Customer smashes SIX display TVs in shop
 

On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 00:44:52 +0100, Bill Wright wrote:
it's indisputable that at least twenty milllion out of the 70 million
that will live here in 2050 will be here as a result of sucessive
governments' idiotic immigration policies.
Why are they idiotic?

If the currently resident population is not producing enough children
to provide enough workers and tax payers to maintain the infrastructure
and industry and to pay for the future health care and pensions of the
elderly, were are the people going to come from, other than through
immigration?

If it were not for immigration, would not the inner cities of England be
even more depopulated that they already are?

Customer smashes SIX display TVs in shop
 

"J G Miller" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 00:38:33 +0100, Bill Wright wrote:
But I do feel some sadness that the status quo is to be
replaced by an alien culture.
The status quo always changes. Change is inevitable.

I fail to see how you can claim that an alien culture is going to
take over. Immigration will always occur and the host nation always
tends to adapt and adopt to the cultural influx, and hopefully the
better elements thereof.


Absolute twaddle, you're talking of thousands over decades, and then
overwhelmingly white European Christians with needed skills, not millions of
people of every race religion and major cultural differences from every
corner of the third world expected to be assimilated in the space of 50
years.

Customer smashes SIX display TVs in shop
 

On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 16:17:44 +0100, Cary Cliter wrote:
Absolute twaddle, you're talking of thousands over decades, and then
overwhelmingly white European Christians with needed skills
I do not recall that the Angles, Saxons, or Jutes when they landed in
England as being Christian, unlike the nominal regional of the Celtic
people at that time.

So why do you apparently have a problem with eg the predominantly
nominally Christian skilled people from the Caribbean whom Enoch Powell
invited to come and settle in England during the 1950s to help out in the
NHS and public transit system?

A probolem with the level of melanin in the skin perhaps?

Customer smashes SIX display TVs in shop
 

"J G Miller" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 00:38:33 +0100, Bill Wright wrote:
But I do feel some sadness that the status quo is to be
replaced by an alien culture.
The status quo always changes. Change is inevitable.

I fail to see how you can claim that an alien culture is going to
take over. Immigration will always occur and the host nation always
tends to adapt and adopt to the cultural influx, and hopefully the
better elements thereof.

I think it's mainly a matter of numbers. There's no problem -- and often a
lot of benefit -- from immigration when the number of immigrants of any
particular coherent group is manageable. They are assimilated and absorbed,
and give the indigenous population a little something. That's fine -- look
at the culture we've absorbed from the Jews for instance. But the total
number of people in the UK at present who originate in S Asia or the Indian
sub-continent is orders of magnitude higher than any previous wave of
immigration.

The demographic predictions tell us that the number of these people will
increase greatly over the next fifty years.

Unlike any previous immigrant group this one has a significant element that
is anti-democratic and anti-west. These people want to change Britain
radically.

The culture of many of these people is radically different from that of the
UK's indigenous population. It isn't a matter of making small cultural
adjustments, it's a matter of either agreeing to differ or having a
confrontation.

If you don't find these facts alarming you are blind. I am not just alarmed
for me. I am alarmed for the peace-loving law-abiding hard working people
who still form the majority of Britain's Asian population. If you talk to
good British Asians about this, as I do quite regularly, you will find that
many of them are quite despondent about the future, and are strongly against
further immigration.

Incidentally, we are all members of minorities of one sort or another. I am
a member of at least four.

Bill


One only has to study a little history of England from the 16th to 19th
century to see how English culture changed due to contact with the rest
of the world.

An Elizabethan would have regarded Victorian culture as foreign.

Was Victorian culture any less English, despite its strong influence from
Germany, than Elizabethan culture?

Furthermore, English culture today is probably more influenced by USA
culture than from any other source.

Do you protest the cultural imperialism of the USA?

The only realistic way to prevent cultural change and maintain racial
purity is to adopt a similar policy to that of the People's Democratic
Republic of Korea and to try and seal the borders, but even for them,
they do not have an impermeable frontier with the People's Republic of
China.

Customer smashes SIX display TVs in shop
 

"J G Miller" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 16:17:44 +0100, Cary Cliter wrote:
Absolute twaddle, you're talking of thousands over decades, and then
overwhelmingly white European Christians with needed skills
I do not recall that the Angles, Saxons, or Jutes when they landed in
England as being Christian, unlike the nominal regional of the Celtic
people at that time.

No, and if I'd been a Celt at the time I would have been pretty ****ed off.
That's the point.
No-one wants their country invading. Another example is Clive's India. If
I'd been an Indian at the time I would have been violently anti-British. If
I'd been a Redskin in America I would have fought the invading whiteman like
buggery. There's nothing special about my stance, historically. Like all
other indigenous people I don't like invaders.


So why do you apparently have a problem with eg the predominantly
nominally Christian skilled people from the Caribbean whom Enoch Powell
invited to come and settle in England during the 1950s to help out in the
NHS and public transit system?

A probolem with the level of melanin in the skin perhaps?

Hang on. Who has a problem with these people? I don't, except maybe I wish
they'd bring their kids up a bit better so they didn't go round stabbing
each other. That's a reasonable viewpoint isn't it?

Bill

Customer smashes SIX display TVs in shop
 

"J G Miller" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 16:17:44 +0100, Cary Cliter wrote:
Absolute twaddle, you're talking of thousands over decades, and then
overwhelmingly white European Christians with needed skills
I do not recall that the Angles, Saxons, or Jutes when they landed in
England as being Christian, unlike the nominal regional of the Celtic
people at that time.

So why do you apparently have a problem with eg the predominantly
nominally Christian skilled people from the Caribbean whom Enoch Powell
invited to come and settle in England during the 1950s to help out in the
NHS and public transit system?

A probolem with the level of melanin in the skin perhaps?


A feeble reply totally avoiding my argument that postwar immigration is a
totally different ball game to anything that's ever happened to these
crowded islands at any time in their previous history, and then the only
kind of response you can muster is by just stopping a tad short of invoking
Godwin's law, not bad.

BTW try reading the recent report by a House of Lords Select Committee on
Economic Affairs on their conclusion of the contributory impact that
immigration makes to this country.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldeconaf/82/82.pdf

Customer smashes SIX display TVs in shop
 

"J G Miller" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 00:44:52 +0100, Bill Wright wrote:
it's indisputable that at least twenty milllion out of the 70 million
that will live here in 2050 will be here as a result of sucessive
governments' idiotic immigration policies.
Why are they idiotic?

If the currently resident population is not producing enough children
to provide enough workers and tax payers to maintain the infrastructure
and industry and to pay for the future health care and pensions of the
elderly, were are the people going to come from, other than through
immigration?

If it were not for immigration, would not the inner cities of England be
even more depopulated that they already are?




Of course in the 'real' world large numbers of immigrants and their families
will themselves become unemployed, old, sick and the recipients of welfare
which will require expensive NHS nursing facilities costing billions, so how
do we solve that one eh?. oh I get it we can import a few million more of
the world's dispossessed to look after them, that is of course until exactly
the same fate befalls them, the vicious circle continuing and increasing ad
infinitum until eventually the whole thing becomes totally unsustainable.

Also any reasonably 'sensible' government has to factor into the equation
that at some time within the next 30 years for any variety of reasons, from
global warming (for whatever reason).. oil depletion.. an expected world
population increase of 50 per cent.. major political and social unrest in
strategically vitally important parts of the world, that the economic
miracle we've all taken for granted in the postwar years could very simply
vaporises into thin air, how then do you suppose that 'any' government is
going to generate sufficient funding to look after all of these extra
millions and their offspring without there being an inevitable breakdown in
social cohesion resulting in major civil unrest?

Customer smashes SIX display TVs in shop
 

On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 18:51:36 +0100, Bill Wright wrote:
No, and if I'd been a Celt at the time I would have been pretty ****ed
off. That's the point.

Agreed, but the Celts were pretty upset when the Romans invaded in 43 AD
were they not?

Yet 400 plus years later, when the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes send over
their expeditionary forces, what do the Celts do?

They send a letter to Rome asking Rome to send back some of the
"occupationary forces" to defend them.

So obviously the British Celts became accustomed to the benefits of
having been invaded, despite their earlier resentment, but when they
could not get Roman aid, they then turned to the Saxons themselves,
hiring Hengist and Horsa as mercenaries to protect them from the invaders.

One should also not forget that
(1) some of the Celtic peoples had at one time invaded Rome themselves
390 BC (according to Livy) or in 387/386 BC (according to Polybius).
(2) the Celts themselves invaded Britain; they were not indigenous people.

There's nothing special about my stance, historically. Like all
other indigenous people I don't like invaders.

The difference today however is one of personal mobility, rather than
tribal mobility. Are you really trying to suggest that some tribes in
for example Pakistan are sending over their people to England to
subjugate the populace of eg Leicester?

And the policy of the multinational corporations is one of selling off
English industry to the "invaders'" folks back home viz Jaguar to Tata
Motors of India and MG and Rover to the Nanjing and Shanghai auto
corporations, so even if the "invaders" do not arrive in person, they are
buying up the country anyways.

So why do you use the emotive term invader to refer to immigrants?

Hang on. Who has a problem with these people?

That question was directed at Cary Cliter, the poster to whom
I was replying, not yourself.

I don't, except maybe I wish they'd bring their kids up a bit better
so they didn't go round stabbing each other.
That is something which all parents have a responsibility to prevent.

That's a reasonable viewpoint isn't it?
No disagreement on that point.

Customer smashes SIX display TVs in shop
 

On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 18:57:35 +0100, Cary Cliter wrote:
BTW try reading the recent report by a House of Lords Select Committee
on Economic Affairs on their conclusion of the contributory impact that
immigration makes to this country.

And is this what upsets you most, from Page 19

QUOTE
The average earnings of immigrants have been higher than that of UK-born
persons since the early 1990s
UNQUOTE

Customer smashes SIX display TVs in shop
 

"J G Miller" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 18:57:35 +0100, Cary Cliter wrote:
BTW try reading the recent report by a House of Lords Select Committee
on Economic Affairs on their conclusion of the contributory impact that
immigration makes to this country.

And is this what upsets you most, from Page 19

QUOTE
The average earnings of have been higher than that of UK-born
persons since the early 1990s
UNQUOTE


Why should that upset me?. IMV it simply means that we have a government who
despite loud noises to the contrary is perfectly prepared to turn a blind
eye to the circa 2.7 million people on incapacity benefit, many of whom no
doubt are more than able bodied enough to the same jobs that are now being
done with immigrant labour.
Just look at what happened to labour MP Frank Field when he was asked by
Blair to 'think the unthinkable', so little wonder that immigrants are only
too willing to step in and take many of the jobs of what 'could and should'
be being done by our own people.

I think that the overall picture of the benefits of immigrant workers is
more succinctly summed up by the BBC's version of the same House of Lords
Select Committee report.
"On public finances the committee takes issue with the idea that immigration
has been a net benefit because of tax contributions from workers. It says
there is no evidence that migrant workers will help defuse the "pensions
time bomb". It also suggests there are greater pressures on public services
such as health and education."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7325606.stm

I have absolutely no problems with people coming here to do jobs that many
of our own people are too bone idle to do and in doing so can earn an honest
crust which enables them to send good money back to their families at home.

However that being said unlike many of our politicians and people (I assume)
like yourself, I can actually see further than the end of my nose, and if
people were coming here on the basis of work permits (in the same way that
thousands of British citizens working overseas are perfectly happy to
accept) which would cease and they would have to automatically return to
their country of origin if say something like the worst scenario of the
economy going into meltdown occurred and there was therefore absolutely no
work available.

I mean, if I'm perfectly prepared to pay Bill the going rate to come and
sort my aerial system out, I don't expect him to turn up and move in with
his entire family and move in with me!