Current Affairs The Conservative Party

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ghost Rider said:
Nobody is right Bruce when it comes to opinions. Expect you believe you are so you feel the need to talk down to others thinking it makes you sound clever.

Funny how every time someone challenges you it turns into childish insults because you can't stand being challenged.
Click to expand...
I'm more than happy to be challenged but reserve the right to assign credibility to the challenge. You asked certain questions, and I said that they're all answered in the books I suggested, which between them spend several hundred pages and use dozens of studies and an awful lot of data to get to the facts of migration rather than succumb to the ill-informed rhetoric that so often drives this debate.

You might also use https://www.plutobooks.com/9780745341071/border-nation/ or https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-63557-2 if it's a topic that really interests you and you want to learn more about it. It seems a wholly reasonable position to say that Leah Cowen or Bryan Caplan explain things in much more depth, and quite probably a lot more clarity, than I ever could on this forum.

I try my best to go where the evidence takes me, and where migration is concerned, the overwhelming evidence is that more migration is better. It's better for us, it's better for them, it's even better for the sending country.
 
Ghost Rider said:
Books on open border policy everywhere. Which is a massive deflection when it was in relation to only this country.

Unless a good few million people uproot and go to a different country to 'make space' which then becomes purely fantasy based rather than realistic.

But again it circles back to it being completely right and not devoid of any drawbacks. So saying 'theres some books' doesn't deviate from it being someone's opinion on how THEY think it would work rather than actual evidence that proves it does.

Ergo opinion , not right or wrong, plenty out there that disagrees with an open border policy, especially when it's reliant on a fantasy element.
Click to expand...
Bill Kerr doesn't go as far as advocating open borders, but he does nonetheless believe that more migration is better. Indeed, he was central in petitioning the Trump administration for just that via his role at Harvard, and I think about 100 other universities joined the call.

Amazon product ASIN 1503605027
And incidentally, all of the sources I've shared with you are heavily reliant either on first-person research of migration in border areas or peer reviewed research on the topic. They're not just shooting the breeze. If you like, I've personally written around 50 articles on refugees on various matters, and again, they're all based upon peer reviewed research. I'm happy to share.
 
Bruce Wayne said:
I'm more than happy to be challenged but reserve the right to assign credibility to the challenge. You asked certain questions, and I said that they're all answered in the books I suggested, which between them spend several hundred pages and use dozens of studies and an awful lot of data to get to the facts of migration rather than succumb to the ill-informed rhetoric that so often drives this debate.

You might also use https://www.plutobooks.com/9780745341071/border-nation/ or https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-63557-2 if it's a topic that really interests you and you want to learn more about it. It seems a wholly reasonable position to say that Leah Cowen or Bryan Caplan explain things in much more depth, and quite probably a lot more clarity, than I ever could on this forum.

I try my best to go where the evidence takes me, and where migration is concerned, the overwhelming evidence is that more migration is better. It's better for us, it's better for them, it's even better for the sending country.
Click to expand...

(I think he'd prefer a YouTube video or a podcast)
 
Ghost Rider said:
That's not how discussion works.

But more to the point I challenged someone on their views and that was likened to denying evolution and now because I personally aren't going to read hand picked books written on the subject I must be stupid.

It's pathetic, and a complete pompus attitude to put accross.



Let me ask you, disagreeing with an open border idea, what's wrong with that? We know that's not an isolated thought process and there is plenty out there that disagrees with it or doesn't think it's viable so what is wrong with holding that idea? After all, it generates potential negatives such as

1. Too many unskilled workers settling in one country

2. Welfare issues

3. Loss of national identity

Not to mention the impact of losing high skill workers in a country. Or the idea that it wouldn't be an open door policy so therefore immigration rules would then have to apply putting you right back in the same position you are in now.

It loses value to a country, being able to go wherever you want doesn't benefit a country in any way, unlike countries like Australia who require worth for immigration. You lose all of that.

It's a completely utopia style argument based in fantasy no matter how strongly you think about it.

So what is wrong with disagreeing with that notion? Rather than dismissive and insulting comparisons and childish name calling. Reading and learning your own viewpoint doesn't validate it any more, it's simply reading the like minded thoughts and creating an echo chamber mindset.

Open border policy isn't the answer to life's problems. It's generates its own problems as other academics have also written about.
Click to expand...
Tell you what. I'm 99% sure I've got the pdf of Caplan's book lying around somewhere. It's written in comic book style so is extremely accessible. PM me your email address and I'll set up a dropbox or something.
 
Ghost Rider said:
That's not how discussion works.

But more to the point I challenged someone on their views and that was likened to denying evolution and now because I personally aren't going to read hand picked books written on the subject I must be stupid.

It's pathetic, and a complete pompus attitude to put accross.



Let me ask you, disagreeing with an open border idea, what's wrong with that? We know that's not an isolated thought process and there is plenty out there that disagrees with it or doesn't think it's viable so what is wrong with holding that idea? After all, it generates potential negatives such as

1. Too many unskilled workers settling in one country

2. Welfare issues

3. Loss of national identity

Not to mention the impact of losing high skill workers in a country. Or the idea that it wouldn't be an open door policy so therefore immigration rules would then have to apply putting you right back in the same position you are in now.

It loses value to a country, being able to go wherever you want doesn't benefit a country in any way, unlike countries like Australia who require worth for immigration. You lose all of that.

It's a completely utopia style argument based in fantasy no matter how strongly you think about it.

So what is wrong with disagreeing with that notion? Rather than dismissive and insulting comparisons and childish name calling. Reading and learning your own viewpoint doesn't validate it any more, it's simply reading the like minded thoughts and creating an echo chamber mindset.

Open border policy isn't the answer to life's problems. It's generates its own problems as other academics have also written about.
Click to expand...
It's exactly how debate works.

And you can't tell me otherwise because it's my opinion.
 
A question I believe that needs to be asked is if a Ukrainian refugee makes it across from Calais to the UK should they be sent to Rwanda? or are the only ones to be sent those from the likes of Syria or Afghanistan? What’s the criteria, can’t possibly imagine skin colour religion might play a part. Oh no most certainly not!
 
NilSatisOptimum said:
A question I believe that needs to be asked is if a Ukrainian refugee makes it across from Calais to the UK should they be sent to Rwanda? or are the only ones to be sent those from the likes of Syria or Afghanistan? What’s the criteria, can’t possibly imagine skin colour religion might play a part. Oh no most certainly not!
Click to expand...
The recent uproar has been because of the red tape involved in following the legal routes to the UK that seemingly the vast majority of Ukrainians have or are following. I would imagine that if a Ukrainian lad came over on an illegal boat he would be treated as any other national would.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top