Lunacy goes mainstream

[cromwell]

The lunacy in question being open borders. This is the way mainstream political thought is going; mass migration is perfectly OK; it is "good for the economy". A larger economy means more profits for big business, so you can just hear the siren voices of big business now, whispering into the ears of politicians. "Why spend money keeping them out, when we, your friends can make money by letting them in?".

Of course, it's not as simple as that. As one clever person said, profits are now privatised whilst costs are socialised. Yes, big business makes money. But they aren't keen on paying their tax; and the government has to pay out lots more money for a bigger population. Roads wear out quicker; air quality gets worse; more rubbish is produced; more schools are needed; more hospitals; more jails; more social costs. The government has to pay for all that.

Now we have a group called the Labour committee for free movement. I'm not particularly having a pop at Labour here. They are just people to say what a lot of politicians are thinking. Here's what one luminary said, ostensibly about free movement in the EU, put the logic extends far beyong that.

In his piece for LabourList, Danning said there is no point in Britain enacting border controls, because he says it is only in people’s imagination that the country can “sort, sift and stop the good, the bad and the ugly.”

So there you go. Border controls which we managed for years, now seem to be impossible, totally beyond us.

It is of course absolute lunacy. To just let any murderer, terrorist, rapist or general crim walk into the country unchecked is insanity for a start. But there are many more poor people in the world than there are rich, and the idea that it's OK for them to be able to alk into a rich country and say "Right, now take care of me" is just pure lunacy.

But that's the way some politicians want the world to go, whether they are brave enough to say so openly or not.

[Workingman]

A few things slipped quietly under the radar this week.

The NHS is to try to make savings of another £400m as it vainly tries to keep its budget from going too far into the red. It will do so by 'streamlining' services and 'amalgamating' resources. I take that as longer waiting lists and closing places.

Wealthier areas will be asked to build up to 40% more homes. The government will tear up local plans to make room or for them to have a number imposed based on predictions by the Office for National Statistics. That would mean 266,000 new homes in England alone every year. That's over one million homes over a four year period, capable of housing 3,400,000 people at current averages. The vast majority will be on greenbelt land.

Traffic has increased to its highest ever levels. In the last four years it has risen by 7.7%. That equates to the roads taking more of a hammering, to an increase in the use of fuels and an increase in pollution.

The common missing link? Population increase.

[Weka]

A few things slipped quietly under the radar this week.

The NHS is to try to make savings of another £400m as it vainly tries to keep its budget from going too far into the red. It will do so by 'streamlining' services and 'amalgamating' resources. I take that as longer waiting lists and closing places.

Wealthier areas will be asked to build up to 40% more homes. The government will tear up local plans to make room or for them to have a number imposed based on predictions by the Office for National Statistics. That would mean 266,000 new homes in England alone every year. That's over one million homes over a four year period, capable of housing 3,400,000 people at current averages. The vast majority will be on greenbelt land.

Traffic has increased to its highest ever levels. In the last four years it has risen by 7.7%. That equates to the roads taking more of a hammering, to an increase in the use of fuels and an increase in pollution.

The common missing link? Population increase.

This is exactly what has happened in NZ and Auckland in particular. They knock down 2 homes and build 10, as "house prices are too high so we must build more"
Why are schools, hospitals, roads, public transport all overflowing and with backlogs etc and a shortage in housing? Immigration overflow. But oh no, apparently it's not the migrants causing this problem. Oh no, oh no, oh no. We need them to fill jobs for example builders, teachers, hospital staff because there is a shortage don't you know.... so to fill 1 job, = new family arriving including grandparents....
(Of which the Chinese in particular will then pump out 4-6 kids a year apart, who get raised by grandparents who don't speak English so kids meed more taxpayer support in school, while dad goes back to china to work so doesn't even pay taxes here yet our taxes now support the whole family....
This kiwis had enough.

[medsec222]

A few things slipped quietly under the radar this week.

The NHS is to try to make savings of another £400m as it vainly tries to keep its budget from going too far into the red. It will do so by 'streamlining' services and 'amalgamating' resources. I take that as longer waiting lists and closing places.

Wealthier areas will be asked to build up to 40% more homes. The government will tear up local plans to make room or for them to have a number imposed based on predictions by the Office for National Statistics. That would mean 266,000 new homes in England alone every year. That's over one million homes over a four year period, capable of housing 3,400,000 people at current averages. The vast majority will be on greenbelt land.

Traffic has increased to its highest ever levels. In the last four years it has risen by 7.7%. That equates to the roads taking more of a hammering, to an increase in the use of fuels and an increase in pollution.

The common missing link? Population increase.

This is exactly what has happened in NZ and Auckland in particular. They knock down 2 homes and build 10, as "house prices are too high so we must build more"
Why are schools, hospitals, roads, public transport all overflowing and with backlogs etc and a shortage in housing? Immigration overflow. But oh no, apparently it's not the migrants causing this problem. Oh no, oh no, oh no. We need them to fill jobs for example builders, teachers, hospital staff because there is a shortage don't you know.... so to fill 1 job, = new family arriving including grandparents....
(Of which the Chinese in particular will then pump out 4-6 kids a year apart, who get raised by grandparents who don't speak English so kids meed more taxpayer support in school, while dad goes back to china to work so doesn't even pay taxes here yet our taxes now support the whole family....
This kiwis had enough.

Exactly - and none of this is ever mentioned when the subject of immigration comes up. What is the point of allowing uncontrolled unskilled immigration into the county to do low paid jobs, which are supposedly so good for the economy. Does the taxpayer also top up low wages with universal credit?

[cromwell]

I'm not surprised the Kiwis have had enough Weka. The exact same thing has happened in the UK re the housing, especially in the south. A developer will buy a nice old house with a big garden, knock it down and build three or four new houses on the plot.

Another result of open door immigration is that it changes the political landscape forever. When you get x million immigrants in a country an anti-immigration party will find it very hard to gain power, because many of that x million certainly won't be voting for you.

I'm not actually against immigration, daft as that may sound. But I am against open door immigration and open borders. There are too many downsides to it. I've seen so much lovely countryside go under concrete forever and that does upset me; it's not like we have an unlimited supply of it.

And the sort of open borders which the EU has encouraged makes me want to put my head in my hands. What is Angela Merkel thinking? Come one come all because "Germany can do this". Then she decides that actually, Germany can't do this and that the rest of the EU (some of which absolutely do not want this), have to take "their fair share".

[AliasAggers]

I'm not actually against immigration, daft as that may sound.

I doesn't sound daft to me.

I'm not against immigration, as long as it is sensibly monitored. Applicants should be able to give
a good reason why they wish to come here, and should be told that they must agree to conform
with the British way of life, otherwise they will have to leave the country. This means that they
will have to learn to converse in English, and follow the accepted type of dress and behavioural
conduct of this country. If they fail to comply with these requirements within a reasonable time
they should be evicted forthwith, and no messing.

[Suff]

I don't have enough hair left to enter into this discussion...

[AliasAggers]

I don't have enough hair left to enter into this discussion...

I know the feeling.