Post by tim...Post by harryhttp://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/04/03/u-n-easter-message-migration-inevitable-desirable-necessary/
Once upon a time immigrants had to fight on the beaches to get a
foothold and only those with greater numbers or better weapons than the
incumbents succeeded. The cull of local males and spread of DNA was good
for reducing in-breeding in isolated villages. There were no PC lefties
shouting "racist".
Now we lay out a welcome mat, shower them with money and the duty of the
navy is no longer to repel invaders but to provide a taxi service.
Post by tim...Post by harryPost by VidcapperPost by GBPost by harryThat's not a reason to let more savages into the country.
You're really a nasty piece of work, Harry.
What if he had said 'that's not a reason to let people into the
country
Post by Vidcapperwhose past had not been thoroughly vetted for criminal activity' - would
that have been better?
Savages and criminals are not necessarily the same thing.
How about we don't need more goat herders, taxi drivers, posters of
waste paper through the letter box and providers of fast food?
Post by tim...Post by harrya) You and I both know that's not what he meant.
b) The vast majority of people are not criminals. Are you proposing this
'thorough vetting' simply as an excuse to put immigration on hold for
umpteen years, or are you seriously suggesting that the vast resources
needed are put in place?
c) Checking with the police in the emigre's home country might be
possible at reasonable cost, but it's going to have very patchy results.
Migrants bring zero benefits to this country.
Rightly or wrongly that's not what the Treasury's (and other country's)
economic model says.
The government says immigration raises national GDP.
It may be good for massaging the government's finances but not
necessarily good for the rest of us when most of that GDP gain is based
upon the demand for property.
Post by tim...This is the problem here
It certainly is.