Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

The Geneva Convention says you don’t need to claim asylum in the first safe country. That makes sense because otherwise you’d just get neighbouring countries resources overwhelmed (this is despite 77% of people claiming asylum in a neighbouring country).

 

We take much less refugees than the other larger 60million+ European countries like Germany, France or Turkey. I personally don’t see why UK should be an exception and not take its fair share.

  • Like 3
Posted
1 hour ago, Parafox said:

 

 

I thought that to be the case and that is further proof, for me anyway, of his narcissism.

 

The man has no knowledge and/or no acceptance of anything outside of 'Murica.

 

I seem to recall something his mother supposedly said about the young Donald about him being stupid and ignorant and hoping he never goes into politics. 

He just embodies certain elements of our species that we thought we had left behind, more's the pity.

Posted
1 hour ago, Footballwipe said:

Protest vote or not, this debate is a clear show that the whole election vote is built on sand.

 

This election was on how the local council will run subsidised buses, SEND services, potholes, rights of way, adult social care, foster care, waste sites amongst so many other things.

 

All you lot are talking about is fvcking immigration and stopping the boats.

 

Local services suffer at the incompetence of the electorate desperate to sock it to parliament at the detriment of the functions that so many people need, yet so many people don't seem to care about.

Hallelujah. Nobody debating the services county councils actually provide. Just glib and vague statements that aim to wind people up and divide.

  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Sampson said:

Yeah and that’s fine. But then what is your practical alternative then? How do you solve population ageing without immigration? That’s the point of the question, it’s not a moral question.

Effective automation would be an answer to that.

 

But then the powers that be wouldn't approve of it being used to liberate from work, either, as they'd lose the power that they have.

Posted
Just now, The Year Of The Fox said:

Yes. We don’t have to take any as far as I’m aware. 

So say that then, rather than making all these excuses, just another person that doesnt like asylum seekers.  I'm not surprised I knew as soon as you asked me for the evidence and facts, and then called illegal and legal semantics lol.

 

reform and brexit voter by any chance?

  • Like 3
Posted
13 minutes ago, Sampson said:

The Geneva Convention says you don’t need to claim asylum in the first safe country. That makes sense because otherwise you’d just get neighbouring countries resources overwhelmed (this is despite 77% of people claiming asylum in a neighbouring country).

 

We take much less refugees than the other larger 60million+ European countries like Germany, France or Turkey. I personally don’t see why UK should be an exception and not take its fair share.

Our population density is quite a bit higher than Germany, and far far higher than France and Turkey

 

 

 

Guest Electric Yetis
Posted

I'd take all the boats in the world if it meant we could send all Reform voters the other way.

Posted
1 minute ago, purpleronnie said:

So say that then, rather than making all these excuses, just another person that doesnt like asylum seekers.  I'm not surprised I knew as soon as you asked me for the evidence and facts, and then called illegal and legal semantics lol.

 

reform and brexit voter by any chance?

They’re not excuses

 

They’re facts.

Posted
2 minutes ago, purpleronnie said:

What are?

My ‘excuses’

 

 

I DO really love the way the left out themselves in ways they don’t realise.

 

You generalise on me apparently not liking asylum seekers, and then you generalise on my referendum vote and election vote.

 

Aren’t the left against generalisation? After all, a Brexit voter or a Reform voter is massively into generalisation or stereotyping. Or is it ok to do the above, but only coming in from the left of politics? 

  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, The Year Of The Fox said:

Our population density is quite a bit higher than Germany, and far far higher than France and Turkey

 

 

 

What does population density have to do with our ability to build infrastructure for a few tens of thousands of people every year? From what I know the number of people coming in on small boats is not much bigger (if at all) than the number of people who leave the country every year, and make up a small percentage of all inward migration anyway

Edited by Sampson
Posted
Just now, The Year Of The Fox said:

My ‘excuses’

 

 

I DO really love the way the left out themselves in ways they don’t realise.

 

You generalise on me apparently not liking asylum seekers, and then you generalise on my referendum vote and election vote.

 

Aren’t the left against generalisation? After all, a Brexit voter or a Reform voter is massively into generalisation or stereotyping. Or is it ok to do the above, but only coming in from the left of politics? 

It's true you said you want less, less than the tiny percentage we have all ready, called illegal/legal semantics.  I asked if you were a reform/brexit voter, never said you were...semantics?

 

 

Posted
Just now, Sampson said:

What does population density have to do with our ability to build infrastructure? From what I know the number of people coming in on small boats is not much bigger (if at all) than the number of people who leave the country every year anyway.

I think we’re heading off on a tangent away from AS to migrants in general. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, Sampson said:

What does population density have to do with our ability to build infrastructure for a few tens of thousands of people every year? From what I know the number of people coming in on small boats is not much bigger (if at all) than the number of people who leave the country every year, and make up a small percentage of all inward migration anyway

Apparantly size of a country is very important, especially to people who's arguements about immigrants have been destroyed, and love to move the goal posts to something else.... everytime.

Posted

I'm not really im to politics. They're all as bad as each other. 

 

Didn't vote yesterday and rarely do.

 

Amazes me how everyone is so anti Reform though after they got so many votes. That doesn't add up, does nobody want to admit it?

 

Labour and the Tories have both had a go and fvcked it up.

 

But yeah, let's keep going round in circles with shit wages and some of the highest costs of living in the world.

 

Not a Reform fan by any means, but something needs changing.

 

Nobody can be happy with the way things are.

 

That's in general by the way, nothing to do with what others 'jokingly ' refer to as "brown people".

  • Like 2
Guest TamworthFoxes
Posted
3 minutes ago, tom27111 said:

I'm not really im to politics. They're all as bad as each other. 

 

Didn't vote yesterday and rarely do.

 

Amazes me how everyone is so anti Reform though after they got so many votes. That doesn't add up, does nobody want to admit it?

 

Labour and the Tories have both had a go and fvcked it up.

 

But yeah, let's keep going round in circles with shit wages and some of the highest costs of living in the world.

 

Not a Reform fan by any means, but something needs changing.

 

Nobody can be happy with the way things are.

 

That's in general by the way, nothing to do with what others 'jokingly ' refer to as "brown people".

It’s because General Chat is a left wing echo chamber.

Its worth dropping in on days like to day to witness the melt down.

But they all thrash it out, agree the reform voters are thick and it’s back to business as usual.

Posted
1 minute ago, purpleronnie said:

Apparantly size of a country is very important, especially to people who's arguements about immigrants have been destroyed, and love to move the goal posts to something else.... everytime.

I’m not moving any goal posts

 

Net migration last year was 730k approximately. 
 

Leeds has a population of 727k

 

How many hospitals does Leeds have? 5, a quick google says.

 

75 secondary schools 

252 Primary schools

 

 

Obviously I realise migrants spread around the country rather than settle in one area, however.
 

Crudely put, we’d need to build 5 hospitals, 252 Primary Schools and 75 secondary schools just to absorb last years net total alone. 
 

The year before were similar numbers

 

How can we sustain either

 

This increase without building the infrastructure required

 

or

 

Funding the infrastructure and staffing needs

 

 

Remember this would need to be done on a yearly basis?

 

It really isn’t feasible. It’s not racism, it’s just facts unfortunately. 
 

I guess I’d be able to go back and search in the general thread section and find posts of people discussing this current topic bemoaning the constant building on green belt land. 
 

Or complaining about schools being over subscribed and missing your kids preferred option.

 

I shan’t use the hospital appointment example as that’s a red rag to a bull these days. 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, tom27111 said:

I'm not really im to politics. They're all as bad as each other. 

 

Didn't vote yesterday and rarely do.

 

Amazes me how everyone is so anti Reform though after they got so many votes. That doesn't add up, does nobody want to admit it?

 

Labour and the Tories have both had a go and fvcked it up.

 

But yeah, let's keep going round in circles with shit wages and some of the highest costs of living in the world.

 

Not a Reform fan by any means, but something needs changing.

 

Nobody can be happy with the way things are.

 

That's in general by the way, nothing to do with what others 'jokingly ' refer to as "brown people".

Absolutely no qualms about me admitting I voted for Reform and Leave.

 

If people want to categorise me without actually knowing me, the issue lies with them, not me 

 

 

The outrage would be fair enough if the two main parties were actually half decent. But they’re not. (Even if Starmer has impressed me more than I thought he would)

Edited by The Year Of The Fox
Posted
5 minutes ago, TamworthFoxes said:

It’s because General Chat is a left wing echo chamber.

Its worth dropping in on days like to day to witness the melt down.

But they all thrash it out, agree the reform voters are thick and it’s back to business as usual.

If that's true, then why answer (perceived) ad hominems with more ad hominems?

 

There's plenty of people here wanting to talk about policy without taking man along with the ball. the latest commentary Stateside might not be an unreasonable place to start.

Posted
14 minutes ago, TamworthFoxes said:

It’s because General Chat is a left wing echo chamber.

Its worth dropping in on days like to day to witness the melt down.

But they all thrash it out, agree the reform voters are thick and it’s back to business as usual.

Sadly this place is disappointingly centrist. 
 

And I’m pretty sure nobody is calling reform voters thick, everybody knows we’re screwed, we just don’t think that Nigel bloody Farage has the solution. 

  • Like 4
Posted
2 hours ago, Lionator said:

Yep but these are problems that Reform are going to make worse not better because they’re for low tax, low wages.

Many voting for Reform won’t know what their policies are other than being anti-migration.

 

  • Like 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, The Year Of The Fox said:

I’m not moving any goal posts

 

Net migration last year was 730k approximately. 
 

Leeds has a population of 727k

 

How many hospitals does Leeds have? 5, a quick google says.

 

75 secondary schools 

252 Primary schools

 

 

Obviously I realise migrants spread around the country rather than settle in one area, however.
 

Crudely put, we’d need to build 5 hospitals, 252 Primary Schools and 75 secondary schools just to absorb last years net total alone. 
 

The year before were similar numbers

 

How can we sustain either

 

This increase without building the infrastructure required

 

or

 

Funding the infrastructure and staffing needs

 

 

Remember this would need to be done on a yearly basis?

 

It really isn’t feasible. It’s not racism, it’s just facts unfortunately. 
 

I guess I’d be able to go back and search in the general thread section and find posts of people discussing this current topic bemoaning the constant building on green belt land. 
 

Or complaining about schools being over subscribed and missing your kids preferred option.

 

I shan’t use the hospital appointment example as that’s a red rag to a bull these days. 

 

 

 

 

We have terrible infrastructure in this country.  Tories failed to build all the hospitals they promised.  Brexit increased both legal and illegal immigration.  Of course those figures include students who often leave.

 

Immigration must be matched with investment in UK infrastructure, and there's no reason why it shouldn't be.  Of course you could argue the vast majority work and pay taxes so should have very little impact on infrastructure.

 

  • Like 1
Posted
12 minutes ago, The Year Of The Fox said:

Absolutely no qualms about me admitting I voted for Reform and Leave.

 

If people want to categorise me without actually knowing me, the issue lies with them, not me 

 

 

The outrage would be fair enough if the two main parties were actually half decent. But they’re not. (Even if Starmer has impressed me more than I thought he would)

I was right then, so much for generalisations  lol

 

Hows brexit worked out for you, less migrants no doubt?  Oh wait.

 

Bet it wasn't implemented right?

  • Like 2
Posted
4 hours ago, CosbehFox said:

I am just hoping that their inability to govern is going to expose them. Those County Councils are going to be a total car crash. That's off the pure inability or experience of the newly elected councillors rather than any opinion of Reform's policies. 

I would imagine many are former UKIP members and we know what headbangers many of them turned out to be.

 

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...