Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChocoCoatedLemons)
    Of course I can see that, I'm not blind. But at the same time, I recognise that self interest is a key component of survival. Don't lecture me on poverty - I've given this more thought than you would believe, and have come to the conclusion that poverty will never be erased, and people will never stop suffering.

    If you're that bothered, go sell all your belongings, give the money to charity and move to a slum in East Africa somewhere.
    Oh goodness me, my apologies. I didn't realise that YOU'VE given it thought. That's really rendered all the great thinkers of the past two hundred years who've argued that poverty exists because of a human system that is rigged, flawed, and can be changed irrelevant, hasn't it? Allow me to bow down to your intellectual triumph.
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by halbeth)
    Oh goodness me, my apologies. I didn't realise that YOU'VE given it thought. That's really rendered all the great thinkers of the past two hundred years who've argued that poverty exists because of a human system that is rigged, flawed, and can be changed irrelevant, hasn't it? Allow me to bow down to your intellectual triumph.
    It's no wonder you didn't realise I've thought about it, since you weren't the one the comment was addressed to.

    Listen not at keyholes, lest ye be vexed.

    The only reason I said that was because SorryInAdvance was behaving as if I must not have come across the concept of equality before. :rolleyes: If you'd paid attention before leaping in, you'd know that.

    Although I'd love to hear you express some economically viable ways to eradicate poverty.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChocoCoatedLemons)
    Of course I can see that, I'm not blind. But at the same time, I recognise that self interest is a key component of survival. Don't lecture me on poverty - I've given this more thought than you would believe, and have come to the conclusion that poverty will never be erased, and people will never stop suffering.

    If you're that bothered, go sell all your belongings, give the money to charity and move to a slum in East Africa somewhere.
    Who's that going to help. Better i stay here, get my physics degree and then spend the rest of my life helping to human knowledge. This goal isn't about money or power, it is about learning. Self interest is what leads to wars and faith. It's only when we look past ourselves and work together with others that great things happen (LHC, the internet, human rights).
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChocoCoatedLemons)
    It's no wonder you didn't realise I've thought about it, since you weren't the one the comment was addressed to.

    Listen not at keyholes, lest ye be vexed.

    The only reason I said that was because SorryInAdvance was behaving as if I must not have come across the concept of equality before. :rolleyes: If you'd paid attention before leaping in, you'd know that.

    Although I'd love to hear you express some economically viable ways to eradicate poverty.
    The reason I leaped in was because I find it extraordinarily arrogant to demand that someone not raise such a huge and complicated issue as poverty in their argument against you simply because YOU'VE given it a great deal of thought, as if that renders the matter closed.

    In answer to your question: in my view, the eradication of capitalism and the establishment of a true communist state (helpful hint: the USSR, China and NK are not this).

    I'm predicting that your reaction is probably going to be that my opinion is a laughable one, but we shall see. Explaining the viable ways in full depth would require something at least the length of a PhD thesis and beyond my ability, but I can gladly direct you to the works of Marx and others...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChocoCoatedLemons)
    If our borders were suddenly wide open, allowing anyone who wanted to to stay, it would cause much more of a problem than natural population growth, although that is also too high. In a sense, it would be beneficial to the human race to have a "super-bug" capable of cutting the population rapidly down. But that's another issue.

    It's not the participation I have a problem with. It's the fact that we just don't have the room. It's already hard to find housing - just think of how much more difficult it would be if suddenly an extra fifteen million people came to the UK. Or more - after all, we have free health care, free education and a generous (compared to some) welfare system.

    The NHS is already a staggering drunk of a system overloaded with too many patients. It could only get worse.
    First off, not everybody is eligable for free treatment on the NHS except in certain emergencies. Also, more legitimate migrants means more tax contributions and therefore more resources for bodies like the NHS. The NHS's efficiency problems will not be worsened by immigration.

    Housing is an ongoing issue. We have no shortage of land, there is new construction going on all the time, so again legitimate migrants will increase demand which will in turn promote further construction. The housing crisis exists because we haven't had a strategy for anticipating demand. Migration is not going to cause a long term housing problem.

    So, if people aren't going to get free health care, and aren't going to have somewhere to live, why are they going to come here? For benefits? Most migrants aren't eligible for them, despite what the tabloids would have you believe. The fact is there are jobs, homes and education to be had here, and people out there who are willing to come and compete for those opportunities and pay back into our system in the process. None of this is actually problematic.

    With regard to asylum seekers and certain illegal migrants, there are other issues. Many of them want to be here because we won't arbitrarily kill them, for example. Many of them are eligible for some benefits, mostly because they arrived with quite literally nothing and need help to build a new life. There are cases where this is abused, they're in the news all the time, but the ones where a refugee gets JSA and housing benefit for six months while they learn and search for a job and then stop claiming because they're becoming self-supporting never make it to the papers.

    The practical issues are, at worst, manageable.
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by SorryInAdvance)
    Who's that going to help. Better i stay here, get my physics degree and then spend the rest of my life helping to human knowledge. This goal isn't about money or power, it is about learning. Self interest is what leads to wars and faith. It's only when we look past ourselves and work together with others that great things happen (LHC, the internet, human rights).
    That would help the charities you'd give your money too. If it's so unfair that we're here when others deserve to be even more than us (so you say), then leave.

    How is your physics degree going to feed the starving? Cure the sick? Stop wars? You haven't been realistic at all so far.

    Go on - show me an economically viable way of providing everyone in the world with enough resources to survive.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SorryInAdvance)
    Pretty much agree, in fact I feel that national/racial pride is actively detrimental to our culture. How are we ever going to get past petty competition if we keep calling people THEM. Immigration debates sicken me, talk of "our" country "our" jobs. Why can't people understand that these immigrants deserve to in this country as much as us.
    I disagree. Though racial pride is silly, an element of national pride is understandable.

    And in a world of nations, not everyone has the same right to be here. As much as a world without borders is a nice concept, we are a nation state that has to look after it's own first and foremost. I liken the analogy to parents and their kids. The kids can have friends over (citizens of other nations) and the parents will treat them almost as their own kids, but those other kids have their own parents that are responsible, and you can't have all of your kids friends over all the time, there has to be a limit, you have to consider your own resources.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    I disagree. Though racial pride is silly, an element of national pride is understandable.

    And in a world of nations, not everyone has the same right to be here. As much as a world without borders is a nice concept, we are a nation state that has to look after it's own first and foremost. I liken the analogy to parents and their kids. The kids can have friends over (citizens of other nations) and the parents will treat them almost as their own kids, but those other kids have their own parents that are responsible, and you can't have all of your kids friends over all the time, there has to be a limit, you have to consider your own resources.
    That's all well and good if you built your country and standard of living solely on your own resources. But if you used (or stole) the resources of other nations to develop your own, then you cannot say **** if those people choose to come here and access a life their ancestors helped build as much as your own.

    Or if you don't like it, give back all the stolen wealth and resources and then you can ban or send all the ethnic people back.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChocoCoatedLemons)
    That would help the charities you'd give your money too. If it's so unfair that we're here when others deserve to be even more than us (so you say), then leave.

    How is your physics degree going to feed the starving? Cure the sick? Stop wars? You haven't been realistic at all so far.

    Go on - show me an economically viable way of providing everyone in the world with enough resources to survive.
    Look you're really not going to like my answer. My political leanings tend toward left communism which is a branch of ideas more focused on mentioning a democratic soicity. Though my views are slightly different then theirs in some areas. You asked for it and that's my answer.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    I disagree. Though racial pride is silly, an element of national pride is understandable.

    And in a world of nations, not everyone has the same right to be here. As much as a world without borders is a nice concept, we are a nation state that has to look after it's own first and foremost. I liken the analogy to parents and their kids. The kids can have friends over (citizens of other nations) and the parents will treat them almost as their own kids, but those other kids have their own parents that are responsible, and you can't have all of your kids friends over all the time, there has to be a limit, you have to consider your own resources.
    Look in my view there should be smaller contrys ( to increase PR) but that are more link together ( in the way Scotland is the rest of the uk) and people are free to move between. The contry's priority is to look after the people that choose to live there.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Yawn!)
    That's all well and good if you built your country and standard of living solely on your own resources. But if you used (or stole) the resources of other nations to develop your own, then you cannot say **** if those people choose to come here and access a life their ancestors helped build as much as your own.

    Or if you don't like it, give back all the stolen wealth and resources and then you can ban or send all the ethnic people back.
    What an utterly childish view.


    (Original post by SorryInAdvance)
    Look in my view there should be smaller contrys ( to increase PR) but that are more link together ( in the way Scotland is the rest of the uk) and people are free to move between. The contry's priority is to look after the people that choose to live there.
    Freedom of movement and settling is a nice idea, but the fact is that we cannot afford to simply let anyone that wants to live here live here.
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by mmmpie)
    First off, not everybody is eligable for free treatment on the NHS except in certain emergencies.
    "You can get free NHS hospital treatment if you are lawfully entitled to be in the UK and usually live here. This is called being ordinarily resident." - If there was no such thing an an illegal immigrant, this would include everyone.


    Also, more legitimate migrants means more tax contributions and therefore more resources for bodies like the NHS. The NHS's efficiency problems will not be worsened by immigration.

    That's not what MigrantWatch and the Institute for Public Policy Research say - "Analysis by the Institute for Public Policy Research suggested that an amnesty would net the government up to £1.038 billion per year in fiscal revenue. However, analysis by MigrationWatch UK suggests that if the migrants granted amnesty were given access to healthcare and other benefits, the net cost to the exchequer would be £5.530 billion annually"

    (Original post by mmmpie)
    Housing is an ongoing issue. We have no shortage of land, there is new construction going on all the time, so again legitimate migrants will increase demand which will in turn promote further construction.
    If anyone and everyone could enter and expect housing in the UK however, there would very soon be no room at all. We'd end up with slums. Also, since you say the demand would increase - so would the price.

    (Original post by mmmpie)
    The housing crisis exists because we haven't had a strategy for anticipating demand. Migration is not going to cause a long term housing problem.
    How can you possibly be able to say that? No country allows open immigration, so we have nothing to base that on. And considering how rapidly people would come here if they could, it could cause a very serious problem.

    (Original post by mmmpie)
    So, if people aren't going to get free health care, and aren't going to have somewhere to live, why are they going to come here? For benefits? Most migrants aren't eligible for them, despite what the tabloids would have you believe.
    People who would like to come this country would generally like to do so because they believe their life style will improve here. If we only allow those who can contribute, then we should not be losing out. However, how much can people who are trying to leave poverty-stricken lives behind actually give? How much education can they have had? Can they run businesses? No, many could not, because they don't have the funding or the knowledge. Could they get jobs? Not when they're competing against higher-educated, intergrated UK residents.

    Welcome to JSA, then.

    (Original post by mmmpie)
    The fact is there are jobs, homes and education to be had here, and people out there who are willing to come and compete for those opportunities and pay back into our system in the process. None of this is actually problematic.
    I answered that above. But also - immigrants often are paid much less, which in turn puts British people out of a job. We already have an unemployment problem, we don't need more people here to flood the system.

    (Original post by mmmpie)
    With regard to asylum seekers and certain illegal migrants, there are other issues. Many of them want to be here because we won't arbitrarily kill them, for example. Many of them are eligible for some benefits, mostly because they arrived with quite literally nothing and need help to build a new life.
    I would never suggest we should not help people who desperately need it. But I don't find open immigration policies to be the way to help them. It would much more sense to improve living conditions in their own countries, with the help of richer countries such as the UK.


    Of course, this discussion is nothing personal.
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by SorryInAdvance)
    Look you're really not going to like my answer. My political leanings tend toward left communism which is a branch of ideas more focused on mentioning a democratic soicity. Though my views are slightly different then theirs in some areas. You asked for it and that's my answer.
    No where in that "answer" was there any suggestion at a practical solution.
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Steevee)
    Freedom of movement and settling is a nice idea, but the fact is that we cannot afford to simply let anyone that wants to live here live here.
    I've been trying to say this for pages now. It's not economically viable.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anarchism101)
    On the contrary, Ancient Rome was very much a multiethnic society.
    Sort of, but certainly not in the way that precludes national pride or sentiments very akin to it. The Roman Empire governed many different ethnic groups, but it was extremely culturally chauvinist and even xenophobic. The Romans believed that they were the bearers of a culture which was the pinnacle and goal of human civilisation, and there was a concerted effort to assimilate, frequently violently, the other ethnic groups of the empire to Romanitas; any sort of advancement for members of other ethnic groups in the empire was certainly conditional upon this.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChocoCoatedLemons)
    I've been trying to say this for pages now. It's not economically viable.
    I imagine you're arguing with people who are of the Left persuasion, so they're arguing idealistically rather than realistically.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AdvanceAndVanquish)
    Sort of, but certainly not in the way that precludes national pride or sentiments very akin to it. The Roman Empire governed many different ethnic groups, but it was extremely culturally chauvinist and even xenophobic. The Romans believed that they were the bearers of a culture which was the pinnacle and goal of human civilisation, and there was a concerted effort to assimilate, frequently violently, the other ethnic groups of the empire to Romanitas; any sort of advancement for members of other ethnic groups in the empire was certainly conditional upon this.

    All of the above is true, but this concerns ethnicity, not race. Ethnicity is performative, not genetic or inherent.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChocoCoatedLemons)
    No where in that "answer" was there any suggestion at a practical solution.
    Because it's like possible to explain Das Kapital and all the leftist thought since then in a few posts?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SorryInAdvance)
    Because it's like possible to explain Das Kapital and all the leftist thought since then in a few posts?
    This.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by halbeth)
    All of the above is true, but this concerns ethnicity, not race. Ethnicity is performative, not genetic or inherent.
    Indeed, however I was myself responding to a post that had strayed slightly into a discussion of national, not racial, pride.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Have you ever participated in a Secret Santa?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.