Do you want to discuss boring politics? (25 Viewers)

Mucca Mad Boys · 2025-06-19T08:07:40+0100

chiefdave said:
Not cherry picking at all. You’re the one doing that.

Your post confirms exactly the point I was making. That when people talk about wanting to copy the danish immigration system what they really mean is pick the parts of it that align with their preferences and ditch the parts that don’t.

What you’re describing is how Denmark allocates social housing which is actually a different policy area to immigration and asylum policies. With respect, you have conflated the two to turn around and say people making reasonable suggests are ‘cherry picking’. Your ‘all in or nothing’ approach to this is odd. You seemingly recognise the impracticality of breaking up ‘ghettos’ because there’s just two many people to distribute over the country.

In all seriousness, what do you object to in the policy areas outlined? The idea that a migrant should financially contribute positive as a condition for remaining is not controversial.

SBT · 2025-06-19T08:16:09+0100

Mucca Mad Boys said:
The idea that a migrant should financially contribute positive as a condition for remaining is not controversial.

Economic tests for arrivals seems reasonable to me. But for remaining?

Call me old fashioned, but I don’t think the government should be able to rescind basic privileges based on whether or not someone is deemed financially “positive”. There by the grace of etc etc.

Brighton Sky Blue · 2025-06-19T08:16:23+0100

Mucca Mad Boys said:
What you’re describing is how Denmark allocates social housing which is actually a different policy area to immigration and asylum policies. With respect, you have conflated the two to turn around and say people making reasonable suggests are ‘cherry picking’. Your ‘all in or nothing’ approach to this is odd. You seemingly recognise the impracticality of breaking up ‘ghettos’ because there’s just two many people to distribute over the country.

In all seriousness, what do you object to in the policy areas outlined? The idea that a migrant should financially contribute positive as a condition for remaining is not controversial.

Immigrants to the UK are already net economic contributors are they not?

chiefdave · 2025-06-19T08:30:21+0100

Mucca Mad Boys said:
What you’re describing is how Denmark allocates social housing which is actually a different policy area to immigration and asylum policies. With respect, you have conflated the two to turn around and say people making reasonable suggests are ‘cherry picking’. Your ‘all in or nothing’ approach to this is odd. You seemingly recognise the impracticality of breaking up ‘ghettos’ because there’s just two many people to distribute over the country.

In all seriousness, what do you object to in the policy areas outlined? The idea that a migrant should financially contribute positive as a condition for remaining is not controversial.

What I’ve described is absolutely part of their immigration policy.

We’ve got people talking about integration, you can’t dismiss policy areas because they aren’t in line with your desires.

If you want a Danish system fine, but if you want to cherry picks part of a system to suit then it’s misleading to say you want to replicate what they have implemented.

‘Financially contribute’ is very vague. We’ve tightened the rules so that people who make a positive net contribution are no longer granted visas by setting a higher threshold. This has decimated some industries, the care sector being a prime example, as they just don’t / won’t pay the wages required to meet the threshold. It was such a disaster an exemption had to be rushed into place. Have much higher do you want to make that threshold?

Although tbh not sure if increasing that threshold is going to resolve the issue of grooming gangs.

fatso · 2025-06-19T08:30:26+0100

Brighton Sky Blue said:
Stop tarring whole communities and there is no argument to be had. Still what it looks like you’re doing even there.

It's 100% an Islamic problem

I can't recall any other organised rape gangs being mentioned, can you?

These particular cases are predominantly Pakistani, but it would appear that all organised rape gangs are muslim.
(I'm happy to be corrected if you can prove otherwise)

Now we all know that not every Muslim is a rapist, and rape is committed by men of all religions and race, but again, in these particular instances it's gangs of Muslims being accused.

It's now come out that some of the girls (as young as 10 apparently) were subject to racist abuse while being raped. And the police knew what was happening and did nothing. And when the local communities took to the streets in anger, they were called far right thugs!!!!

fatso · 2025-06-19T08:30:44+0100

Brighton Sky Blue said:
Immigrants to the UK are already net economic contributors are they not?

No

Brighton Sky Blue · 2025-06-19T08:32:53+0100

chiefdave said:
What I’ve described is absolutely part of their immigration policy.

We’ve got people talking about integration, you can’t dismiss policy areas because they aren’t in line with your desires.

If you want a Danish system fine, but if you want to cherry picks part of a system to suit then it’s misleading to say you want to replicate what they have implemented.

‘Financially contribute’ is very vague. We’ve tightened the rules so that people who make a positive net contribution are no longer granted visas by setting a higher threshold. This has decimated some industries, the care sector being a prime example, as they just don’t / won’t pay the wages required to meet the threshold. It was such a disaster an exemption had to be rushed into place. Have much higher do you want to make that threshold?

Although tbh not sure if increasing that threshold is going to resolve the issue of grooming gangs.

That issue with care workers sums it up. We refuse to pay decent wages and offer decent conditions for a vitally important job, can’t get British people to do the work, then baulk at foreigners coming in to do it instead.

chiefdave · 2025-06-19T08:34:45+0100

SBT said:
Economic tests for arrivals seems reasonable to me. But for remaining?

This already exists to an extent. I’ve worked with people in the past who have wanted to move jobs but can’t even move to the same job with another company under their visa terms. If they had been sacked or made redundant that would be the immediate end of their visa.

The idea that you can remove 2nd, 3rd generation immigrants. British citizens who were born here and most likely lived here all their lives, seems crazy to me. On a practical level alone where are we sending them, not to mention the very high chances each case involves years of legal action.

shmmeee · 2025-06-19T08:51:47+0100

Brighton Sky Blue said:
That issue with care workers sums it up. We refuse to pay decent wages and offer decent conditions for a vitally important job, can’t get British people to do the work, then baulk at foreigners coming in to do it instead.

Got to be honest I hate this “can’t get British workers to do it phrase cos yes that’s because we’ve raised standards of living beyond sleeping ten to a room and eating gruel. Foreigners don’t take these jobs because they’re better people, they take them because they are dirt poor and desperate and often don’t know their legals rights.

Brighton Sky Blue · 2025-06-19T09:02:28+0100

shmmeee said:
Got to be honest I hate this “can’t get British workers to do it phrase cos yes that’s because we’ve raised standards of living beyond sleeping ten to a room and eating gruel. Foreigners don’t take these jobs because they’re better people, they take them because they are dirt poor and desperate and often don’t know their legals rights.

So we agree.

SBT · 2025-06-19T09:05:36+0100

chiefdave said:
This already exists to an extent. I’ve worked with people in the past who have wanted to move jobs but can’t even move to the same job with another company under their visa terms. If they had been sacked or made redundant that would be the immediate end of their visa.

The idea that you can remove 2nd, 3rd generation immigrants. British citizens who were born here and most likely lived here all their lives, seems crazy to me. On a practical level alone where are we sending them, not to mention the very high chances each case involves years of legal action.

Yeah, I’ve had a visa that depended on me remaining employed. Brutal if circumstances change, but I understand the need for a job requirement if it’s part of your arrival to a new country.

Quite another thing if the government can just kick you out because they decide you’re no longer productive enough.

shmmeee · 2025-06-19T09:09:21+0100

Mucca Mad Boys said:
- deport economically unproductive people and criminals

Can’t wait to deport half of Stoke Aldermoor

shmmeee · 2025-06-19T09:09:56+0100

So great we’re talking about immigration: the only topic allowed.

SBT · 2025-06-19T09:12:21+0100

shmmeee said:
Can’t wait to deport half of Stoke Aldermoor

Don’t forget all elderly and disabled people!

shmmeee · 2025-06-19T09:12:34+0100

Mucca Mad Boys said:
In theory, that’s how the system works currently. Your visa can be cancelled if you no longer meet the conditions. In practice, this isn’t working as intended because we have issued way more health & social care visas than roles filled.

In Denmark, non-Danish citizens are barred from all benefits and permanent residency until you have to passed a Public Benefit Test. Which assesses your financial contributions to the state. If you fail this test, the deportation procedures are initiated.

With the NHS being taxpayer funded, I don’t think it would be unreasonable for mandating migrants to have comprehensive private healthcare coverage as a condition of a visa.

The report specifically criticised the authorities for its inaction over fears of being labelled racist and ‘raising community tensions’. By this definition, ethnicity is a central focus of the report.

It mentions that they were non-UK residents and in some cases, asylum seekers rather than second generation immigrants. The perpetrators were mostly new arrivals. If this isn’t a damning failure of the immigration system, what is?

What the report actually says:

Brighton Sky Blue · 2025-06-19T09:13:19+0100

SBT said:
Don’t forget all elderly and disabled people!

and children.

SBT · 2025-06-19T09:14:47+0100

Brighton Sky Blue said:
and children.

I assumed they would be in the workhouse

Mucca Mad Boys · 2025-06-19T09:20:21+0100

Brighton Sky Blue said:
Immigrants to the UK are already net economic contributors are they not?

EEA migrants, yes. Non-EEA migrants, no. This pattern is repeated by all EU countries that monitor this (such as Denmark and the Netherlands).

SBT said:
Economic tests for arrivals seems reasonable to me. But for remaining?

Call me old fashioned, but I don’t think the government should be able to rescind basic privileges based on whether or not someone is deemed financially “positive”. There by the grace of etc etc.

Why is it unreasonable? If you’re a net drain on the exchequer, the British taxpayer shouldn’t be paying for you.

The public benefit test takes place before someone is granted permanent residency and access to welfare. As things stand in the UK, you are granted indefinite leave to remain after 5 years with few conditions. This will have a pretty big impact on the benefits bill from 2026-27 when the ‘Boriswave’ migrants get access to this.

The word ‘rights’ gets thrown around here. But what about an equally important word, ‘responsibilities?’

chiefdave said:
This already exists to an extent. I’ve worked with people in the past who have wanted to move jobs but can’t even move to the same job with another company under their visa terms. If they had been sacked or made redundant that would be the immediate end of their visa.

The idea that you can remove 2nd, 3rd generation immigrants. British citizens who were born here and most likely lived here all their lives, seems crazy to me. On a practical level alone where are we sending them, not to mention the very high chances each case involves years of legal action.

No one has suggested this.

In theory, we have a clear means to deport people. In practice, we struggle to deport people who remain in breach of their visa conditions. Hence the number of people awaiting deportation is a growing list.

rob9872 · 2025-06-19T09:23:49+0100

Such polarised views is part of the problem. The efforts at calling out old people, children etc is no different to the lack of awareness in those who mock with the 'doctors and engineers' line.

Everyone who thinks that immigration is too high, should not be labelled a racist, anyone who welcomes immigration and says that we rely on them to fill our service industry isn't wrong. As usual there is a balance and the truth often lies in the middle ground, but whilst we perpetuate with name-calling and only one agenda, nothing will get resolved.

I'd hope those in charge are beyond the petty squabbling, although having seen a little of the MP's debating I'm not sure they're any better than the SBT'ers who are nailing their colours to a 'side'.

SBT · 2025-06-19T09:26:29+0100

Mucca Mad Boys said:
Why is it unreasonable? If you’re a net drain on the exchequer, the British taxpayer shouldn’t be paying for you.

The word ‘rights’ gets thrown around here. But what about an equally important word, ‘responsibilities?’

I’m sure you would love to argue this for days but clearly you just have a wildly different view about how much control the government should have over our lives, and whether less fortunate people are deserving of any kind of public support.

I hope you stay economically productive.

shmmeee · 2025-06-19T09:30:25+0100

rob9872 said:
Such polarised views is part of the problem. The efforts at calling out old people, children etc is no different to the lack of awareness in those who mock with the 'doctors and engineers' line.

Everyone who thinks that immigration is too high, should not be labelled a racist, anyone who welcomes immigration and says that we rely on them to fill our service industry isn't wrong. As usual there is a balance and the truth often lies in the middle ground, but whilst we perpetuate with name-calling and only one agenda, nothing will get resolved.

I'd hope those in charge are beyond the petty squabbling, although having seen a little of the MP's debating I'm not sure they're any better than the SBT'ers who are nailing their colours to a 'side'.

The problem is the “and so we X” question.

We can agree deportations fell massively under the Tories as did border funding and Brexit opened the floodgates to non EU immigration which is less economically useful.

But it’s fair to then ask what you want to do? We’ve spent a decade following the most extreme voices on this and it’s only got worse. We’ve massively harmed our economy and lost the right to live and work across a continent in the name of this. Every major signatory to the ECHR is talking about reform, returns are up, funding for the border force is up, Boris’s schemes have mostly ended or been shut down.

Yet still it’s all we are allowed to talk about.

mmttww · 2025-06-19T09:30:26+0100

fatso said:
I can't recall any other organised rape gangs...

Rape and sexual abuse of children is not an Islamic problem. You've got a very short memory. At least be consistent with your outrage. Both the Catholic church and Church of England were responsible for systematic abuse that was covered up for decades.

shmmeee · 2025-06-19T09:33:07+0100

To be clear immigration isn’t even mentioned in the Casey report, ethnicity is. So if your answer is to kick em out then you’re likely talking about kicking out British citizens because of their ethnic heritage, not changing immigration law.

shmmeee · 2025-06-19T09:34:04+0100

mmttww said:
Rape and sexual abuse of children is not an Islamic problem. You've got a very short memory. At least be consistent with your outrage. Both the Catholic church and Church of England were responsible for systematic abuse that was covered up for decades.

To be a grooming gang it has to be from the Grooming region of Pakistan. Otherwise it’s just a sparking Pedophile Ring

SBT · 2025-06-19T09:38:59+0100

fatso said:
These particular cases are predominantly Pakistani, but it would appear that all organised rape gangs are muslim.
(I'm happy to be corrected if you can prove otherwise)

No, you’re incorrect. Do a search for Operation Satchel, for example. You could find this stuff in less than two minutes if you actually opened up the report.

Nick · 2025-06-19T09:40:18+0100

SBT said:
I’m sure you would love to argue this for days but clearly you just have a wildly different view about how much control the government should have over our lives, and whether less fortunate people are deserving of any kind of public support.

I hope you stay economically productive.

How is economic productivity defined? This is where the whole immigration thing gets silly.

Situation A - Nurse

Comes to the UK and instantly wants to work, straight into the NHS and provide a service. Yeah, she may be without work at points but she will have been paying UK tax so of course she should get all of the benefits, NHS (obviously), school and all of the good stuff the UK has to offer. She wants to move, work and create a better life for herself and her family.

Situation B -

Couple of examples, people who have no intention of working, will fire out as many kids as they can, demand benefits or just try and defraud

Suspected member of child trafficking gang jailed for £800,000 benefits fraud

• Romanian masterminded fraud targeting state handouts• Crime ring's haul enriched Romanian town of Tandarei

www.theguardian.com

Homeless migrant mum-of-five refuses to live in council house OUTSIDE

A HOMELESS mother of five who refused a state-funded house outside London is taking her battle to the Supreme Court.

www.express.co.uk

It's silly to say "what should we deport a migrant if they are temporarily out of work?" of course not. If somebody has no intention of working ever then of course.

I'd bet 95% (or more) people who have issues with immigration clearly don't have issues with things like a nurse or engineer etc. (of course, there will be some straight up racists, keep britain white type bullshit)

shmmeee · 2025-06-19T09:48:12+0100

Nick said:
How is economic productivity defined? This is where the whole immigration thing gets silly.

Situation A - Nurse

Comes to the UK and instantly wants to work, straight into the NHS and provide a service. Yeah, she may be without work at points but she will have been paying UK tax so of course she should get all of the benefits, NHS (obviously), school and all of the good stuff the UK has to offer. She wants to move, work and create a better life for herself and her family.

Situation B -

Couple of examples, people who have no intention of working, will fire out as many kids as they can, demand benefits or just try and defraud

Suspected member of child trafficking gang jailed for £800,000 benefits fraud

• Romanian masterminded fraud targeting state handouts• Crime ring's haul enriched Romanian town of Tandarei

www.theguardian.com

Homeless migrant mum-of-five refuses to live in council house OUTSIDE

A HOMELESS mother of five who refused a state-funded house outside London is taking her battle to the Supreme Court.

www.express.co.uk

It's silly to say "what should we deport a migrant if they are temporarily out of work?" of course not. If somebody has no intention of working ever then of course.

I'd bet 95% (or more) people who have issues with immigration clearly don't have issues with things like a nurse or engineer etc. (of course, there will be some straight up racists, keep britain white type bullshit)

Second one is a bit of a random pick. It was the case the proved councils should try and find people social housing where they are settled which seems fair enough. And it’s over a decade old.

SBT · 2025-06-19T09:48:20+0100

Nick said:
I'd bet 95% (or more) people who have issues with immigration clearly don't have issues with things like a nurse.

A hard-working immigrant nurse whose child also happens to have a rare condition that requires regular medical care would probably also be a net drain on the taxpayer. Out they go?

Meanwhile an Albanian drug dealer makes a killing on selling cheap coke in Earlsdon, goes out and buys himself a new BMW with the profits, and the taxman banks a major cut of the proceeds. Economic productivity ftw?

rob9872 · 2025-06-19T09:53:38+0100

SBT said:
A hard-working immigrant nurse whose child also happens to have a rare condition that requires regular medical care would probably also be a net drain on the taxpayer. Out they go?

Meanwhile an Albanian drug dealer makes a killing on selling cheap coke in Earlsdon, goes out and buys himself a new BMW with the profits, and the taxman banks a major cut of the proceeds. Economic productivity ftw?

FFS!

Brighton Sky Blue · 2025-06-19T09:53:54+0100

SBT said:
A hard-working immigrant nurse whose child also happens to have a rare condition that requires regular medical care would probably also be a net drain on the taxpayer. Out they go?

Meanwhile an Albanian drug dealer makes a killing on selling cheap coke in Earlsdon, goes out and buys himself a new BMW with the profits, and the taxman banks a major cut of the proceeds. Economic productivity ftw?

Don’t understand why we can’t put them all on ships to Australia like the good old days.

tisza · 2025-06-19T09:57:13+0100

Brighton Sky Blue said:
In practice what does this mean? If an immigrant loses their job the clock starts ticking?

Most EU countries (if not all) have rules saying 3rd country nationals have 60 days to get a new job or your visas are cancelled.

shmmeee · 2025-06-19T09:57:14+0100

Questions for those with this as their main concern:

Would you ever accept just changing who can come in and deportations for serious crimes, or are you at the point where you want people who are here legally and law abiding to be removed?

shmmeee · 2025-06-19T09:58:02+0100

Brighton Sky Blue said:
In practice what does this mean? If an immigrant loses their job the clock starts ticking?

This is fairly normal around the world tbf. It leads to a huge imbalance between employer and employee but it’s common.

Nick · 2025-06-19T09:59:40+0100

shmmeee said:
Questions for those with this as their main concern:

Would you ever accept just changing who can come in and deportations for serious crimes, or are you at the point where you want people who are here legally and law abiding to be removed?

Surely both overlap? ie. Changing who can come in also defines who is here legally.

Deportation for crime is common sense and should be non-negotiable. No second chances, fuck around and find out.

rob9872 · 2025-06-19T10:03:14+0100

Nick said:
Surely both overlap? ie. Changing who can come in also defines who is here legally.

Deportation for crime is common sense and should be non-negotiable. No second chances, fuck around and find out.

Would certainly free up some space in jails to keep our own pricks in for longer!

Do you want to discuss boring politics? (25 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency