Turn on thread page Beta
Put "Britain First" - watch
- Political Ambassador
- 31-01-2017 23:53
(Original post by MachinesCradle)
- 01-02-2017 00:33
Ethnic Japanese make up 98.5% of the population and for some strange reason it's a very developed country with a high quality of life.
(Original post by Treeroy)
Think you will also find that areas of Britain with 97%+ white population are the richest and most successful areas of the country.
"wealth" in Britain is concentrated in Anglo-saxon protestant areas, (the south)
the celtic and catholic areas are poorer (the north and cornwall )
(Original post by Danny the Geezer)
- 01-02-2017 01:45
Take it from me it's alright having ambition, then not being surrounded by the right peers/mentorship etc to achieve that ambition. But I take my hat if to those that do.
Again depends. Sometimes it's financially more rewarding to stay on benefits these days, have you seen the price of a single prescription item these days??
Isn't this the same principle that these protestors are protesting for though, to allow more refugees in because they are foreign, irrespective of their what they have to offer back to the UK? Since when did the UK have an obligation to take people in who have little to no skills to offer, can't speak the language, not all but some who have criminalistics intent, just because we have this unbeknown obligation???
Well, benefits are never really the better choice in terms of net income, but with regards to the ratio of effort to reward, definitely so.
Well, the UK has signed international agreements. Agreements which were required to be signed for the UK to benefit from political power in the world to pursue its own interests abroad (and as such secure a better life for its own population, at least in theory) and access to the economic powerhouse that is the EEA, etc.
The point is that the UK takes in a tremendously SMALL number of refugees, especially when compared to its population and economy. I suppose that the government is mismanaging the situation, and should make those refugees work in something called 'makework welfare'. I.e. cleaning the streets, helping with decorations, etc. Perhaps even undertaking qualifications which make them more employable. The answer is not kicking them out of the country and violating international law. Nevermind that it is a very immoral thing to do, especially in terms of total utility.
But you're right, in a sense. Those who aim to remain within the country ought to be forced (read: strongly pressured) to integrate and work and be an addition to society. The government should do a better job of taking care of its own people as well, especially the lower class (because there is always room for improvement). But kicking refugees out is the lazy and heartless way of going about it; it wouldn't take too much to make these people work and integrate. Or at least, to give them the choice to do that or else be thrown out.
Besides, these refugees help drive the economy which creates jobs for the British. In capitalism, few things are better than a growing population in stimulating the economy and providing jobs.