Jump to content
  • Sign Up!

    Join our friendly community of music lovers and be part of the fun 😎

news & politics:discussion


zahidf

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, kalifire said:

If there is an economic drain, it's not because of the numbers of asylum seekers (which make up a tiny proportion of new arrivals in Britain), it's because the system is incapable of processing their claims efficiently. That said, around 75% of asylum claims are granted protection early on.

Since you disagree, I'd be interested to read the official sources and statistics which substantiate your claims. Please do share.


https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/the-fiscal-impact-of-immigration-in-the-uk/

Actually it depends.

Here meta studies are generally showing that migration from outside of Europe has a net fiscal cost.

I know that there is also a lot of diversity in net fiscal contribution between groups here in Sweden too. And thats part of the integration challenge - in particular for certain groups of people of overseas origin for whom females never enter the workforce and they have lots of kids- in that case the average welfare spend is relatively high and the average tax receipt is relatively low.

Then again, if those kids are successfully integrated themselves then over several generations I guess the initial decision to accept their parents as migrants eventually pays dividends.

But then there is also evidence that high immigration to a locality leads to higher property prices in that locality. Then there is also evidence that rising property prices suppresses birth rates (because people are priced out of growing their families).

Point being - the economics of migration is complex.

Edited by mattiloy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

Cry me a river.  Them and millions of others around the world.  The reality is we take who we want and need when we want them.  Unfettered migration was never a thing in this country.

Justin Timberlake entered the chat?

We have obligations, as a developed country. Obligations you and the Tories would like to ignore. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Barry Fish said:

The Rwanda thing is a bit embarrassing really but it does call out the "asylum seekers" for what they mostly are.  If you was genuinely fleeing persecution you would just want to be safe which Rwanda would offer.  The reality is a vast chunk of them are just economic migrants who will be a drain on our system.  

And there it is!

Just as I suspected, no surprise really.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Crazyfool01 said:

that famed safe haven of ...... Rwanda 

not that good at detaining immigrants: they've let all three home secretary's out to come back here.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just heard that one of the councils Which helps fund the charity I volunteer for will be removing their funding, meaning the charity can't deliver it's services (now part of the NHS services) so that's a healthcare downgrade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mattiloy said:


Not long until we’re in hung parliament territory 😁


Maybe Starmer really is playing 4D chess. Maybe he really wants PR and is deliberately trying to squeeze the Labour vote to ensure a hung parliament. A bit conspiratorial but what else can explain how sh*t he is?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, steviewevie said:

Gone off PR a bit recently. We'd just end up with Farage as PM.


Isnt that whats gonna happen anyway when he rejoins to Tory party?

First past the post encourages extremism by making people feel like they have no voice.

I’d rather have farage as PM leading a far right party on 20% with his wings clipped by a coalition than farage as PM with a tory majority and carte blanche to do what he likes.

The Sverige Democrats propping up the Swedish govt here is preferable to a Trump, Bolsonaro, Milei situation.

What I hear is that the far right is on the rise, liberals arent so enamoured with democracy anymore. I heard some centrist podcast praising the French system lately basically because Macron was able to win and has a lot of executive power. But what happens when Le Pen wins next time and has the same executive power?

Rigging democracy to give you the result you want only works for so long. So short sighted. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, mattiloy said:


Isnt that whats gonna happen anyway when he rejoins to Tory party?

First past the post encourages extremism by making people feel like they have no voice.

I’d rather have farage as PM leading a far right party on 20% with his wings clipped by a coalition than farage as PM with a tory majority and carte blanche to do what he likes.

The Sverige Democrats propping up the Swedish govt here is preferable to a Trump, Bolsonaro, Milei situation.

What I hear is that the far right is on the rise, liberals arent so enamoured with democracy anymore. I heard some centrist podcast praising the French system lately basically because Macron was able to win and has a lot of executive power. But what happens when Le Pen wins next time and has the same executive power?

Rigging democracy to give you the result you want only works for so long. So short sighted. 

it's the direction...Wilders can say stuff like he'll ban mosques and have zero immigration and then win...and maybe he can't get what he wants in coalition, but people will see that and think woo...there's something in this...and then some one else comes along and says we'll kick out all muslims and bring back hanging and they win etc etc...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, squirrelarmy said:

Hope you’re all watching Spaffer at the enquiry. To say he is out of his depth is an understatement 

I'm suprised he found the venue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...