General News Thread

[Samilktray]

11 minutes ago, StanSP said:

You make it sound like we've all had the same experience. 

 

I've come across loads of people of the demographic you've collectively all piled into one. But my experience is different. 

 

I've not come across a Muslim person who disagrees with the general lifestyle here. I don't see them complaining about people drinking, eating pork or bacon, not fasting during Ramadan, embracing Christmas and Easter and other holidays celebrated here. 

 

 

None of them care what you or I or anyone else is doing to be fair, and if they do theyre obviously complete nutters anyway

[Stevosevic]

Genuine question for those so accepting of all people outside of controlled migration.

 

How do you think Europe will look in 50 years time? Do you think we are on a better path currently? 

[leicsmac]

3 minutes ago, Stevosevic said:

Genuine question for those so accepting of all people outside of controlled migration.

 

How do you think Europe will look in 50 years time? Do you think we are on a better path currently? 

Unless serious measures are taken in 50 years time there will be a migration crisis that will make the present one look like a picnic, because over a billion people will have to move from places that will simply become uninhabitable due to lack of potable water (or an excess of it at the wrong time).

[Stevosevic]

2 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Unless serious measures are taken in 50 years time there will be a migration crisis that will make the present one look like a picnic, because over a billion people will have to move from places that will simply become uninhabitable due to lack of potable water (or an excess of it at the wrong time).

At least we are voting in people who are focused on winning support by pandering to a group’s foreign grievances though. It’s in this country’s best interests though of course…
 

 

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, Stevosevic said:

At least we are voting in people who are focused on winning support by pandering to a group’s foreign grievances though. It’s in this country’s best interests though of course…
 

 

 Not sure what that has to do with the original point made, but fair enough. 

[Stevosevic]

The future of the UK. Used and then replaced. So much to look forward to.

 

 

 

[Sampson]

21 minutes ago, Stevosevic said:

Genuine question for those so accepting of all people outside of controlled migration.

 

How do you think Europe will look in 50 years time? Do you think we are on a better path currently? 

Europe without migration will be a bunch of old people because people haven’t been having babies for 50 years. So would be a population of retirees and pensioners (with the pension being by far and away the biggest benefit given out by almost all western governments and also by far and away the biggest users of healthcare) who can’t be supported by a working minority who all their wages get taxed into pension and healthcare systems for 70 year olds. And because the majority of the population are seniors, they’ll all vote to keep that system because working age people will not have enough votes to change it. 
 

Don’t know if it’s still true with defence spending increase, but certainly until a few years ago, our government spent more on its pension benefits system already than it did on defence, housing and education combined.
 

I think what you’re missing is a lot of western culture will die out regardless because no one is having children so we’re going to end up with exponential shrinkage of the population once we reach the threshold for it. See the ghost towns and cultural traditions dying out in rural Japan for example.

 

Be interesting to see how Japan and South Korea look in 50 years as seriously ageing populations, exceedingly low birth rates for generations and with very little migration too.

Edited 27 February by Sampson

[Spudulike]

46 minutes ago, CornwallFox said:

They aren't here illegally, no matter how many times you say it. The supreme court has confirmed that position. Until their asylum claims are processed they are here. If they are not granted asylum and fail any appeals then they can be removed.

 

The issue is that the Tories intentionally stopped processing claims, leading to a huge backlog of people then being put into hotels etc. Your ire should be directed at a party intentionally causing a problem they thought would help them electorally. 

 

The current government has started making progress on the backlog, has overseen record numbers leaving, and it's trying to cut the costs off accommodation - though that is difficult as jenrick signed contracts with hotels until 2029. If you don't like the costs off asylum seekers then you should be supportive of these things. 

 

No matter what % are granted or not granted asylum in the end, while they are claiming asylum they are allowed to be here so allowing them to work would allow us to offset the cost, and potentially give them a route to show they are productive members of society, again something you should support if cost and fairness are your key concerns.

They are illegal the moment they arrive and can be removed at anytime before an assylum claim is made.

[Lionator]

18 minutes ago, Stevosevic said:

Genuine question for those so accepting of all people outside of controlled migration.

 

How do you think Europe will look in 50 years time? Do you think we are on a better path currently? 

Nobody wants people crossing on dinghy’s whether you’re left, right or washing machine. Europe is screwed because we deindustrialised in the late 70’s, early 80’s and we don’t have enough workers to undertake manual labour jobs such as within the care sector. So unless we massively incentivise white people to do these jobs by increasing the minimum wage to something livable (which would be seen as economically reckless), you’ll have to put up with non white people from poorer countries doing these jobs on the cheap to prevent collapse.

Edited 27 February by Lionator

[danny.]

Just now, Lionator said:

Nobody wants people crossing on dinghy’s whether you’re left, right or washing machine. Europe is screwed because we deindustrialised in the late 70’s, early 80’s and we don’t have enough workers to undertake manual labour jobs such as within the care sector. So unless we massively incentivise white people to do these jobs by increasing the minimum wage to something livable (which would be seen as economically reckless), you’ll have to put up with non white people from poorer countries doing these jobs on the cheap. 

Fortunately we're going to have a lot of white collar people looking for a job in the near future so that will solve that problem. 

[CornwallFox]

37 minutes ago, danny. said:

I'm not right of Lib dem, though. Although they have had my vote every time bar a few forays into Green and Labour (Corbyn era, anyway). It's very tricky to define the political spectrum as everyone has their own definition of it now, and - as I say - the observer's own position adds a lot of bias to that.

Yea I think you have that pretty wrong IMHO, as an ideology, Islam is hard-right, so alliance with the left makes little sense. For example its views on women, LGBT, trans etc are in line with extreme- right Christian conservative in the US, Westboro Baptist Church territory. 

Fair enough re your position politically. 

 

That is a good point re the inherent conservatism of most religious groups, but I'm not sure how much that lines up with political conservatism.

 

Let's be honest, the number of active Christians in this country is tiny - not just those who claim to be Christian while doing and saying nothing Christian, but those who actively go to a church to celebrate their religion, I'm not even sure which part of the electorate you'd line them up with. There's certainly nothing Christian about the current right wing leaders, reform, who are the party that are currently most trying to link politics to a supposed Christian state of Britain. Whereas the left wing parties tend to adopt positions and policies more in keeping with the messages of key religions - they're more peace and love I suppose. 

[danny.]

1 minute ago, CornwallFox said:

Fair enough re your position politically. 

 

That is a good point re the inherent conservatism of most religious groups, but I'm not sure how much that lines up with political conservatism.

 

Let's be honest, the number of active Christians in this country is tiny - not just those who claim to be Christian while doing and saying nothing Christian, but those who actively go to a church to celebrate their religion, I'm not even sure which part of the electorate you'd line them up with. There's certainly nothing Christian about the current right wing leaders, reform, who are the party that are currently most trying to link politics to a supposed Christian state of Britain. Whereas the left wing parties tend to adopt positions and policies more in keeping with the messages of key religions - they're more peace and love I suppose. 

Totally agree, which is where the alliance with Islamic ideology makes absolutely no sense, yet we see it all the time.

[Stevosevic]

6 minutes ago, Lionator said:

Nobody wants people crossing on dinghy’s whether you’re left, right or washing machine. Europe is screwed because we deindustrialised in the late 70’s, early 80’s and we don’t have enough workers to undertake manual labour jobs such as within the care sector. So unless we massively incentivise white people to do these jobs by increasing the minimum wage to something livable (which would be seen as economically reckless), you’ll have to put up with non white people from poorer countries doing these jobs on the cheap to prevent collapse.

I’m not sure that’s the case made tbh 😂 

[Lionator]

5 minutes ago, danny. said:

Fortunately we're going to have a lot of white collar people looking for a job in the near future so that will solve that problem. 

True, the people that already can’t get on the mortgage ladder (and no that’s not because of asylum seekers). 

[CornwallFox]

1 minute ago, danny. said:

Totally agree, which is where the alliance with Islamic ideology makes absolutely no sense, yet we see it all the time.

Islamic ideology is for the most part peace and love. Maybe the divide is really just on how much we believe Islam is a force for ill or don't believe it is (not the same as believing it's a force for good, as I'd rather we had no religions). 

[Stevosevic]

10 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

They are illegal the moment they arrive and can be removed at anytime before an assylum claim is made.

Careful you’ll be called racist for not being accepting

[Trumpet]

Just now, CornwallFox said:

Islamic ideology is for the most part peace and love. Maybe the divide is really just on how much we believe Islam is a force for ill or don't believe it is (not the same as believing it's a force for good, as I'd rather we had no religions). 

But not same sex love, right?

[CornwallFox]

Just now, Trumpet said:

But not same sex love, right?

I suppose this is where political parties are flawed. Let's be honest, we live in a world where everybody tries to back up their liking for a particular party by claiming everything they do is right, and nothing is wrong. Nobody admits any flaws in their world views any more. 

 

Reality is that political parties have memberships and voters that cover a spectrum of people. Their overall world view is likely to be similar, hence them feeling able to come together. But within that there will also be many differences in outlooks on individual policies. And at times that will mean diametric opposition to each other within a party.

 

We pretend this is a party failure but it's simply human nature. We group ourselves together with those we feel we have commonalities with, but then argue and squabble within those groups. 

 

There's no policy on the left which directly benefits Islam above anything else, so clearly if Islamic peoples (as many other originally immigrant groups) are voting left wing it's because they feel those parties more broadly share an outlook. 

[Stevosevic]

7 minutes ago, Trumpet said:

But not same sex love, right?

It’s also strange how the Islamic vote aligned to the left wing party when they don’t even treat women equally. Not exactly very left wing is it?

 

I think people are right to be confused by the alliance. 

[Lionator]

9 minutes ago, Trumpet said:

But not same sex love, right?

There are many older white people that still squirm at us gay people. Everyone laughing about pronouns and whatever too. Muslims in the uk aren’t stopping anyone from being gay. Again what do you suggest we do about it?

[StanSP]

12 minutes ago, Trumpet said:

But not same sex love, right?

You make it sound like that's only an Islam problem. When it quite obviously isn't just that. 

 

Not quite the 'gotcha' you think it is. 

 

[CornwallFox]

28 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

They are illegal the moment they arrive and can be removed at anytime before an assylum claim is made.

 

17 minutes ago, Stevosevic said:

Careful you’ll be called racist for not being accepting

Elements of the illegal migration act 2023 that banned migrants entering the UK irregularly from claiming asylum were never enforced and are in the process of being repealed. To claim asylum an immigrant simply have to tell a border force officer that is their intention. So in reality what you're saying isn't true.

 

For the record, the new laws Labour are seeking to enact look to Denmark as inspiration, a country where asylum claims are currently at a 40 year low. 

 

 

Edited 27 February by CornwallFox

[Trumpet]

6 minutes ago, Lionator said:

There are many older white people that still squirm at us gay people. Everyone laughing about pronouns and whatever too. Muslims in the uk aren’t stopping anyone from being gay. Again what do you suggest we do about it?

First point on older white people that still squirm at gay people - agreed and in my view and most, is wrong.

 

On Muslims in the UK not stopping people being gay - because they're thankfully not able to. Are gay Muslim’s in the UK unable to be openly so, due to religion and culture? I’d say so. 

[Trumpet]

6 minutes ago, StanSP said:

You make it sound like that's only an Islam problem. When it quite obviously isn't just that. 

 

Not quite the 'gotcha' you think it is. 

 

Wasn’t intended to be a gotcha. I just can’t sit by as Islam is described as for the most part peace and love. Maybe selective peace and love would be more appropriate.

Edited 27 February by Trumpet

[StanSP]

1 minute ago, Trumpet said:

Wasn’t intended to be a gotcha. I just can’t sit by as Islam is described as peace and love. Maybe selective peace and love would be more appropriate.

Fundamentally, it is. 

 

Radical and extremist Islam isn't. Much like any other radical and extremist far right group relying on religion and culture to see their point through.