Current Affairs EU In or Out

[peteblue]

Just because most people don’t want it doesn’t mean you have to agree with it or consider it to not have xenophobic roots.
It’s more a question of why people don’t want ‘mass’ immigration

Then it should be easy for you to say why you actually want ‘mass’ immigration....

 

[JimmyJeffers]

Then it should be easy for you to say why you actually want ‘mass’ immigration....

It’s a pretty complex subject, not gonna lie, but in my opinion, the movement of people is about as close to natural human behaviour as you can get.
Mass migrations have happened throughout history and have (arguably of course) made societies better for it.
The problem is the argument always ends up boiling to such tropes as ‘we’re full, they’re coming to claim benefits, they don’t integrate (except when they try to integrate with our women), they don’t contribute, they want to take us over,’ etc etc.
We have ended up dehumanising people searching for a better life. When this starts happening, we can enter very dangerous waters

 

[peteblue]

It’s a pretty complex subject, not gonna lie, but in my opinion, the movement of people is about as close to natural human behaviour as you can get.
Mass migrations have happened throughout history and have (arguably of course) made societies better for it.
The problem is the argument always ends up boiling to such tropes as ‘we’re full, they’re coming to claim benefits, they don’t integrate (except when they try to integrate with our women), they don’t contribute, they want to take us over,’ etc etc.
We have ended up dehumanising people searching for a better life. When this starts happening, we can enter very dangerous waters

I am all in favour of migration, just not mass migration nor uncontrolled immigration. Unless the likes of Russia, Canada or Australia with their humongous land mass wanted huge areas populated then ‘mass’ migration provides more problems than solutions.....

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Think it's about time you accepted that most people in this country don't want mass immigration

I don't dispute it. I dispute their reasons for not wanting it, because nearly always the actual reality doesn't match what they think is the reality. Or maybe you think ignorance is a good way to proceed?

 

[JimmyJeffers]

I am all in favour of migration, just not mass migration nor uncontrolled immigration. Unless the likes of Russia, Canada or Australia with their humongous land mass wanted huge areas populated then ‘mass’ migration provides more problems than solutions.....

Think there’s plenty of space to be honest. Just requires creative thinking.
I agree it can cause problems, especially if the narrative ends up being hijacked by right wing grifters. With hindsight, perhaps there should have been tighter controls previously as immigration has allowed individuals to scapegoat people and further nefarious agendas. Brexit almost certainly wouldn’t have happened either. If it wasn’t immigrants would have been someone else though.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Then it should be easy for you to say why you actually want ‘mass’ immigration....

A few reasons off the top of my head:

1) It's one of the most basic human rights we have
2) It's an economic boon worth approximately $78 trillion globally
3) It greatly enriches the world culturally
4) It improves science and innovation by creating a greater cross-fertilization of ideas
5) It improves the economy as migrants are disproportionately likely to create their own businesses
6) It improves cross-border trade, especially between the migrant's homeland and their adopted home
7) It reduces crime

There are probably more, but they should do you for now.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

You keep saying that, but in reality, only specific practices are detrimental, some beneficial, just like the other areas of farming, unfortunately, the West has gone almost all-out on an intensive pollutant concentrating disease ridden monocultural disaster.

It was my understanding that cattle farming was harmful due to the feed required (and the energy and specifically water required to grow it), the land that's cleared to both grow that feed and graze the animal, and the cow's farts.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Think there’s plenty of space to be honest. Just requires creative thinking.
I agree it can cause problems, especially if the narrative ends up being hijacked by right wing grifters. With hindsight, perhaps there should have been tighter controls previously as immigration has allowed individuals to scapegoat people and further nefarious agendas. Brexit almost certainly wouldn’t have happened either. If it wasn’t immigrants would have been someone else though.

It seems sadly commonplace around the world that those who are most opposed to immigration live in areas with few immigrants. It's the idea of immigration that seems to upset them rather than the reality of immigrants.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Our farmers don't because they are banned from using it and on "bloody" the assumption we were happy to prevent this “profit making” making drug being used by our own farmers since 1989, it hardly seams the right thing now to allow imports from farmers who use it. Not a level "bloody" playing field is it?

All I'm asking for is the grounds on which they're banned from using it. All you've provided thus far is a study from 1999 that says it's probably carcinogenic but we don't have enough data to say for sure, nor how harmful it is. If that was the strength of our evidence-driven policy making then all of the vaccines would be permanently banned because they carry a risk of blood clots.

 

[peteblue]

Think there’s plenty of space to be honest. Just requires creative thinking.
I agree it can cause problems, especially if the narrative ends up being hijacked by right wing grifters. With hindsight, perhaps there should have been tighter controls previously as immigration has allowed individuals to scapegoat people and further nefarious agendas. Brexit almost certainly wouldn’t have happened either. If it wasn’t immigrants would have been someone else though.

Theres loads of room around the planet. Argentina has 45 M people occupying 1million square miles so 45 people per square mile, however England has 56M people occupying just 50K square miles so 1,120 people per square mile. It’s crazy.....

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Theres loads of room around the planet. Argentina has 45 M people occupying 1million square miles so 45 people per square mile, however England has 56M people occupying just 50K square miles so 1,120 people per square mile. It’s crazy.....

My borough of London has 17,000 people per square mile Pete. Just saying like.

 

[peteblue]

A few reasons off the top of my head:

1) It's one of the most basic human rights we have
2) It's an economic boon worth approximately $78 trillion globally
3) It greatly enriches the world culturally
4) It improves science and innovation by creating a greater cross-fertilization of ideas
5) It improves the economy as migrants are disproportionately likely to create their own businesses
6) It improves cross-border trade, especially between the migrant's homeland and their adopted home
7) It reduces crime

There are probably more, but they should do you for now.

I totally agree with that regarding migration, and have said so before. But what you have not shown are any benefits of ‘mass’ migration ......

 

[peteblue]

My borough of London has 17,000 people per square mile Pete. Just saying like.

Could it take say another 17,000 people per square mile ? And if so could you list the benefits.....

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Could it take say another 17,000 people per square mile ? And if so could you list the benefits.....

I believe Paris is more densely populated than London, so probably, yes. I'm sure there are parts of Seoul and Tokyo that are considerably more densely populated. For instance, Nakano has 20,000 people per square km. The benefits are probably in the eye of the beholder, but given how many people live in these areas there is clearly an attraction. I love my borough and all that it provides.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

I totally agree with that regarding migration, and have said so before. But what you have not shown are any benefits of ‘mass’ migration ......

Well firstly, that's a bit of a false question as what exactly is defined as "mass" migration? Secondly, the multi-trillion dollar economic boost is for open borders, so is very much mass migration. Thirdly, I notice you haven't replied to my previous post giving you concrete evidence that unchecked migration does not cause an increase in crime, as you previously thought.