Turn on thread page Beta

Why do people associate the B.N.P with nazism? Hmm I dont get it watch

    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by randdom)
    I am still confused over why there is a fuss over asylum seekers! I mean the fact of the matter is that they contribute more to the economy than they take out over 2 generations so why is it a problem. The fact is that there is no economic reason for not allowing asylum seekers into the country. Get them working and it can be even more beneficial. Many people who come into the country illegally aren't being supported by the state because the state doesn't know about them. Many work on the black market which contributes to the economy. So over all if it is beneficial or the economy please tell me your justification for keeping them out?

    I would just like to say to llama boy that I really agree with you. We studied things like intial advantage in the economics section of our Geography A2 and it is worrying the mess some of the countries are in when it is our fault.
    The black market doesn't help anyone. Here are just a few reasons,

    Black market workers don't pay tax or NI (that's why they're paid cash) so they don't contribute to the treasury or make any contribution towards the health service.

    The black market cheapens labor which therefore drives labor rates as a whole southwards.

    Black market employers cut corners like insurance, and health and safety.

    The black market exploits labor as is very well documented.

    The black market is also illegal.

    I disagree with both you and Llama boy (nothing new there). It is complete tripe to say that asylum seeker's countries are in a mess because of us. Good God. Half these folks are coming from central and eastern europe, places like Bosnia and Kosovo. What the fu*k has that to do with us?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    I disagree with both you and Llama boy (nothing new there). It is complete tripe to say that asylum seeker's countries are in a mess because of us. Good God. Half these folks are coming from central and eastern europe, places like Bosnia and Kosovo. What the fu*k has that to do with us?
    No one here is trying to defend a blanket statement "that asylum seeker's countries are in a mess because of us". That would be a gross over generalisation. There is much that the West is responsible for, and much that it isn't. Your Kosovo example doesn't disprove that.

    Very interesting history, though...

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/special_r...ovo/110492.stm
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    The black market doesn't help anyone. Here are just a few reasons,
    Black market workers don't pay tax or NI (that's why they're paid cash) so they don't contribute to the treasury or make any contribution towards the health service.
    The black market cheapens labor which therefore drives labor rates as a whole southwards.
    Black market employers cut corners like insurance, and health and safety.
    The black market exploits labor as is very well documented.
    The black market is also illegal.
    They do contribute to the economy in the sense that the buisnesses they work for pay tax ok not NI but other taxes and the people who are here illegally are not drawing from the social services therefore a net gain. I am not denying that the black market is illegal and exploitative all I am saying is that it positively contributes to the economy. You learn about the positive influence of the black market in LEDC's and it is the same in Britain.
    On another note did anyone see that program last night called if about pensions and what is going to happen if we don't boost are population. I know that allowing asylum seekers in isn't the most popular way but many of the families have more children which may boost the population.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by randdom)
    They do contribute to the economy in the sense that the buisnesses they work for pay tax ok not NI but other taxes and the people who are here illegally are not drawing from the social services therefore a net gain. I am not denying that the black market is illegal and exploitative all I am saying is that it positively contributes to the economy. You learn about the positive influence of the black market in LEDC's and it is the same in Britain.
    On another note did anyone see that program last night called if about pensions and what is going to happen if we don't boost are population. I know that allowing asylum seekers in isn't the most popular way but many of the families have more children which may boost the population.
    Strikes me as strange that I thought one of your main reasons for being pro asylum was on humanitarian grounds.

    Yet, you are now a proponent of black market employment for economic reasons (regardless of how it is a proven exploiter of these types of people) which even Bush in the US has taken radical steps to quash.

    Ang that's topsy turbey logic by the way! So what if asylum seekers have bigger families? If big families could be equated to individial and national propsperity then Ethiopia would be a G7 nation. :rolleyes:
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    Strikes me as strange that I thought one of your main reasons for being pro asylum was on humanitarian grounds.

    Yet, you are now a proponent of black market employment for economic reasons (regardless of how it is a proven exploiter of these types of people) which even Bush in the US has taken radical steps to quash.

    Ang that's topsy turbey logic by the way! So what if asylum seekers have bigger families? If big families could be equated to individial and national propsperity then Ethiopia would be a G7 nation. :rolleyes:
    Two points
    1) I am very aware of the bad side of the black Market all I was doing was pointing out the economic benefits to counter act the negative things that people were saying about the negative economic effects.

    2) The reason that we need larger families is because of our falling birth rate. We are already and economically developed country and Ethiopia isn't. Ethiopias problems are partly related to their over population. We need more people so that more people pay taxes to support the growing number of elderly people through pentions. When our parents retire we are going to have to pay 80% more in taxes to support them. All I am saying is that asylum seekers have bigger families and this may help to increase the number of working people and reduce the amount of taxes each individual has to pay.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    I noticed a few pages back that Bigcnee noted there is a lack of manual labourers for positions nowdays. I totally agree with this and I suggest that everybody that is granted asylum here is given a nice, basic place to live and gets training in English(when in rome ya know), training in things such as nursing (if my friend can do nursing with two U's and 3 E's then I'm sure they can) driving trains etc. Then giving them the chance to help themselves and the country itself, i would be happy.
    I only get pissed off when you hear stories of how families suddenly "have to" be moved by taxi and then the government gets the bill of £178 from A to B because they had to move in the middle of the night.

    I'm not against immigrants, I just don't think they should receive special attention...

    random rant for 4am
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by randdom)
    Two points
    1) I am very aware of the bad side of the black Market all I was doing was pointing out the economic benefits to counter act the negative things that people were saying about the negative economic effects.

    2) The reason that we need larger families is because of our falling birth rate. We are already and economically developed country and Ethiopia isn't. Ethiopias problems are partly related to their over population. We need more people so that more people pay taxes to support the growing number of elderly people through pentions. When our parents retire we are going to have to pay 80% more in taxes to support them. All I am saying is that asylum seekers have bigger families and this may help to increase the number of working people and reduce the amount of taxes each individual has to pay.
    This is very short sighted indeed. Jobs are only created at a pace to suit economic growth. An increase in population wouldn't necessarily result in an increase in the tax yield.

    Britain's pension problem cannot be tackled by "increased humping" or importing cheap labor (for the black market or otherwize). So, we increase population. What happens then? What happens when that group of workers (home grown or asylum seekers) themselves get older? We'd need to increase population again. And so ad infinitum. By your rationale we'd all need to fu*k like rabbits just to perpetuate the pensions burden.

    Perhaps there are other ways of tacking this issue. Years ago people retired at 65 and died at 70. Millions particularly in the public sector are now retiring at 50/55 (I've yet to see a cop older than 50) on full pensions financed by private sector taxation. That's got to stop!

    Perhaps the retirement age could be increased as well. People retiring at 50/55 are now often living till ripe old age of 80. That's 25/30 years sitting on your ass/wandering around garden centers/driving in the middle of the road while wearing a silly hat/etc. No wonder we're struggling!

    What about permitting people to take more responsibility for their own pensions? Instead of taxing people to death why not let them "opt out", give them a tax break, and let them make their own investments to try and provide for their future security? Who say's the state is the only way pensions can be funded?

    I'm not an expert in the "pensions crisis" by any means but surely to God there are tons of possible ways this might be addressed, the "asylum solution" being way down the list.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Danithestudent)
    I noticed a few pages back that Bigcnee noted there is a lack of manual labourers for positions nowdays. I totally agree with this and I suggest that everybody that is granted asylum here is given a nice, basic place to live and gets training in English(when in rome ya know), training in things such as nursing (if my friend can do nursing with two U's and 3 E's then I'm sure they can) driving trains etc. Then giving them the chance to help themselves and the country itself, i would be happy.
    I only get pissed off when you hear stories of how families suddenly "have to" be moved by taxi and then the government gets the bill of £178 from A to B because they had to move in the middle of the night.

    I'm not against immigrants, I just don't think they should receive special attention...

    random rant for 4am
    Well, as very few Brits are "given a nice basic place to live" I don't see why asylum seekers should be. I really cannot think of a better way to promote ill feeling towards asylum seekers than what you suggest.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    Well, as very few Brits are "given a nice basic place to live" I don't see why asylum seekers should be. I really cannot think of a better way to promote ill feeling towards asylum seekers than what you suggest.
    Yeah well that is more of an issue of how to treat asylum seekers when they get here rather than them coming in the first place. Just wondering if asylum seekers weren't given these "nice basic places to live" would fewer people have a problem. Just wondering because a change in policy could change that.

    All I have said about the pensions crisis is it is one thing that having more people coming into the country could help I didn't say that it is the best an or only way. The fact of the matter is that we are going to have a pensions crisis whether we like it or not so we should all start thinking of solutions and this is one of the ones that academics have come up with.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by randdom)
    Yeah well that is more of an issue of how to treat asylum seekers when they get here rather than them coming in the first place. Just wondering if asylum seekers weren't given these "nice basic places to live" would fewer people have a problem. Just wondering because a change in policy could change that.

    All I have said about the pensions crisis is it is one thing that having more people coming into the country could help I didn't say that it is the best an or only way. The fact of the matter is that we are going to have a pensions crisis whether we like it or not so we should all start thinking of solutions and this is one of the ones that academics have come up with.
    Oh well. Why didn't you say? If this particular solution hails from the sky-blue world of academic thinking I guess it must be right. :rolleyes:

    Sorry, but IMO, this is just lazy-mindedness.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    Oh well. Why didn't you say? If this particular solution hails from the sky-blue world of academic thinking I guess it must be right. :rolleyes:

    Sorry, but IMO, this is just lazy-mindedness.
    Don't be patronising now, all I am doing is expressing my oppionion and it is not lazy mindedness I have studies the subject in Geography and I am aware of the other arguments but this is possible solution and just because you don't agree with it doesn't make it any less valid. I personally feel that a good solution would be to increase the number of people in this country but not to much and combine this with the other economic factors. Please don't try to make out that I have no idea what I am talking about because I have done quite a bit of work on the topic of an ageing population and the possible solutions so I do know what I am talking about.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by randdom)
    Don't be patronising now, all I am doing is expressing my oppionion and it is not lazy mindedness I have studies the subject in Geography and I am aware of the other arguments but this is possible solution and just because you don't agree with it doesn't make it any less valid. I personally feel that a good solution would be to increase the number of people in this country but not to much and combine this with the other economic factors. Please don't try to make out that I have no idea what I am talking about because I have done quite a bit of work on the topic of an ageing population and the possible solutions so I do know what I am talking about.
    I wasn't calling you lazy-minded. I was referring to the academics that you obviously hold in such high esteem.

    However, apart from your geography lessons is there anything else that leads you to believe you actually do know what you're talking about? Or are you implying that this alone qualifies you as an expert in the field whereas I, personally not having benefited from your teacher's massive intellect, don't know what I'm talking about?

    I've made my position as clear as I can over several days. As have you. It seems we can't find common ground on a single issue here and neither one of us is likely to be swayed by the other's argument so there's no point in going around in circles forever. I suggest we agree to disagree on this issue.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    I wasn't calling you lazy-minded. I was referring to the academics that you obviously hold in such high esteem.

    However, apart from your geography lessons is there anything else that leads you to believe you actually do know what you're talking about? Or are you implying that this alone qualifies you as an expert in the field whereas I, personally not having benefited from your teacher's massive intellect, don't know what I'm talking about?

    I've made my position as clear as I can over several days. As have you. It seems we can't find common ground on a single issue here and neither one of us is likely to be swayed by the other's argument so there's no point in going around in circles forever. I suggest we agree to disagree on this issue.

    Just wanted to mention that I have done extra research on the subject on the well and I am aware you have knowledge of the subject and have never said that you don't know what you are talking about.

    I will leave it now
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Joey_Johns)
    Yes, but the problem lies with the BBC in this incident. When they roll in to town, they interview the local 'thickies' in the poor areas who stay stuff like 'send em back, they are taking all our money'. The BBC forget to mention only one poor area in Bunrley is actually BNP run. All the others are fairly affleunt, and in some cases very affluent areas. The BBC never interviews someone from Burnley who is well spoken and from an affluent area, thats what i'm taking about, giving the town the impression it is racist, when the vast majority arent.
    If your previous posts about fences etc referred to |Burnley then you are wrong to assume it has anything to do with the BNP. No BNP councellor has attended any council meetings since they were elected.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    I think this argument about all Brits being a result of immigration is a bit silly. True. But silly nevertheless.

    I never paid much attention to history but even I know that the last time Britain was sucessfully invaded was in 1066, almost a thousand years ago. I also know that up until that time Britain was invaded solely by various western/central european tribes, romans, saxons, jutes, vikings, celts etc.

    This means that the majority of white folks in Britain have been here at least 1000 years and some a good deal longer. It also means that irrespective of their date of arrival they are derived of a common western/central european ancestry.

    I think it's absolutely ridiculous to try and compare this ancient immigation of 1000+ years ago with the new immigration wave that really only started in 1950 and say "we're all immigrants" Strictly speaking it's true but logically it's meaningless.
    OK so what about the romans? The majority came from the roman empire, not Italy. The roman army had a policy of posting soldiers far from home so there were black soldiers on hadrians wall.

    What about slavery? Have you forgotten the black slaves in british homes? they were not all shipped off to america / the carribean you know. Bristol, Liverpool and other ports have had black communities for hundreds of years. In 1833 there were 15 000 ex slaves in London alone.

    Then there are the other people who have made britain home for a number of reasons. Maybe they fought in WW I and/or II and stayed. Lots of eastern europeans didn't have homes to return to after WWII.

    The BNP don't care about whether someone has contributed to society, worked, helped people, committed a crime, harmed someone they only care about the colour of a person's skin.

    Ever heard of Charles Richard Drew? He invented the blood bank. He then organised "blood for britain" pusuading americans to donate blood for british soldiers injured in WWII.

    In 1950 he was involved in a car crash, he was still alive when he arrived at hospital. The hospital refused to treat him. Guess why?
 
 
 
Poll
Do you think parents should charge rent?
Useful resources

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

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