Paris

No I was just saying that sometimes people use political correctness gone mad and similar to excuse themselves for saying things that are racist or near being racist.

 

Two great boxing wins last night. Well done lads pity about the City. I hate the use of the word racist as I feel there are two forms. One is despicable while the other is a view held on a subject which happens to involve people from another country (that's not racism as I understand it) . The trick is to have a balanced view. Some observers say enough is enough whereas others say look for the positives but nothing is ever perfect as we don't live in a perfect world. Some time ago the mention was made about housing and in this respect the attached makes useful reading. It seems to me that EU workers cant apply for social housing unless they are working but in any case most go into private rented accommodation which I understand is very much more common in the EU. Still that's me done on this thread
http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/briefings/migrants-and-housing-uk-experiences-and-impacts

 

How can you 'near being racist'

Its a tool used by the left to swing in to a conversation or debate when people discuss immigration, shock horror! if you don't agree we should fill this country with people who don't wish to share our culture or language or traditions you must be racist! The vast majority of people all over Europe have bent over backwards to make certain cultures and religions welcome, that has been repaid by the events of Paris by homegrown people bent on destroying the culture of their own birth!

Why do you think this should be allowed to happen?

The reason this thread was posted has been forgotten already by some.

Some ironies for you as you like to compare how 'media' works.

The Sun newspaper recently posted a survey that established that 1 in 5 British muslims has sympathy for the terrorist atrocities carried out in the name of Islam. my Facebook and twitter feed were full of 'outraged' people of all denominations angered that a newspaper should dare to publish this. I didn't see the same outrage from the same people about the Paris atrocities over my news feeds.

The irony, everyone seemed to ignore the fact that 80% of those questioned didn't.!!

20% is still too high, but shout 'racist' and that kills any debate..

By the way, I have many Caribbean and African descent friends who apparently you would consider to be racist?

 

I like the comment

"The reason this thread was created is forgotten already by some"

And it does seem to that because I want the borders controlled better and not let anyone in I'm considered racist. And yet the people who class me as racist would probably say they hate Wales, it's full of sheepshagers etc. But is that not classed as racism?

Let's get this thread back to the point and show support to the victims of Paris who has the highest Muslim residents in Euro zone. Bizzarly enough they've had two attacks this year alone.

 

Oh yes the sun! What a reliable source! This is about as true as their stories on Hillsborough. JFT96

 

Well done on completely missing the point. again.

 

The Epitome of socialist values...

Jeremy Corbyn.. Shall we bomb Syria? Let me think about it and I will decide for you!

 

I don't think you are getting the point on the statement. You seem to be making a lot of these errors.

 

We shouldn't bomb Syria because thousands of innocent people will die. Bombing needs to be followed up by ground support which won't happen because that'll involve picking sides with assad or the rebels.

 

I getting a feeling you don't rate him much then Wiz

 

Thousands of innocent people are already dying! Again you need to read the thread from the beginning.

The bombing would and should be targeted to avoid innocent people. its not a complete solution and its definitely an unfortunate one, but the hand wringing from your lot helps no one. innocent people are being beheaded and thrown from high buildings because they are gay on a daily basis.

What do you suggest we do to help them? have a march perhaps? knit some rainbow scarves? hold a 'not in my name fete?

 

These world issues always stem from the same thing ideology.

Religion is the worst for it, Christianity and Islam are supposed to be about peace and harmony, but the ideology always ends up brain washing many and handing power to the few. Its about controlling the masses, socialism does the same, in theory about the many, but benefiting the few, its always the same but many thousands join up to the ideology and end up suppressed.

Thats why Corbyn has to do your thinking for you.. he doesn't think you're capable of it as he is morally superior to you.

 

I know it's the daily mail and its your biggest hated paper by according to you Murdoch but maybe you can go with this guy to talk to them MTG

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...pen-peace-talks-terrorists.html#ixzz3ssInaOTd

 

I'll buy them both a ticket. but they will have to make their own way back..

 

Hes not great but better than the tories any day.

65% of his core policies are very good though

Sent from my D6603 using Tapatalk

 

I wouldn't piss in his mouth if his back teeth were on fire as Redprintt would say..

 

With all due respect, you slated Mind the gap for stating that immigrants benefit the economy, despite this being a relatively commonly known fact. Whether you think Britain is getting too full or not (which I do), the fact is immigrants to bring more money to the country than they take.

As for Corbyn, he seems to be one of the very few 'genuine' politicians out there. I absolutely admire his principles, the problem is that he lives in a fantasy land. Given our current situation, for me, Corbyn saying he would struggle to condone air strikes in Syria makes him completely unelectable instantly imo. How can he be PM when he would struggle to do what's necessary to defend his country?

 

That would depend on what report you wish to read, I can find you reports saying they bring an increase of £25 bn, another saying £5bn and another saying none.

"3.1 House of Lords Report

In 2008 the report of the Economic Affairs Committee of the House of Lords concluded (Para. 62) (Click here):

“The overall conclusion from existing evidence is that immigration has very small impacts on GDP per capita, whether these impacts are positive or negative. This conclusion is in line with findings of studies of the economic impacts of immigration in other countries including the US.”

Economic Impacts of Immigration to the UK
Economics: MW 235

1. Summary

• The impact of immigration into the UK on GDP per head – the key metric measuring prosperity - is essentially negligible (see section 3 below)
• Although labour market effects are notoriously difficult to estimate, there is tentative evidence to show that some immigration has had negative effect on the employment of UK-born workers (4.2). There is also substantial anecdotal evidence that workers in some sectors of the economy have suffered more than others from competition with migrant labour: the IT industry is one such sector (4.2)
• Since 1997 three-quarters of employment created in the UK economy has been taken by immigrants (4.4)
• On the impact of immigration on average wage levels, the evidence is again inconclusive (5.1), but there is a strong consensus of opinion that immigration has harmed the earnings of the most poorly-paid UK-born members of the labour force (5.2)
• The methodology used to demonstrate alleged positive fiscal impacts is flawed and partial (section 6); in any case calculations of the size of the fiscal impact, whether negative or positive, are extremely small.