The Student Room Group

Having lots of "culture minority" MPs is NOT good

Scroll to see replies

Original post by The_Internet
And he can't refute me either lol

What am I supposed to be refuting?
Original post by HygieneTherapy15
Billydisco made a very good point. But you're quick to pull out the racist card


Posted from TSR Mobile


1) It wasn't a good point.
2) It's not racist it is religious prejudist and there is a big difference.
3) He has skipped my post and went to reply to others so give me a reason why I shouldn't start to assume that he is Islamophobic?
Original post by HygieneTherapy15
Lib dem have had their day. They're going to fade into nothing :smile:


Posted from TSR Mobile


And that's your opinion. Isn't democracy a wonderful thing? Where we ALLOW people to have their opinion? Opinions that you would like censored...
Original post by billydisco
What am I supposed to be refuting?


All the above, that I argued against. You simply...stopped arguing
Original post by ILovePancakes
You seem to have a problem with reading. I never said that.

As the net impact is beneficial, this would suggest that the majority of immigrants have a positive effect. The likelihood that a minority induce this net result is minimal and irrelevant.

Ah I apologise, I replied quickly thinking it was ridwan.

My point still stands, where is the evidence the majority of immigrants are beneficial?
Original post by The_Internet
All the above, that I argued against. You simply...stopped arguing

You havent asked me a single thing the last two pages. If you want me to answer something, ask it. I havent consciously avoided anything you've asked, so I have probably just missed it.
Original post by The_Internet
ILP, I find it odd how they're cool with one middle Eastern religion, but not another tbh. Christianity is not British.It's an import.

They clearly struggle with simple logic. I think that if people bothered opening their eyes a little bit and actually reading, rather than allowing themselves to believe everything they see on television, they might be able to develop some original ideas, which would also provide a more entertaining debate; rather than me facepalming continuously.
Original post by The_Internet
How in hell do you come to that conclusion?

If every couple has four kids, that doubles their population

3 million now, (double 1=>) 6 million (double 2=>) 12 million (double 3 =>) 24 million

(not quite half, but my point remains)
Original post by HygieneTherapy15
Lib dem have had their day. They're going to fade into nothing :smile:


Posted from TSR Mobile

:unimpressed:


This is a very dark hour for our party but we cannot and will not allow decent liberal values to be extinguished overnight. Our party will come back. Our party will win again. It will take patience, resilience and grit. But that is what has built our party before - and will rebuild it again.
Original post by billydisco
Ah I apologise, I replied quickly thinking it was ridwan.

My point still stands, where is the evidence the majority of immigrants are beneficial?


Read what I said again? The fact that there is a positive net impact suggests that the majority of immigrants contribute positively. Does this not make sense to you?
Original post by The_Internet
Because we don't have ENOUGH. If we had enough, then medics would not have an almost 100% employability rate. There's a reason why we don't need as many pharmacists these days. We have enough. More than enough even

Meh, that's how Dubai looks. Most of their population isn't actually Emirati. Does not bother me.

How can we not have enough...... if the application rate to get in to medical schools is so competitive?
Original post by billydisco
You said the majority of immigrants benefit the UK. That isn't what your sources prove..... they just show if you add up all contributions and all costs, the contributions are higher.

Why do you think I told you to tread carefully? :wink:

So again, can you please show me proof the majority of immigrants benefit the UK?


Well it would be very hard to see the individual effect of immigrants on the UK, so that's why they have been grouped. If you can proof that the majority don't benefit the UK then fine, but you can't.

"Recent immigrants were 45% less likely to receive state benefits or tax credits than people native to the UK and 3% less likely to live in social housing"

This show's they are more likely to benefit the UK than our own native citizen's, due to being 45% less likely to be dependent on the state and 3% less likely to take up social housing. :h::u:
Original post by ILovePancakes
They clearly struggle with simple logic. I think that if people bothered opening their eyes a little bit and actually reading, rather than allowing themselves to believe everything they see on television, they might be able to develop some original ideas, which would also provide a more entertaining debate; rather than me facepalming continuously.

When was the last time you read a book? :smile:
Original post by billydisco
You havent asked me a single thing the last two pages. If you want me to answer something, ask it. I havent consciously avoided anything you've asked, so I have probably just missed it.


Yet still, you haven't answered my questions. I will continue to assume you are Islamophobic.
Original post by ridwan12
Well it would be very hard to see the individual effect of immigrants on the UK, so that's why they have been grouped. If you can proof that the majority don't benefit the UK then fine, but you can't.

"Recent immigrants were 45% less likely to receive state benefits or tax credits than people native to the UK and 3% less likely to live in social housing"

This show's they are more likely to benefit the UK than our own native citizen's, due to being 45% less likely to be dependent on the state and 3% less likely to take up social housing. :h::u:

Group of 100 people. One contributes £1m, the rest cost us £100.

Net figure is positive, but 99% of them are stealing from this country.

Get my point?
Original post by billydisco
If every couple has four kids, that doubles their population

3 million now, (double 1=>:wink: 6 million (double 2=>:wink: 12 million (double 3 =>:wink: 24 million

(not quite half, but my point remains)


And white English non Muslim kids won't have any kids? BTW, the average fertility rate in Pakistan is around ... 3, so it would stand to reason that in the UK, the Pakistani birth rate is less than that. India and Bangladesh have a lower birth rate than that. Google public data is really good for this.
Original post by The_Internet
And white English non Muslim kids won't have any kids?

I didn't say they wouldn't- my point is its not just about immigration, its who you let in and what they do whilst here.
Original post by ILovePancakes
Does this not make sense to you?


Evidently not! :biggrin:
Original post by billydisco
x
Please reply to posts 185 and 189.
Original post by billydisco
I didn't say they wouldn't- my point is its not just about immigration, its who you let in and what they do whilst here.


Well that does imply ENglish non Muslims aren't having kids... Using your maths, when you talk about "If all Muslims had 4 children they would have 50% in three generations", you see that figure, but you don't consider the kids that non Muslims have too...

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you