Again, this thread has a real habit of not reading things properly - which is almost certainly deliberate.
You are using the middle section to join your side (which is that you essentially want as much immigration as possible), when in reality they are essentially a 'don't mind' answer. You could put them either way.
I said: More people in the UK want less immigration than to increase it. That's fact. There are more people in that survey wanting to decrease immigration than increase it.
You can listen to those people, or you can ignore them. But this is why you keep losing election after election.
I'm not sure it is less of a concern that it was 5 or 10 years ago, it might be that other things have gotten in the way. The fact remains however, more people want less immigration than more - that graph literally proves it. As I said - the middle ground answer is essentially 'don't mind' - I was highlighting how stupid it would be for me to say they want less, the same way it would be for you and others to say they want more.
Compare the top two and the bottom two, that's where my point is. That's where the point of the country is. To just ignore that over and over again fuels the extreme anti-immigrant sentiment, and withdraws support for positive immigration, or for refugee compassion. It is also a massive reason why people don't vote in the direction of many on this thread, and also why the tories themselves are playing off it (with probably very little intention of doing anything seriously about it).
These attacks on the legal system are dangerous and resonate of autocratic regimes. An independent judiciary is fundamental to a functioning democracy. Bravamen is a disgrace. Apparently sent out an email complaining about lefty lawyers and civil servants.
And yet some people think Starmer is as bad as this and equally dishonest.
I thought the point was asylum seekers were entitled to rights they're denied elsewhere (such as a fair legal system!) rather than we take those rights away too, anyway.People with no legal knowledge or expertise calling those who do ‘lefties’ for calling out legal flaws in new policies. It’s like GB News is running the country.
I thought the point was asylum seekers were entitled to rights they're denied elsewhere (such as a fair legal system!) rather than we take those rights away too, anyway.
Except I didn’t. Making things up. Very adult of you.Tony you advised someone who wanted to work in Europe for two weeks the best advice would be to sign up to Ancestry.com and try and see if you have an Irish relative
Very adult of you
Be back to packing them into refrigerated lorries before you know it, like the good old days!I see they have rallied behind the slogan ‘Stop the boats’. Not stop the human trafficking, just the boats.
Next they’ll be hiring Coventrian to keep watch at Dover with his rifle
They’re no different to Meloni’s party in Italy, apart from they’re doing stuff they’d like to do but wouldn’t get away with here.I see they have rallied behind the slogan ‘Stop the boats’. Not stop the human trafficking, just the boats.
Next they’ll be hiring Coventrian to keep watch at Dover with his rifle
What really gets me is that it’s the children and grandchildren of immigrants doing this and then using that fact as some sort of justification that it makes it okay. Maybe I’m of a different mindset but the we’re in pull up the ladder attitude doesn’t make it okay, in my mind it makes it worse.Frankly it wouldn't matter if the world approved of these policies, they'd still be immoral and cruel.
I see they have rallied behind the slogan ‘Stop the boats’. Not stop the human trafficking, just the boats.
Next they’ll be hiring Coventrian to keep watch at Dover with his rifle
His language has been truly shocking over this issue though - was during his leadership campaign too.It's like everything with them, it's all grandstanding a political theatre.
To be fair to Sunak, I don't think it's something he buys into but he knows he has to be careful opposing the more rabid elements of the party, its anabsolute joke.
It's like everything with them, it's all grandstanding a political theatre.
To be fair to Sunak, I don't think it's something he buys into but he knows he has to be careful opposing the more rabid elements of the party, its anabsolute joke.
People with no legal knowledge or expertise calling those who do ‘lefties’ for calling out legal flaws in new policies. It’s like GB News is running the country.
They’re no different to Meloni’s party in Italy, apart from they’re doing stuff they’d like to do but wouldn’t get away with here.
"Tofu eating wokerati"
"Lefty Lawyer"
"Captain Crasheroony Snoozefest"
Who do they think this stuff is landing with?
Its embarrassing
And thanks to their 2019 intakes the rabid element is bigger and more rabid than its ever been.It's like everything with them, it's all grandstanding a political theatre.
To be fair to Sunak, I don't think it's something he buys into but he knows he has to be careful opposing the more rabid elements of the party, its anabsolute joke.
The point is that I don't think the majority of people are anti immigration where as you seem to be suggesting they are.
Forgetting all that, do you support this government policy then?
That graph clearly shows more think we need more immigration, think we've got it right, or have gone meh, than those who think we have too much! Why is this an arguement?!?
because he's thick
True-it’s about people who don’t have the freedom of choice being treated like law breakers. He is an economic migrant to another country-but he argues against too many people doing this.
That's not what you said. You said, " It just means that people think we have too much immigration." Well a small proportion of people do according to your evidence!The point I was making was that more people think we need less than we currently do, than think we need more.
So why isn't that what the tories are focusing on?
No they’re not a neutral “don’t mind”. They’re a “happy as it is” Which is qualitatively different. These people could be just as upset with immigration going down as much as up so they act in opposition to both claims “people want more immigration” and “people want less immigration”. Most people are happy with the immigration we have.
We have a cost of living crisis, and we just had a pandemic. We also had brexit. As I said, other things have got in the way making it less of a priority. It doesn't suddenly mean the entire country is an open border advocator.It is.
Forwhatever reason the referendum has a massive effect on sentiment towards immigration here.
View attachment 28662
Come on he's not an "economic migrant" in the same sense is he?True-it’s about people who don’t have the freedom of choice being treated like law breakers. He is an economic migrant to another country-but he argues against too many people doing this.
That's not what you said. You said, " It just means that people think we have too much immigration." Well a small proportion of people do according to your evidence!
No. You posted a graph which had absolutely nothing to do with what I was saying. The leading question in your graph said 'on a scale of 0-10, has immigration had a positive or negative effect on Britain'. You said I was in a minority of an opinion, despite saying openly that I think migration has a good effect on Britain for the most part, but there has been a lot of it, and some people think it is too much.
I have also given my thoughts on the policy, and think there are better ways they should do it, and that it is most likely a publicity campaign. I have just maintained that something needs to be done about the current situation. Please read again.
It isn't. The point I was making was that more people think we need less than we currently do, than think we need more. The graph literally says this, no matter which way the left leaning consensus on this forum try to twist it. 'Meh' doesn't mean they want more or less, despite you trying to grab that section and lean it towards your argument. There are a higher percentage of people that feel strongly towards there being too much, than strongly think we need more. It's absolute fact.
That's so funny and ironic, I'm not even going to bother trying to counter argue you. You probably couldn't read it anyway.
You've posted three things in my direction today, all of which have been false and also lacked any kind of common sense. In fact, they've mostly been really childish comments which aren't a reflection of what I've said either. I thought you may try and debate, and make some decent points, especially being a teacher that should be able to consciously put their views across and engage like an adult.
Come on he's not an "economic migrant" in the same sense is he?
I don't think he took a boat and rocked up on the Dutch coast and went off seeking work.
We have a lot of people employed here who obtain work visas and then have Home Office approval.
Have I really just heard the following at PMQs?!
“Graphic lessons on oral sex, ‘how to choke your partner safely’, and 72 genders. This is what passes as relationships and sec education in British schools.”
What the actual fuckery?
yeah but it is nonsense trotted out yet again by one of the tories most likely to need a new job soonHave I really just heard the following at PMQs?!
“Graphic lessons on oral sex, ‘how to choke your partner safely’, and 72 genders. This is what passes as relationships and sec education in British schools.”
What the actual fuckery?
His net argument is the same-too many immigrants is bad. Unless he actually means that immigration from ‘good’ countries is fine but too many fleeing from somewhere unsafe isn’t. We can go down that road if you want
It is not the same at all - economic migrants would apply through other channels for work and attain a Visa - sorry its not the same however many times you say it
Goes back to entirely what government wants us to conflate, and surely there should be no debate that a policy that criminalises people for being tortured is not a good policy!It is because he was going on about immigration as a whole.
thick as mince
Goes back to entirely what government wants us to conflate, and surely there should be no debate that a policy that criminalises people for being tortured is not a good policy!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?