and 3rd and 4th generation muslims having been brought up in the UK will become a more dominant muslim voice within the UK muslim community - and the UK will be all the richer for that...

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.

I could take issue with both of your numerical points - the paedophilia/child abuse one is particularly hilarious. No one denies that societies in general have such issues but the muslims have turned it into an industry, the scale of which still hasn't been admitted by the authorities.

Regarding the ICM poll methodology, this was explained by them pretty comprehensively. Telephone polling was known by ICM to be a non-starter to gain accurate results from this part of the population. The idea that the muslim population is small and widely dispersed is a new one on me - that is some statement!
Because it is known that the muslim attitudes make clumping of population more likely it was indeed logical to concentrate on these areas. Does that lead to inaccuracy? No, I would say that it is fairly representative because these places are where the majority live.

[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?

[thebish]

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...

[Hoboh]

I will try to answer your questions where I can - you have concentrated on the sub-continent but most of my views and information applies to all selectively constructed and released "official" information, whether immigration, financial or legislative. I live 90 miles from Bolton although I can't really see how that is relevant. From the start of the 1960s when I were a nipper the steady immigration from the Indian sub-continent into areas of Bolton was very noticeable. This I observed whenever I was taken to visit my relatives. Immigration carried on apace from then to the present day and it was obvious (at least to me via innocent eyes) that the majority did not integrate or even try. We now know why in the case of the muslims.

do we? what do we know now that we didn't know before - specifically about Muslims rather than just any immigrant community? (and how do we know this?)

The recent ICM attitude survey about which Trevor Phillips has written about in the Sunday Times and presented on Channel 4 was conducted on a one to one, face to face basis by muslims employed by the research organisation specifically so honest responses could be elicited. They even went as far as asking the interviewees to write down their views and seal them in envelopes if they felt uncomfortable discussing their real attitudes.

There have been previous attempts to get to the bottom of muslim attitudes to living in the UK, one in the late 90s (1999 I think, without looking it up) which showed similar results and when presented to the then Labour Government was buried very quickly.

The survey confirmed that 52% of muslims think homosexuality should be illegal, 39% that a woman should always obey her husband irrespective of circumstances, 18% believe in violence toward anyone insulting the prophet, 4% (100,000 people in the UK) support suicide bombers, 66% would not inform the authorities of anyone involved in supporting terrorism. 53% supported the attack on the Charlie Hebdo offices in Paris.

There was many other responses to questions such as do you meet with non-muslims outside work? Have you ever been in a non-muslim home? Very high no responses from both these questions 92% for have you ever been in a non-muslim home.

Obviously you don't want to admit it or agree, but from all that has recently been gleaned muslims in general are a nation within a nation. Their dismissive anti-democratic views (probably explains their gerrymandering of votes in elections) and subserviance only to their prophet makes them a clear and present danger, in my opinion.

on the integration, question though - which I highlighted - the survey gives us no evidence that Muslims are any less likely to integrate than any other defined group... on the integration questions - you'd probably get very, very similar answers from "ex pats" living in Spain... "have you ever been in a non ex-pat home? do you mix socially with non ex-pat spanish-speaking locals?" I don't think this is summat that a poll has discovered about MUSLIMS pers se - we haven't learned anything new - this isn't a "now we know..." situation (as you described it) - it's just what most people do...

Bloody big bunch of straws being plucked there alongside a whiff of whataboutry.

[Hoboh]

So believing that homosexuality should be illegal, advocating domestic violence against women and failing to recognise their equality inside marriage is integrating is it??

eh?? I haven't said Muslims ARE integrating... merely that is is not something special or particularly unique to muslims - and not summat that a survey has just uncovered or worked out why...

there are, of course, in my living memory non-integrating white brits who resorted to terrorist outrage - blowing people up and shooting people... they still aren't integrating - so adamantly not integrating that there is still a huge 10ft wall between their respective communities and closable iron road barriers - the "peace wall"...

They're not really Brits though are they? and to be fair most Irish with a few travelling exceptions are part of society on the mainland UK and don't live in ghettos (or 'communities' to be correctly PC).

[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

[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)

[BWFC_Insane]

I find it funny that people are saying we should bar immigrants who don't share our societies "views" on a variety of issues.

Especially as I'm not sure we have a societal view on anything that is common or shared. We have laws that any citizen or visitor must abide by. But as far as I know we do not police people's opinions on anything.

How many "non-Muslims" think that homosexuality should be illegal? There will be a number. Should we round those up and shoo them out the country?

There are some very muddled arguments and people tying themselves in knots. I don't see why they don't just say "I don't like foreigners and I don't want them here". Because ultimately in amongst all the "anecdotes" and stories and bizarre demand for "facts" that is what it boils down to.

[Hoboh]

They come into a charity shop and you ask 'em if they filled in a census? Wow.

Don't be so fcuking stupid!
You know dammed well most of them would not be registered on the census role having not been here long enough to register, or just not on any electoral role, bank accounts in other countries, work in cash, digs rented by who and as good as untraceable, so no 'fine' without specialist resources.
Don't go off thinking it doesn't happen, I have know a few brits that have lived virtually 'off line' usually escaping debt collectors.