Will the EU clamp down on immigration?

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/11/28/uk-britain-politics-immigration-cameron-idUKKCN0JC00J20141128

Looks like England is leading the charge to curtail immigration on the basis that they cannot sustain the population economically.

Originally posted by whodey
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/11/28/uk-britain-politics-immigration-cameron-idUKKCN0JC00J20141128

Looks like England is leading the charge to curtail immigration on the basis that they cannot sustain the population economically.

You're wrong. The UK government is seeking to curb migration from other EU countries not because they are a burden on the UK economy (quite the opposite), but because the Tories are afraid of the UKIP and seek to halt their recent electoral gains.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
You're wrong. The UK government is seeking to curb migration from other EU countries not because they are a burden on the UK economy (quite the opposite), but because the Tories are afraid of the UKIP and seek to halt their recent electoral gains.

Are you saying immigration at current levels are unpopular politically?

Originally posted by normbenign
Are you saying immigration at current levels are unpopular politically?

Among the chavs and other scum whose votes the Tories seek, yes.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Among the chavs and other scum whose votes the Tories seek, yes.

So some constituencies you don't like are opposed to current levels of immigration? Nations exist due to borders, language and culture. Protecting those is important to some people.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
You're wrong. The UK government is seeking to curb migration from other EU countries not because they are a burden on the UK economy (quite the opposite), but because the Tories are afraid of the UKIP and seek to halt their recent electoral gains.

UKIP are were they are now because migration is a burden on the UK economy .

Originally posted by phil3000
UKIP are were they are now because migration is a burden on the UK economy .

I'm sure you have lots of facts to back up that claim.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-24517983

Originally posted by phil3000
UKIP are were they are now because migration is a burden on the UK economy .

In general that's not true. They get skills for free as the host country does not have to pay for education. It's a problem for the indigenous population because immigrants are used as a stick to beat them with - work harder for less pay or we'll give your job to someone who will. It isn't great for the East European member states as they are losing skills. There is an obvious long term problem for Britain if it carries on this way because there's a housing shortage and landlords here seem to think they are entitled to charge more in rent than a mortgage costs. What we need is to get rid of the ********s who think that people here, immigrants or indigenous, are just devices to make them richer. UKIP will not do that, they'll just make things worse.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
I'm sure you have lots of facts to back up that claim.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-24517983

And you believe the BBC ?

Originally posted by phil3000
And you believe the BBC ?

So... are you going to back up your claims or not?

By what measure are EU migrants a "burden" on the UK economy?

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
So... are you going to back up your claims or not?

By what measure are EU migrants a "burden" on the UK economy?

You can cherry pick claims all day and you will find the one to back your argument . There is a massive strain on public services ,housing ,schooling, etc . I believe a city the size of Birmingham would have to be built every year to accommodate the influx of migrants coming to the UK .
Look at the swing toward UKIP ,this is not a far right reaction but a reaction from a large sway of the British people of all political persuasions fed up of being dictated to by Brussels and left wing nutter's

Originally posted by normbenign
So some constituencies you don't like are opposed to current levels of immigration? Nations exist due to borders, language and culture. Protecting those is important to some people.

Nations exist due to borders of course, but rarely coincide with either language or culture. The attempt to impose uniformity on populations that are actually diverse has been consistently a disaster and a stain on the record of humanity.

Britain is called the "United Kingdom" to reflect, in fact, that it is comprised of a number of distinct cultural and language groups, with different although overlapping histories, despite a strong effort (especially in the Education Acts of the 1870s) to impose uniformity.

After centuries of violence, the EU reflects a real effort to make borders and cultural differences less divisive of peoples in Europe who actually share a common history and many common values, regardless of their cultural differences. The claim that the EU harms local cultures is unfounded. As seen in the recent Scottish referendum, the EU provides a framework within which it is more possible, not less so, to express local cultures. Cultural diversity is a great attribute of the EU - not uniformity.

The nation state is largely an ideological goal, devised in the Nineteenth century Europe as an antidote to French cultural and military imperialism. The attempt to achieve cultural uniformity is in practice deeply oppressive. The relative uniformity of language and values in the USA was achieved through violence.

At Versailles in 1918, Wilson's attempt to extend the delights of the nation state to other regions, not least the former Ottoman Empire, has proven disastrous. Indeed, the hymns sung to the rights of small nations, exemplified then in plucky little Belgium, were referring to the occupiers of one of the world's most vicious and destructive empires, in the Belgian Congo. Neither France nor Britain gave much shift for the rights of the small nations absorbed into their empires while America's Monroe Doctrine accompanied US interference throughout Central and South America. None of the dominant nation states have ever respected the rights of any less powerful state that got in their way.

Yugoslavia, Rwanda, Syria, Ukraine are not good exemplars of the benefits of cultural and language uniformity in the modern nation state.

Stop romanticising nations. Nationalism is a poison that does untold harm.

Originally posted by finnegan
Nations exist due to borders of course, but rarely coincide with either language or culture. The attempt to impose uniformity on populations that are actually diverse has been consistently a disaster and a stain on the record of humanity.

Britain is called the "United Kingdom" to reflect, in fact, that it is comprised of a number of distinct cultural an ...[text shortened]... ern nation state.

Stop romanticising nations. Nationalism is a poison that does untold harm.

Very interesting , thumbs up from me .
Nationalism is a pack mentality ,it's in our genes .

Originally posted by normbenign
Nations exist due to borders, language and culture. Protecting those is important to some people.

What rubbish!
Apart from "nation" being a very vague term I cannot see how its existence
could be dependent on language or culture. The UK is composed of many
regional cultures as well as culture from abroad. The national dish is a curry!

Originally posted by finnegan
Nations exist due to borders of course, but rarely coincide with either language or culture. The attempt to impose uniformity on populations that are actually diverse has been consistently a disaster and a stain on the record of humanity.

Excellent post.