Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
immigration the facts
Sex God
Quote by Kaznkev
i am saddend by the fact that those who in other threads bring up immigration so widely have nothing to say about this report.i hoped it might lead to an interesting discussion of fears versus facts.
but thanks to those who took the time to look at the link.
But the truth is a big scary thing and half baked bollocks is much more accurate really I mean can you prove figures really exist can you ???
As immigration has become a hot topic in the UK, here are some key claims and some facts drawn from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the UK Labour Force Survey, and the London School of Economics' Centre for Economic Performance. Compiled by The Scotsman.
CLAIM: Immigration into Britain has risen.
True. There were about 60,000 economic migrants a year in the early 1980s, and there are now about 150,000 a year. Immigrants were 7 per cent of the UK workforce in 1984 - that had risen to 10.5 per cent last year.
CLAIM: Britain has a particularly high rate of immigration.
False. About 8.5 per cent of the UK population was born abroad. In Germany, the figure is 12.5 per cent; in France, 10 per cent; and in the Netherlands, 10.1 per cent.
CLAIM: Immigrants are from poor countries.
False. Last year, the top five "sender" countries, who provided some 30 per cent of all immigrants to the UK, were India, South Africa, Poland, the United States and Australia.
CLAIM: Immigrants tend to be low-skilled.
Mixed. Fully 20 per cent of immigrants in 2004 had degrees, compared with 17 per cent of the UK-born population. But 19 per cent of immigrants had no qualifications, compared with 15 per cent of UK-born workers.
CLAIM: Immigration is an economic "problem".
Probably not. Most economists argue that immigration is sign of a healthy economy creating jobs and attracting migrants. And since immigrants are, on average, younger than UK-born people, they do not contribute to Britain's pensions crisis.
CLAIM: Immigrants place a burden on Britain's public services.
Reliable data on the use of services are hard to come by. One solid figure is that 27 per cent of health professionals in the UK were born abroad, suggesting that the NHS at least benefits from immigration.
CLAIM: Immigration is an important issue all across the UK.
Actually, immigrants are not evenly spread across the UK. South-east England draws almost half of all immigrants, despite making up barely 20 per cent of the UK population. Scotland attracts a disproportionately small number of immigrants, and needs more to offset a fast-falling population.
CLAIM: There are thousands of illegal immigrants at large in Britain.
True, but no one knows the exact number. The government refuses to give an estimate, although one leaked Home Office document suggested up to 500,000. Migrationwatch UK, an anti-immigration think-tank, estimates 250,000.
Immigration News
I have had a quick read through the link and it actually says:
Immigrants are arriving from many more countries than in the past. Poland, India and Pakistan are now the countries that contribute the biggest proportion of new arrivals, followed by South Africa and the United States
The Stats showing that the the largest proportion of immigrants are from the US and Ireland are from 1985.
I could not see where it said that the UK had lower rates of immigration than Australia, Germany and France, it does say:
The UK has a lower share of immigrants in its total population (10.2%) than Australia(25%), Germany (12.9%) or the United States (13.6%).
which is not the same thing!
Is the L.S.E right wing?
Immigrants are arriving from many more countries than in the past. Poland, India and Pakistan are now the countries that contribute the biggest proportion of new arrivals, followed by South Africa and the United States
The Stats showing that the the largest proportion of immigrants are from the US and Ireland are from 1985.
I could not see where it said that the UK had lower rates of immigration than Australia, Germany and France, it does say:
The UK has a lower share of immigrants in its total population (10.2%) than Australia(25%), Germany (12.9%) or the United States (13.6%).
which is not the same thing!
Is the L.S.E right wing?
My basic position is that there has been, and probably still is, too much immigration in the UK. The 60% of working age population in Brent is frightening. The mention by JTS of 27% of healthcare professionals in NHS, is so too.
The position with Australia (25% immigrants) sounds bad, but the situation is different there. The country is just so big (a continent in itself) with such a sparse population to start with that they have room for and probably need people.
Plim :sad:
The position with Australia (25% immigrants) sounds bad, but the situation is different there. The country is just so big (a continent in itself) with such a sparse population to start with that they have room for and probably need people.
Plim :sad:
Sex God
Quote by flower411
My basic position is that there has been, and probably still is, too much immigration in the UK. The 60% of working age population in Brent is frightening. The mention by JTS of 27% of healthcare professionals in NHS, is so too.
The position with Australia (25% immigrants) sounds bad, but the situation is different there. The country is just so big (a continent in itself) with such a sparse population to start with that they have room for and probably need people.
Plim :sad:
Why is that frightening ?
I suppose it was frightening when the Romans moved in.
And when the Angles, Saxons and Jutes moved in.
And when the Vikings moved in.
And when the Normans moved in.
And when the West Indians moved in, and the Indians, and now the Eastern Europeans.
And all the time before the Romans, and continuously since, that people have been coming here.
The fact is we are a great place to come to (for loads of reasons) and early on it was a matter of us being conquered. Now it is a peacful arrival. But whatever the circumstances, people come here.
I doubt that ANYONE posting one here can claim to be un-enriched (or if you prefer, untainted) by foreign blood in their family tree. The simple fact people come here isn't the problem. Problems arise when it is handled badly, when they are forced into ghettos or are encouraged to form their own rather than joining the rest of us. When counties that have a higher influx than others aren't given the finance or practical support to managae it effectively.
Quote by Kaznkev
i am saddend by the fact that those who in other threads bring up immigration so widely have nothing to say about this report.i hoped it might lead to an interesting discussion of fears versus facts.
but thanks to those who took the time to look at the link.
But the truth is a big scary thing and half baked bollocks is much more accurate really I mean can you prove figures really exist can you ???
Can i prove anything exists,perhaps we are just shadows on the cave wall.
Max the lse economics department is generally monetarist and spent a long time worshipping Friedman,Klapholtz who did the introductory courses back in the day used to argue that the only justifiable state intervention in anything was opera.
Mind it was always hard to argue about personal freedom with a man with a belsen tatoo on his arm.
This report however was produced by a policy unit,funded by a number of different organisations,
"The Centre current annual funding of annual funding comes mainly from the Economic and Social Research Council (50 per cent), from the Anglo German Foundation, Department for Education and Skills, Esmée Fairbairn Foundation, Princes Trust, Rowntree Trust, the European Commission, Bank of England and from contributions from members of its Senior Business Forum."
Apologies if i misunderstood some of the stats, i have to take off my shoes to count to 20,but the overall argument i did understand ,and it paints a very different picture to the one posted regularly about immigration.
Dont confuse the students with the school.
The report obviously does not include illegal immigration, which could be anywhere from the government's admission of 500,000 (JTS' post above) to the figure of 900,000 claimed by Nick Glegg in the PM Debate last Thursday. So potentially, as many immigrants could be excluded from the report as its including. Surely it can't really be claimed to be a definitive report on immigration in that case?
Quote by flower411
My basic position is that there has been, and probably still is, too much immigration in the UK. The 60% of working age population in Brent is frightening. The mention by JTS of 27% of healthcare professionals in NHS, is so too.
The position with Australia (25% immigrants) sounds bad, but the situation is different there. The country is just so big (a continent in itself) with such a sparse population to start with that they have room for and probably need people.
Plim :sad:
Why is that frightening ?
Re Brent, surely to have approaching half, let alone over half of a British borough occupied by people of a non-domestic culture is wrong (in my view) - travel and essential work on a global basis are to be encouraged, but merging of cultures takes time to jel and works better if spread over a reasonable time span. Remember, the UK was stable in this respect up till the end of the 1930s, but we took in Jews, Poles, Ukraines and similar as refugees during WWII and then, far too quickly, we took in ex Empire/Commonwealth people (West Indies, India and so on) from 1948, which caused troubles because there was't time to organise things properly and the day to day systems hadn't even digested the Jews, Poles etc. into our society properly - in fact this didn't happen till the end of the 1960s / early 70s.
Now the 27% in the NHS is a different thing - in fact it is an absolute disgrace that we can't plan and train enough of our own people to do these jobs - a sad reflection on what we have become.
Plim :sad: :sad:
Sex God
Quote by duncanlondon
i suppose all those statistics, pie charts and such are valuable, but immigration has been going on here since the ice age rolled back to reveal the land beneath it.
we still have royal family (stands up to god bless the queen like a true royalist i am )
some things immigration can`t affect
as for figures well the last 13 years are one of them great mystery`s of who`s counting and no one cares (every man for himself )
Quote by Plimboy
My basic position is that there has been, and probably still is, too much immigration in the UK. The 60% of working age population in Brent is frightening. The mention by JTS of 27% of healthcare professionals in NHS, is so too.
The position with Australia (25% immigrants) sounds bad, but the situation is different there. The country is just so big (a continent in itself) with such a sparse population to start with that they have room for and probably need people.
Plim :sad:
Why is that frightening ?
Re Brent, surely to have approaching half, let alone over half of a British borough occupied by people of a non-domestic culture is wrong (in my view) - travel and essential work on a global basis are to be encouraged, but merging of cultures takes time to jel and works better if spread over a reasonable time span. Remember, the UK was stable in this respect up till the end of the 1930s, but we took in Jews, Poles, Ukraines and similar as refugees during WWII and then, far too quickly, we took in ex Empire/Commonwealth people (West Indies, India and so on) from 1948, which caused troubles because there was't time to organise things properly and the day to day systems hadn't even digested the Jews, Poles etc. into our society properly - in fact this didn't happen till the end of the 1960s / early 70s.
Now the 27% in the NHS is a different thing - in fact it is an absolute disgrace that we can't plan and train enough of our own people to do these jobs - a sad reflection on what we have become.
Plim :sad: :sad:
Does that rant include the Poles who made up 10% of the pilot roster at Fighter Command during 1940?
Quote by Plimboy
Now the 27% in the NHS is a different thing - in fact it is an absolute disgrace that we can't plan and train enough of our own people to do these jobs - a sad reflection on what we have become.
Plim :sad: :sad:
But that is the story of Britain.
Lack of training and education has been the story for many decades.
Sex God
Quote by JTS
Now the 27% in the NHS is a different thing - in fact it is an absolute disgrace that we can't plan and train enough of our own people to do these jobs - a sad reflection on what we have become.
Plim :sad: :sad:
But that is the story of Britain.
Lack of training and education has been the story for many decades.
shakes head and wonders ::all those wasted disability allowances and long term unemployed
to many bright people doing nothing such a shame
Quote by awayman
My basic position is that there has been, and probably still is, too much immigration in the UK. The 60% of working age population in Brent is frightening. The mention by JTS of 27% of healthcare professionals in NHS, is so too.
The position with Australia (25% immigrants) sounds bad, but the situation is different there. The country is just so big (a continent in itself) with such a sparse population to start with that they have room for and probably need people.
Plim :sad:
Why is that frightening ?
Re Brent, surely to have approaching half, let alone over half of a British borough occupied by people of a non-domestic culture is wrong (in my view) - travel and essential work on a global basis are to be encouraged, but merging of cultures takes time to jel and works better if spread over a reasonable time span. Remember, the UK was stable in this respect up till the end of the 1930s, but we took in Jews, Poles, Ukraines and similar as refugees during WWII and then, far too quickly, we took in ex Empire/Commonwealth people (West Indies, India and so on) from 1948, which caused troubles because there was't time to organise things properly and the day to day systems hadn't even digested the Jews, Poles etc. into our society properly - in fact this didn't happen till the end of the 1960s / early 70s.
Now the 27% in the NHS is a different thing - in fact it is an absolute disgrace that we can't plan and train enough of our own people to do these jobs - a sad reflection on what we have become.
Plim :sad: :sad:
Does that rant include the Poles who made up 10% of the pilot roster at Fighter Command during 1940?
Oh dear, someone not read the message properly. Poles fighting in the War has nothing to do with the issue. I said that the Poles who came to live in the UK were not accepted by the British people till into the late 60s and 70s - I didn't say that was either right or wrong (my personal feelings do not matter in this context). The fact is they weren't accepted earlier, I should know as I grew up in those days in an area with a Polish and Jewish content. Hope that makes it clear.
Oh, by the way, you have overlooked that the Poles no doubt fought in 1940 as you state, because the British had gone into the War late 1939 to support Polland
Plim
Quote by Kaznkev
"Remember, the UK was stable in this respect up till the end of the 1930s"
What utter total bollocks.
i have to second that,from the Russian horsemen brought by the Romans to the Yemmeni Arabs who gave the folk of shields the nickname sandancers the idea of Britain as a homogenous place which saw its first non white face 50 years ago is an ugly lie.
Again, I did not say that there was no immigration in this country prior to WWII - I said that the country was stable (in an immigration context) The flood of refugees during WWII and the influx of Commonwealth people after the war was at a much higher rate and there was not time for the cultures to be absorbed by the British people.
Plim
Quote by Plimboy
My basic position is that there has been, and probably still is, too much immigration in the UK. The 60% of working age population in Brent is frightening. The mention by JTS of 27% of healthcare professionals in NHS, is so too.
The position with Australia (25% immigrants) sounds bad, but the situation is different there. The country is just so big (a continent in itself) with such a sparse population to start with that they have room for and probably need people.
Plim :sad:
Why is that frightening ?
Re Brent, surely to have approaching half, let alone over half of a British borough occupied by people of a non-domestic culture is wrong (in my view) - travel and essential work on a global basis are to be encouraged, but merging of cultures takes time to jel and works better if spread over a reasonable time span. Remember, the UK was stable in this respect up till the end of the 1930s, but we took in Jews, Poles, Ukraines and similar as refugees during WWII and then, far too quickly, we took in ex Empire/Commonwealth people (West Indies, India and so on) from 1948, which caused troubles because there was't time to organise things properly and the day to day systems hadn't even digested the Jews, Poles etc. into our society properly - in fact this didn't happen till the end of the 1960s / early 70s.
Now the 27% in the NHS is a different thing - in fact it is an absolute disgrace that we can't plan and train enough of our own people to do these jobs - a sad reflection on what we have become.
Plim :sad: :sad:
Does that rant include the Poles who made up 10% of the pilot roster at Fighter Command during 1940?
Oh dear, someone not read the message properly. Poles fighting in the War has nothing to do with the issue. I said that the Poles who came to live in the UK were not accepted by the British people till into the late 60s and 70s - I didn't say that was either right or wrong (my personal feelings do not matter in this context). The fact is they weren't accepted earlier, I should know as I grew up in those days in an area with a Polish and Jewish content. Hope that makes it clear.
Oh, by the way, you have overlooked that the Poles no doubt fought in 1940 as you state, because the British had gone into the War late 1939 to support Polland
Plim
I actually think it has an enormous amount to do with the issue. No-one moaned about problems integrating the Poles when they fought on our side in World War two. I have no memory of the Polish families who lived in my home town not being accepted in the 1970s.
The idea that we only took in Jews in world war two as refugees is a glib, superficial generalization - Britain's Jewish community is much older than that, and much more interesting. Same with the Yemeni and Somali communities in some of our major cities. Same with the Italian communities that made such a striking contribution to our towns and cities from the start of the twentieth century. Same with the German communities that made such an impact on the commercial life of cities like Manchester and the chemical and steel industries in the North East.
I don't understand the need some people have to deny integration. To do so on the basis of historically incontinent claims that have only a limited evidential basis is to leave yourself wide open to suggestions of bias.
" Faced with such a clear expression of public opinion, repeated in poll after poll, and with the practical consequences of mass immigration highlighted in the Panorama programme, it is surely the government's duty to take firm measures on immigration policy to ensure that the population increase now projected does not take place. Instead, they seem to be in a state of denial ".
Sex God
irony is so wasted here
but thanks for the history lesson all the same
but thanks for the history lesson all the same
