PowerSwitch Main Page
PowerSwitch
The UK's Peak Oil Discussion Forum & Community
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Westminster Terror Attack
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> News
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
jonny2mad



Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 2422
Location: weston super mare

PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2017 8:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would say doubling every 11-12 years wont be much diffrent than every 10. and migration into europe looks to be ticking along fine boats are chugging across the med likely as we speak
_________________
"What causes more suffering in the world than the stupidity of the compassionate?"Friedrich Nietzsche

optimism is cowardice oswald spengler
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
johnhemming2



Joined: 30 Jun 2015
Posts: 1970

PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2017 8:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Except you were talking about the UK and you have argued a case which is that through natural growth and the difference in the size of families ....

The problem with this is that you have not done the calculations properly. Obviously there is substantial growth, but without doing the calculations properly your argument appears more to be driven by an underlying emotion rather than being evidence based.

There is an interesting question as to whether the change in the law such that children past the second child born today will no longer get financial support for the family will affect the number of children born (and the number of larger families).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Little John



Joined: 08 Mar 2008
Posts: 5667
Location: UK

PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2017 7:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It is ultimately irrelevant if the increase in the share of the population that is Muslim comes from migration or from relatively higher fertility. The outcome is the same. There is barely a Muslim majority country in the world that does not have its legal system heavily influenced by Islamic law taken form the Quran. We do not want a Muslim majority country or even Muslim majority urban centres, least of all our capital.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
johnhemming2



Joined: 30 Jun 2015
Posts: 1970

PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2017 8:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What is important is what the truth is. I do not myself wish to live under Sharia law. I don't see that as being likely.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jonny2mad



Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 2422
Location: weston super mare

PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2017 9:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

johnhemming2 wrote:
What is important is what the truth is. I do not myself wish to live under Sharia law. I don't see that as being likely.


People laughed at enoch powell when he forecast the demographic change he did and its worse than he forecast.

We have a situation where people running the country put in place laws that arrest people talking about grooming they did that to nick griffin

And where they cover up industrial scale rape of white children for reasons of community cohesion.

Even if most people in politics knew what we were saying would come true none of them would speak out or do anything to avert it
_________________
"What causes more suffering in the world than the stupidity of the compassionate?"Friedrich Nietzsche

optimism is cowardice oswald spengler
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Little John



Joined: 08 Mar 2008
Posts: 5667
Location: UK

PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2017 10:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

johnhemming2 wrote:
What is important is what the truth is. I do not myself wish to live under Sharia law. I don't see that as being likely.
Why don't you see that as being likely given the demographic shift in the population that has been predicted? Is it because you do not think a majority Muslim UK would inevitably end up with some form of Quranic legal system, despite the evidence to the contrary in a majority of existing Muslim dominated countries? Or, is it because you think the demographic predictions are wrong? In which case, on what basis do you think they are wrong?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
vtsnowedin



Joined: 07 Jan 2011
Posts: 4273
Location: New England ,Chelsea Vermont

PostPosted: Mon Apr 03, 2017 10:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Little John wrote:
johnhemming2 wrote:
What is important is what the truth is. I do not myself wish to live under Sharia law. I don't see that as being likely.
Why don't you see that as being likely given the demographic shift in the population that has been predicted? Is it because you do not think a majority Muslim UK would inevitably end up with some form of Quranic legal system, despite the evidence to the contrary in a majority of existing Muslim dominated countries? Or, is it because you think the demographic predictions are wrong? In which case, on what basis do you think they are wrong?

It comes down to how events play out. Do the incoming Muslims assimilate into the UK culture or do they hold themselves apart and demand that changes are made to accommodate their religion which inspires a backlash which ends in blood on the streets.
The first seems unlikely and the second seems ominously more likely then not.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
johnhemming2



Joined: 30 Jun 2015
Posts: 1970

PostPosted: Tue Apr 04, 2017 8:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Enoch Powell's speech was specifically opposed to the race relation bill. On that point he was wrong then and remains wrong now.

He also talked more generally about commonwealth immigration highlighting afro-caribbean and sikh migration proposing a repatriation policy.

It should be noted that immigration controls have been substantially changed over the years. Very few people, however, argue for expelling people from the country.

On the question of the assertion that Sharia law will be imposed in the UK in the future.
a) Proper estimates need to be done as to the number of supporters of this policy.
b) Proper estimates need to be done as to the trends in terms of the number of supporters given the current national policy framework.

It should be recognised that when people migrate they originally keep most of their own culture. The first generation tend to see the place they were born as "home". The second generation have mixed loyalties and the third generation tend to see where they were born as "home". This also affects family sizes which tend to go down for second and third generation migrants.

On my knowledge of the diversity of those described as Muslims and the current policy framework I don't think it (The imposition of sharia law) is likely to happen. I don't even see a real attempt to apply it beyond what we have already seen informally in Tower Hamlets (which I am not aware of as happening in Birmingham).


Many changes in law and policy are not reported in the media simply because the journalists don't think they are significant. I have, however, seem the changes over the past 20 years for instance in terms of immigration policies in some detail.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark



Joined: 13 Dec 2007
Posts: 883
Location: NW England

PostPosted: Tue Apr 04, 2017 12:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

johnhemming2 wrote:
It should be recognised that when people migrate they originally keep most of their own culture. The first generation tend to see the place they were born as "home". The second generation have mixed loyalties and the third generation tend to see where they were born as "home". This also affects family sizes which tend to go down for second and third generation migrants.



That's all well and good, except the flow of new arrivals doesn't stop - it continues all the while...
The impact is also related to the numbers of arrivals and whether they are concentrated in one area or dispersed....

You imply that given enough time, the issue will resolve itself.
Many people would disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
johnhemming2



Joined: 30 Jun 2015
Posts: 1970

PostPosted: Tue Apr 04, 2017 1:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The rules on migration have been changed over the years. You need to look at the rules now and see what change are needed to those rather than the rules as they were 20 years ago.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark



Joined: 13 Dec 2007
Posts: 883
Location: NW England

PostPosted: Tue Apr 04, 2017 4:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

johnhemming2 wrote:
The rules on migration have been changed over the years. You need to look at the rules now and see what change are needed to those rather than the rules as they were 20 years ago.


Granted, the rules have changed, but data still shows high levels of nett immigration:
https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/statistics-net-migration-statistics

The figures are adjusted for Asylum Seekers, but not sure about Refugees and Illegals. They show 164,000/yr from non-EU countries - the majority of these will be Muslim ?
Going by your logic, these new arrivals (may) then go on a 3-generation process to assimilate.
However, next year a further 164,000 will arrive, and the following year another 164,000....
The assimilation process can never be fast enough for these numbers.

You imply that given enough time, the issue will resolve itself.
Many people would disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
johnhemming2



Joined: 30 Jun 2015
Posts: 1970

PostPosted: Tue Apr 04, 2017 6:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What I say is that the issue is complex and you need to look at the detailed figures.

For example you need to look at what is happening with UK citizens and others with votes (which historically was particularly the Irish, but also certain commonwealth citizens - not all). EU citizens have votes only in local and European elections.

You also need to consider the changes in immigration status as some people get naturalised (and a small number lose citizenship - so small actually that it can be ignored).

Migration includes people who come here temporarily to study including children in schools.

Emigration is also a factor that has to be taken into account.

Some UK citizens who emigrate continue to vote in UK elections. Others don't.

In the end, however, it all comes down to questions as to what policy changes people would propose in what circumstances.

If someone has Indefinite Leave to Remain they may also then become citizens, if they don't have a visa or limited leave to remain then that does not go necessarily through to citizenship.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jonny2mad



Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 2422
Location: weston super mare

PostPosted: Wed Apr 05, 2017 10:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Enoch powell spoke about race he also said there were people coming to the uk who would not assimulate. He mentioned sikhs wearing turbans not crash helmets as a example because that was something in the papers then but it was not limited to that .

I spoke to him around the time of the rushdie affair and it wasn't a surprise to him it was a surprise to western liberals.

I dont think we have seen a assimulation, you just have to look at the numbers of british muslims who have joined isis these are not people born in pakistan they are mainly born here.
Now its a minority that have packed their bags and gone to syria but its a larger percentage than brits that went to fight fascism in spain in the international brigades .

its a bigger than the number of muslims in uk armed forces
_________________
"What causes more suffering in the world than the stupidity of the compassionate?"Friedrich Nietzsche

optimism is cowardice oswald spengler
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
fuzzy



Joined: 29 Nov 2013
Posts: 594
Location: The Marches, UK

PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2017 12:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

johnhemming2 wrote:
The rules on migration have been changed over the years. You need to look at the rules now and see what change are needed to those rather than the rules as they were 20 years ago.


The rules on IM-migration [discuss the same topic as us, please, John] have been a sick joke since Enoch correctly pointed out that, if you don't know the people in your next street, arranging to marry someone from 1000's of miles away who you don't know - who then just 'happens' to become eligible for UK immigration, all arranged [as you know] by a commercial service, is a scam. If I say I am going to open a white staffed restaurant, the thought police will have me before the beak pronto, yet the entire UK has asian only staffed restaurants employing immigrants [which according to previous governments is an acceptable vocation for immigration status]. It was about 30 years ago that a friendly asian shopkeeper pointed out that there were few driving licences shared amongst the asian Doncaster taxi drivers, after I had been discussing my neighbour taxi driver who was ahead of me signing on in the dole queue.

Everyone who doesn't live in a 'liberal' bubble know what governments have turned our urban areas into due to mass immigration against the majority's choice.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
johnhemming2



Joined: 30 Jun 2015
Posts: 1970

PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2017 5:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If you believe the issues relating to immigration are important then you should also consider issues relating to emigration need looking at. After all it is "net migration" that people talk about.

Migrationwatch are a an NGO that looks at those issues.
https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/

I, therefore, refer to migration to include the issues of emigration as well as the issues of immigration.

I see little merit in only bothering about immigration.

For example if a student comes here to study they are initially an immigrant and then when they leave they are an emigrant. If all the foreign students that study here leave after their course or at some other point then that is a relevant fact.

If you were to put some effort into studying the changes in migration policy you would know that there have been changes in terms of the rights to bring a non EU spouse into the country. I am not quite sure when this first changed, but now there is a requirement for the UK resident spouse to be earning something like 18,500 before they can bring a partner to the country.

There also have been prosecutions about fraudulent marriages those procured purely for immigration purposes.

It is a good idea to spend some time studying an issue before you post about it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> News All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 6 of 7

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group