|
Post by elystokie on Mar 17, 2023 10:42:59 GMT
Something seems to have 'triggered' a storm. Ely and his Prestwich have got their own personal Blizzard going on. It's quite romantic actually. Yes I was triggered enough to link a YouTube vid. Someone was triggered enough to go to the trouble of creating a series of memes, believe it or not
|
|
|
Post by foster on Mar 17, 2023 10:45:52 GMT
Ely and his Prestwich have got their own personal Blizzard going on. It's quite romantic actually. Yes I was triggered enough to link a YouTube vid. Someone was triggered enough to go to the trouble of creating a series of memes, believe it or not You think I make memes because I'm triggered That's cute.
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Mar 17, 2023 10:47:50 GMT
Something seems to have 'triggered' a storm. But hasn't someone being triggered subsequently triggered Gawa....? Riddle me that 🤔 Everyone's being a snowflake today! I'm just trying to stay out of the tit for tat. I'm only here for the dopamine rush from the likes. Gonna have to write another essay now fs 😜
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Mar 17, 2023 10:48:55 GMT
Yes I was triggered enough to link a YouTube vid. Someone was triggered enough to go to the trouble of creating a series of memes, believe it or not You think I make memes because I'm triggered That's cute. You've used an arguably weaker excuse to accuse me of the same thing. Cute but a little hypocritical
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Mar 17, 2023 10:49:51 GMT
Least the last hour or so has meant asylum seekers have had a break from the permanently offended. Every cloud and all that.......
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Mar 17, 2023 11:00:54 GMT
But hasn't someone being triggered subsequently triggered Gawa....? Riddle me that 🤔 Yes, but in that, aren't you presuming that gawa is a snowflake? I wouldn't have thought he is, living in the north of Ireland I'm sure he's seen and heard a lot worse things than some people having a chinwag on a messageboard. On social media, it seems that if you respond to a post, you're no longer ‘responding’, apparently you’ve been triggered.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Mar 17, 2023 11:01:03 GMT
I’ve seen people get bans for less. How do you know who gets banned and what for? I've often wondered that.
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on Mar 17, 2023 11:01:46 GMT
Education would be a good start. Would it not? Go on... Without wasting 7 hours writing you a full curriculum... A few decent foundations could be laid by simply: - Not telling children from the age of 4 that they are racist, unconsciously biased or that Britain is the root of all evil or indeed, encouraging children to question their gender. - Politicians that are willing to define a woman. (Sunak has made great progress on this one, Starmer not so much) and are not afraid to emphasise the importance of family. - Having politicians that prioritise our own domestic economy over a knees up in Davos or Egypt to appease the Macron's and Trudeau's of the world in a feable attempt to achieve a totally unachievable goal. - A higher education system that allows freedom of thought to flourish and doesn't de-platform or cancel individuals who question or indeed oppose what they are being told. - A health service that can be reformed, criticised and not deified. - A state broadcaster that doesn't just pump out a bunch of weak, spineless news and questioning that allows unelected government scientists and government to plunge us into totally unnecessary lockdowns and a set of authoritarian state mandates. Something the nation is still trying to recover from. - Public AND private sector organisations focusing on acquiring and investing in talent based on ability and work ethic over race, gender and any other shit box ticking quota exercise. Loads more but wouldn't the above be a nice start? 😉
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Mar 17, 2023 11:02:10 GMT
But hasn't someone being triggered subsequently triggered Gawa....? Riddle me that 🤔 Everyone's being a snowflake today! I'm just trying to stay out of the tit for tat. I'm only here for the dopamine rush from the likes. Gonna have to write another essay now fs 😜 Don't bother fella. It's golden.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Mar 17, 2023 11:03:04 GMT
I’ve seen people get bans for less. How do you know who gets banned and what for? I've often wondered that.You've got too much free time mate.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Mar 17, 2023 11:05:13 GMT
Without wasting 7 hours writing you a full curriculum... A few decent foundations could be laid by simply: - Not telling children from the age of 4 that they are racist, unconsciously biased or that Britain is the root of all evil or indeed, encouraging children to question their gender. - Politicians that are willing to define a woman. (Sunak has made great progress on this one, Starmer not so much) and are not afraid to emphasise the importance of family. - Having politicians that prioritise our own domestic economy over a knees up in Davos or Egypt to appease the Macron's and Trudeau's of the world in a feable attempt to achieve a totally unachievable goal. - A higher education system that allows freedom of thought to flourish and doesn't de-platform or cancel individuals who question or indeed oppose what they are being told. - A health service that can be reformed, criticised and not deified. - A state broadcaster that doesn't just pump out a bunch of weak, spineless news and questioning that allows unelected government scientists and government to plunge us into totally unnecessary lockdowns and a set of authoritarian state mandates. Something the nation is still trying to recover from. - Public AND private sector organisations focusing on acquiring and investing in talent based on ability and work ethic over race, gender and any other shit box ticking quota exercise. Loads more but wouldn't the above be a nice start? 😉 What is an example of the kind of state broadcaster you'd like to see, Nick?
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Mar 17, 2023 11:07:02 GMT
Without wasting 7 hours writing you a full curriculum... A few decent foundations could be laid by simply: - Not telling children from the age of 4 that they are racist, unconsciously biased or that Britain is the root of all evil or indeed, encouraging children to question their gender. - Politicians that are willing to define a woman. (Sunak has made great progress on this one, Starmer not so much) and are not afraid to emphasise the importance of family. - Having politicians that prioritise our own domestic economy over a knees up in Davos or Egypt to appease the Macron's and Trudeau's of the world in a feable attempt to achieve a totally unachievable goal. - A higher education system that allows freedom of thought to flourish and doesn't de-platform or cancel individuals who question or indeed oppose what they are being told. - A health service that can be reformed, criticised and not deified. - A state broadcaster that doesn't just pump out a bunch of weak, spineless news and questioning that allows unelected government scientists and government to plunge us into totally unnecessary lockdowns and a set of authoritarian state mandates. Something the nation is still trying to recover from. - Public AND private sector organisations focusing on acquiring and investing in talent based on ability and work ethic over race, gender and any other shit box ticking quota exercise. Loads more but wouldn't the above be a nice start? 😉
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Mar 17, 2023 11:10:22 GMT
How do you know who gets banned and what for? I've often wondered that.You've got too much free time mate. Lol, I've been on here about 25 years, I wonder about it when someone gets accused of being back from a ban or whatever, I'm thinking 'how d'you know?'. I mean with Crapslinger et al it was blatantly obvious but there's probably been others. It was badly worded to be fair, it reads a bit like I'm asking Cobham how he knows when it was more retrospective really. 'often' might be a bit hyperbolic too, in my defence I thought the board might be a bit desensitised to that by now
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on Mar 17, 2023 11:12:34 GMT
Without wasting 7 hours writing you a full curriculum... A few decent foundations could be laid by simply: - Not telling children from the age of 4 that they are racist, unconsciously biased or that Britain is the root of all evil or indeed, encouraging children to question their gender. - Politicians that are willing to define a woman. (Sunak has made great progress on this one, Starmer not so much) and are not afraid to emphasise the importance of family. - Having politicians that prioritise our own domestic economy over a knees up in Davos or Egypt to appease the Macron's and Trudeau's of the world in a feable attempt to achieve a totally unachievable goal. - A higher education system that allows freedom of thought to flourish and doesn't de-platform or cancel individuals who question or indeed oppose what they are being told. - A health service that can be reformed, criticised and not deified. - A state broadcaster that doesn't just pump out a bunch of weak, spineless news and questioning that allows unelected government scientists and government to plunge us into totally unnecessary lockdowns and a set of authoritarian state mandates. Something the nation is still trying to recover from. - Public AND private sector organisations focusing on acquiring and investing in talent based on ability and work ethic over race, gender and any other shit box ticking quota exercise. Loads more but wouldn't the above be a nice start? 😉 What is an example of the kind of state broadcaster you'd like to see, Nick? One that gives honest, accurate news without an agenda that offers honest, challenging questions to those in power.
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Mar 17, 2023 11:13:07 GMT
I’ve seen people get bans for less. It's okay mate. I doubt he's man enough to recognise the difference between banter and the C-bomb. Humour is subjective I guess. I mean questioning my manhood that's as low as it can go but it was most definitely meant as "bantz". If I get a ban I can always contact the Toby Young Free Speech Union and tell anyone who'll listen how I've been cancelled I guess?
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Mar 17, 2023 11:14:27 GMT
Without wasting 7 hours writing you a full curriculum... A few decent foundations could be laid by simply: - Not telling children from the age of 4 that they are racist, unconsciously biased or that Britain is the root of all evil or indeed, encouraging children to question their gender. - Politicians that are willing to define a woman. (Sunak has made great progress on this one, Starmer not so much) and are not afraid to emphasise the importance of family. - Having politicians that prioritise our own domestic economy over a knees up in Davos or Egypt to appease the Macron's and Trudeau's of the world in a feable attempt to achieve a totally unachievable goal. - A higher education system that allows freedom of thought to flourish and doesn't de-platform or cancel individuals who question or indeed oppose what they are being told. - A health service that can be reformed, criticised and not deified. - A state broadcaster that doesn't just pump out a bunch of weak, spineless news and questioning that allows unelected government scientists and government to plunge us into totally unnecessary lockdowns and a set of authoritarian state mandates. Something the nation is still trying to recover from. - Public AND private sector organisations focusing on acquiring and investing in talent based on ability and work ethic over race, gender and any other shit box ticking quota exercise. Loads more but wouldn't the above be a nice start? 😉 Surprisingly (to me) I agree with some of that, but most of it's just political ranting isn't it? There's very little about 'education' just 2 bits in fact, both highly questionable.
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on Mar 17, 2023 11:14:35 GMT
Without wasting 7 hours writing you a full curriculum... A few decent foundations could be laid by simply: - Not telling children from the age of 4 that they are racist, unconsciously biased or that Britain is the root of all evil or indeed, encouraging children to question their gender. - Politicians that are willing to define a woman. (Sunak has made great progress on this one, Starmer not so much) and are not afraid to emphasise the importance of family. - Having politicians that prioritise our own domestic economy over a knees up in Davos or Egypt to appease the Macron's and Trudeau's of the world in a feable attempt to achieve a totally unachievable goal. - A higher education system that allows freedom of thought to flourish and doesn't de-platform or cancel individuals who question or indeed oppose what they are being told. - A health service that can be reformed, criticised and not deified. - A state broadcaster that doesn't just pump out a bunch of weak, spineless news and questioning that allows unelected government scientists and government to plunge us into totally unnecessary lockdowns and a set of authoritarian state mandates. Something the nation is still trying to recover from. - Public AND private sector organisations focusing on acquiring and investing in talent based on ability and work ethic over race, gender and any other shit box ticking quota exercise. Loads more but wouldn't the above be a nice start? 😉 Sorry you're right - Children as young as 7. www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/01/29/children-aged-seven-taught-not-racially-innocent/
|
|
|
Post by foster on Mar 17, 2023 11:15:08 GMT
It's okay mate. I doubt he's man enough to recognise the difference between banter and the C-bomb. Humour is subjective I guess. I mean questioning my manhood that's as low as it can go but it was most definitely meant as "bantz". If I get a ban I can always contact the Toby Young Free Speech Union and tell anyone who'll listen how I've been cancelled I guess? Apology accepted mate.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Mar 17, 2023 11:18:10 GMT
What is an example of the kind of state broadcaster you'd like to see, Nick? One that gives honest, accurate news without an agenda that offers honest, challenging questions to those in power. And your go-to example of such a broadcaster, one that we should be looking to recreate?
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Mar 17, 2023 11:20:00 GMT
it's behind a paywall so i have no idea what it says?
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on Mar 17, 2023 11:22:59 GMT
One that gives honest, accurate news without an agenda that offers honest, challenging questions to those in power. And your go-to example of such a broadcaster, one that we should be looking to recreate? There are plenty of good state broadcasters around the world and plenty of bad ones. The BBC has been fantastic at times over the years and only in recent years has it fell into this current trap of wokery, censorship and offering an opinion that goes above and beyond what it is there for. Both the right and the left have actually suffered from this in recent years. The idea of a state broadcaster is good. Should it be censoring our screens from stuff that they deem "offensive" or funded in the way it currently is by the British taxpayer, offering salaries to presenters of over £1 million per annum - That is a different story and needs to be addressed if it wants to survive.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Mar 17, 2023 11:25:54 GMT
And your go-to example of such a broadcaster, one that we should be looking to recreate? There are plenty of good state broadcasters around the world and plenty of bad ones. The BBC has been fantastic at times over the years and only in recent years has it fell into this current trap of wokery, censorship and offering an opinion that goes above and beyond what it is there for. Both the right and the left have actually suffered from this in recent years. The idea of a state broadcaster is good. Should it be censoring our screens from stuff that they deem "offensive" or funded in the way it currently is by the British taxpayer, offering salaries to presenters of over £1 million per annum - That is a different story and needs to be addressed if it wants to survive. I don't disagree that there's a lot that the BBC are getting wrong at the moment and things they seem to have lost sight of. That said I think it's incredibly difficult to think of a broadcaster, state or otherwise, who is currently offering the kind of things you're calling for across the board or even getting close to it.
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on Mar 17, 2023 11:49:33 GMT
There are plenty of good state broadcasters around the world and plenty of bad ones. The BBC has been fantastic at times over the years and only in recent years has it fell into this current trap of wokery, censorship and offering an opinion that goes above and beyond what it is there for. Both the right and the left have actually suffered from this in recent years. The idea of a state broadcaster is good. Should it be censoring our screens from stuff that they deem "offensive" or funded in the way it currently is by the British taxpayer, offering salaries to presenters of over £1 million per annum - That is a different story and needs to be addressed if it wants to survive. I don't disagree that there's a lot that the BBC are getting wrong at the moment and things they seem to have lost sight of. That said I think it's incredibly difficult to think of a broadcaster, state or otherwise, who is currently offering the kind of things you're calling for across the board or even getting close to it. But the BBC have been exceptional at times in years gone by so there is no excuse for them getting so many things wrong. Despite the obvious ownership flaws I always find Rai TV in Italy very good and incredibly balanced. (I lived in Italy and still stream a lot of their content).
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Mar 17, 2023 11:55:24 GMT
I don't disagree that there's a lot that the BBC are getting wrong at the moment and things they seem to have lost sight of. That said I think it's incredibly difficult to think of a broadcaster, state or otherwise, who is currently offering the kind of things you're calling for across the board or even getting close to it. But the BBC have been exceptional at times in years gone by so there is no excuse for them getting so many things wrong. Despite the obvious ownership flaws I always find Rai TV in Italy very good and incredibly balanced. (I lived in Italy and still stream a lot of their content). Cheers - I was actually reading about Rai recently and their own Lineker-style scandal where it appeared that a musician was censured for criticising far-right politicians during a concert. The similarities were interesting.
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on Mar 17, 2023 12:00:24 GMT
But the BBC have been exceptional at times in years gone by so there is no excuse for them getting so many things wrong. Despite the obvious ownership flaws I always find Rai TV in Italy very good and incredibly balanced. (I lived in Italy and still stream a lot of their content). Cheers - I was actually reading about Rai recently and their own Lineker-style scandal where it appeared that a musician was censured for criticising far-right politicians during a concert. The similarities were interesting. Didn't know that tbh. I love the morning talk show "Agora". So refreshing to see a political talk show that includes representatives on a daily basis from minority parties on a mainstream channel.
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Mar 17, 2023 12:16:19 GMT
The whole debate is pointless without statistics. So let's get some actual numbers: In the main I agree with a lot in your post, just a few clarifications This shows the total visas provided for entry to the UK for a variety of reasons. - 1.17 million visas issued. - Just under 16k people who could be targeted by this new policy were granted a visa as an asylum seeker. - So of the 1.17 million immigrants, this targets less than 2% - Refugees make up 0.6% of the UK population (this includes Ukrainians etc..) - Out of foreign born nationals they make up 5% of the population. Here are my thoughts right now: - How much immigration is too much immigration? While we can be supportive of it, no matter how left wing you are, you need to have a limit. I think that is generally true but sometimes a world event occurs like Ukraine where you have to respond differently not just instead- I think because we often debate the specific bills presented to us that it sort of distracts from debating the actual topic. The Bills are the only tangible things to discuss Borders Bill, Rwanda Bill, Illegal Immigration Bill. As you say each are designed to fix 2% of Immigration Even on Governments own admission they break international law so they are very specifically designed to debate I won't even speculate as to why- The argument about there being no legal route for asylum seekers and how the bill breaks humans rights conventions I agree with. Agreed - The argument that allowing asylum seekers to apply for visas through embassy's I don't think is the best one. This makes it more accessible and puts further demand on the system as I imagine there'd be even more applications. If the only way of making a claim is by reaching these shores doesn't it incentivise the Boat Crossings - The whole France 500 million thing is a bit daft. They already paid them a few hundred and we've had more people arrive than when we paid them nothing. Like how do they judge it? France could say they're doing it but in reality it's one copper on a bike by himself lol I too am sceptical if this will make any material difference. The French Coastline is 150KM and the deal is for an increase of 40% more Gendarme. Its about as futile as trying to patrol the Border in your neck of the woods- There are aspects of the asylum process I don't understand enough. So for instance something like 72% of applications were granted last year. But say I throw away all my documents and give me name and a story, does that get me in? How easy is it to manipulate? These are details which are important. I agree not an easy task but other Countries seem to get through the processing much quicker. I don't know if this is because of efficiency, numbers employed or a will to do it. There can be very good reasons why people dispose of their documents sometimes not. The UK Government told the Afghans they couldn't evacuate to try and get to a safe Country If you are trying to get out of Afghanistan the last thing you need is paperwork that incriminates you in the eyes of the Mullahs. 85% of Afghan refugees are in neighbouring Pakistan 1.3M Iran 750K If any of these people like interpreters etc have a legitimate claim to Asylum in UK the only way they can make it is by getting here- I think that immigration can certainly see short term growth and have immediate benefits to the economy. It is a provable fact that immigration increases GDP in total. It is also the case that GDP per Capita decreases due to extra numbers- BUT without investment in more dentists, hospitals, police, transport, housing then ultimately it does add further demand on our already strained services over the long term. This is where the rubber hits the road and is why people have genuine and legitimate concerns, but it's not the 2% Boat Crossers that are creating most of the problem. The problem they are creating is being housed in Limbo without a legal right to work with too much time on their hands. Process their claims if failed send back, if granted begin to contribute. But beside that we need to do more than build 40 imaginary Hospitals or import more Doctors, Dentists and Nurses from Third World Countries because we are not training enough of our own- With that said only 20% of last years immigrants were refugees (and 2% were ones which would be targeted under this policy). So in terms of strains on services, it is the other areas of immigration adding more. Agreed So to conclude: It's just a pointless culture war. We're literally debating over a bill which will never get through the commons and Lords and would never pass legally. And the worst thing about it is that it only targets 2% of those who were granted an immigration visa last year. So it solves the square root of fuck all. So I wonder why successive Bills have been floated Instead of getting 500k students in to study who ultimately use up housing, NHS etc.. Why not cut that number in half. Because the huge uptake in Students have primarily come from India to replace EU Students who now don't come in the main This was agreed as a precursor to getting a Trade Deal and is very lucrative to University's
At the same time a Cap has been placed on places for UK Students I.e. Doctors, Dentists, Nurses etc because Government won't fund it. Many Univercities could increase capacity but are restricted. John Allan Chairman of Tesco who's involved in Education in Cumbria The other 250k places can go to people like young mothers, veterans, older people looking to retrain, ex prisoners, kids coming out of care, young people. Invest in people in the country through different schemes, particularly vulnerable ones and get them qualified and using their qualifications in this country rather than getting them and using them elsewhere. Can't argue with that, but it takes Political will and won't happen overnight The work visas for a variety of jobs. We will always need this and this is the type of immigration which helps the eocnomy. But alongside that have a long term stategys to get more people qualified in these areas. Agreed And for asylum seekers. Alot of these people are legitimate and here for good reason. I'm supportive of it but I admit that I don't know enough about the process to say with confidence that all criminals get rejected or that the government even knows about all past crimes. And there is very little data online which shows crime stats for the different type of immigrants to be granted visas. As a result of Brexit UK lost access to Schengen Information Systems SIS 11 which issue Europe wide alerts to Police Forces and EuroDac which is the Central European Fingerprint Database
It is widely accepted that the Criminal Gang Lords from Albania have entered UK under Knype's preferred method by Air and with Visas. The Footsoldiers arrive by DingyBut yeah immigration can certainly be beneficial to the country when controlled and done correctly. And as humans we should try to show compassion to those legitimately seeking asylum and try to help where possible. Absolutely
|
|
|
Post by knype on Mar 17, 2023 12:43:33 GMT
Time for someone to call in again maybe? See if it goes a bit better this time? 😊 You know things are going pretty badly for the left in a debate when LBC's James O'brien gets wheeled out as the voice of reason. Does anyone still listen to that cnut ?
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Mar 17, 2023 12:45:11 GMT
The whole debate is pointless without statistics. So let's get some actual numbers: In the main I agree with a lot in your post, just a few clarifications This shows the total visas provided for entry to the UK for a variety of reasons. - 1.17 million visas issued. - Just under 16k people who could be targeted by this new policy were granted a visa as an asylum seeker. - So of the 1.17 million immigrants, this targets less than 2% - Refugees make up 0.6% of the UK population (this includes Ukrainians etc..) - Out of foreign born nationals they make up 5% of the population. Here are my thoughts right now: - How much immigration is too much immigration? While we can be supportive of it, no matter how left wing you are, you need to have a limit. I think that is generally true but sometimes a world event occurs like Ukraine where you have to respond differently not just instead- I think because we often debate the specific bills presented to us that it sort of distracts from debating the actual topic. The Bills are the only tangible things to discuss Borders Bill, Rwanda Bill, Illegal Immigration Bill. As you say each are designed to fix 2% of Immigration Even on Governments own admission they break international law so they are very specifically designed to debate I won't even speculate as to why- The argument about there being no legal route for asylum seekers and how the bill breaks humans rights conventions I agree with. Agreed - The argument that allowing asylum seekers to apply for visas through embassy's I don't think is the best one. This makes it more accessible and puts further demand on the system as I imagine there'd be even more applications. If the only way of making a claim is by reaching these shores doesn't it incentivise the Boat Crossings - The whole France 500 million thing is a bit daft. They already paid them a few hundred and we've had more people arrive than when we paid them nothing. Like how do they judge it? France could say they're doing it but in reality it's one copper on a bike by himself lol I too am sceptical if this will make any material difference. The French Coastline is 150KM and the deal is for an increase of 40% more Gendarme. Its about as futile as trying to patrol the Border in your neck of the woods- There are aspects of the asylum process I don't understand enough. So for instance something like 72% of applications were granted last year. But say I throw away all my documents and give me name and a story, does that get me in? How easy is it to manipulate? These are details which are important. I agree not an easy task but other Countries seem to get through the processing much quicker. I don't know if this is because of efficiency, numbers employed or a will to do it. There can be very good reasons why people dispose of their documents sometimes not. The UK Government told the Afghans they couldn't evacuate to try and get to a safe Country If you are trying to get out of Afghanistan the last thing you need is paperwork that incriminates you in the eyes of the Mullahs. 85% of Afghan refugees are in neighbouring Pakistan 1.3M Iran 750K If any of these people like interpreters etc have a legitimate claim to Asylum in UK the only way they can make it is by getting here- I think that immigration can certainly see short term growth and have immediate benefits to the economy. It is a provable fact that immigration increases GDP in total. It is also the case that GDP per Capita decreases due to extra numbers- BUT without investment in more dentists, hospitals, police, transport, housing then ultimately it does add further demand on our already strained services over the long term. This is where the rubber hits the road and is why people have genuine and legitimate concerns, but it's not the 2% Boat Crossers that are creating most of the problem. The problem they are creating is being housed in Limbo without a legal right to work with too much time on their hands. Process their claims if failed send back, if granted begin to contribute. But beside that we need to do more than build 40 imaginary Hospitals or import more Doctors, Dentists and Nurses from Third World Countries because we are not training enough of our own- With that said only 20% of last years immigrants were refugees (and 2% were ones which would be targeted under this policy). So in terms of strains on services, it is the other areas of immigration adding more. Agreed So to conclude: It's just a pointless culture war. We're literally debating over a bill which will never get through the commons and Lords and would never pass legally. And the worst thing about it is that it only targets 2% of those who were granted an immigration visa last year. So it solves the square root of fuck all. So I wonder why successive Bills have been floated Instead of getting 500k students in to study who ultimately use up housing, NHS etc.. Why not cut that number in half. Because the huge uptake in Students have primarily come from India to replace EU Students who now don't come in the main This was agreed as a precursor to getting a Trade Deal and is very lucrative to University's
At the same time a Cap has been placed on places for UK Students I.e. Doctors, Dentists, Nurses etc because Government won't fund it. Many Univercities could increase capacity but are restricted. John Allan Chairman of Tesco who's involved in Education in Cumbria The other 250k places can go to people like young mothers, veterans, older people looking to retrain, ex prisoners, kids coming out of care, young people. Invest in people in the country through different schemes, particularly vulnerable ones and get them qualified and using their qualifications in this country rather than getting them and using them elsewhere. Can't argue with that, but it takes Political will and won't happen overnight The work visas for a variety of jobs. We will always need this and this is the type of immigration which helps the eocnomy. But alongside that have a long term stategys to get more people qualified in these areas. Agreed And for asylum seekers. Alot of these people are legitimate and here for good reason. I'm supportive of it but I admit that I don't know enough about the process to say with confidence that all criminals get rejected or that the government even knows about all past crimes. And there is very little data online which shows crime stats for the different type of immigrants to be granted visas. As a result of Brexit UK lost access to Schengen Information Systems SIS 11 which issue Europe wide alerts to Police Forces and EuroDac which is the Central European Fingerprint Database
It is widely accepted that the Criminal Gang Lords from Albania have entered UK under Knype's preferred method by Air and with Visas. The Footsoldiers arrive by DingyBut yeah immigration can certainly be beneficial to the country when controlled and done correctly. And as humans we should try to show compassion to those legitimately seeking asylum and try to help where possible. Absolutely Good response. I agree with alot of that. It's just very frustrating to have a government in power which keep pushing out bills which have been developed on the back of a fag packet. The asylum Bill and Rwanda Bill solve very little and the only reason behind them in my eyes is for culture wars rather than fixing issues. Similarly the childcare bill recently announced seems to be estimated to cost around 9 billion by the OBS (is that the body?) whereas the government say it will cost half the amount. But there's a real lack of detail there too. Nursery's are already full and there are less people working in nursery's than before. Where are all the new nursery's and staff which will accommodate all these children going to be? Just feels poorly thought out. And another fantasy bill which will never come intro fruition properly. I'm not a big fan of Starmers Labour but anything is better than the corrupt, incompetent, treachery self serving scum we have at the minute.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Mar 17, 2023 12:56:51 GMT
You know things are going pretty badly for the left in a debate when LBC's James O'brien gets wheeled out as the voice of reason. Does anyone still listen to that cnut ? I don't personally, that was just a clip I saw a while back that amused me A quick Google brought up this article as the first result, it is from a year ago, his listeners 'might' have all deserted him in the meantime www.theguardian.com/media/2022/feb/03/lbcs-james-obrien-overtakes-nick-ferrari-as-radio-audiences-tune-in-later'Meanwhile O’Brien has hit 1.307 million during his 10am-1pm slot, as listeners in their droves tune in to hear his lengthy critiques of Boris Johnson and the Conservatives.' BBC Morning News gets about 1.4 million people watching it apparently. I can't find any figures for GB News, they're probably just being coy
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Mar 17, 2023 12:57:23 GMT
GAWA, OBR costed Governments plan at £4Bn, CBI say to do it properly and make a difference would cost £9Bn
|
|