• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics

The Alternative is a war torn country not an EU as in your scenario its only us with open boarders.
The US safety net is small the Canada is large -more people want to get to America.
I'd suggest more people can get to America. One of the advantages of being an island is that we're reasonably difficult to access. #

And nobody wants to live in Canada. They're lives might be a risk, but they've not had their sense of humour removed.
 
I'd suggest more people can get to America. One of the advantages of being an island is that I'm a reasonably difficult to access. #

And nobody wants to live in Canada. They're lives might be a risk, but they've not had their sense of humour removed.
You won't be difficult to reach with free movement any one just jumps on a plane or slow boat.

So the safety net isn't as important as other intangible aspects... Glad we agree
 
You won't be difficult to reach with free movement any one just jumps on a plane or slow boat.

So the safety net isn't as important as other intangible aspects... Glad we agree
For the people likely to be dying in the streets, a plane or boat would likely cost a life's savings. Spending them to get to a country where they would die within weeks is hardly a decent prospect.

If other countries are not following our lead, then the draw to the UK would be hugely diminished.
 
For the people likely to be dying in the streets, a plane or boat would likely cost a life's savings. Spending them to get to a country where they would die within weeks is hardly a decent prospect.

If other countries are not following our lead, then the draw to the UK would be hugely diminished.
Average living standards would be so much higher that just the chance of getting in on it would be the draw. That and the lack of your kids getting raped etc.

Does sound like your plan is to make the UK as bad as war torn countries

And if we did it our average living standards would fall so much that in the medium term they won't want to come, you are right there
 
Last edited:
Average living standards would be so much higher that just the chance of getting in on it would be the draw. That and the lack of your kids getting raped etc.

Does sound like your plan is to make the UK as bad as war torn countries

And if we did it our average living standards would fall so much that in the medium term they won't want to come, you are right there
I think that's an intentionally inaccurate description of my posts.

We agree that the level of safety net is unimportant to someone fleeing a country. After all - even the most basic if if healthcare and shelter is probably better than they are leaving. But I disagree that a country with no safety net whatsoever (no shelter, no healthcare, etc) would be in any way appealing. Especially not when Germany and France would be both cheaper and easier to access with much better safety net provisions.
 
I think that's an intentionally inaccurate description of my posts.

We agree that the level of safety net is unimportant to someone fleeing a country. After all - even the most basic if if healthcare and shelter is probably better than they are leaving. But I disagree that a country with no safety net whatsoever (no shelter, no healthcare, etc) would be in any way appealing. Especially not when Germany and France would be both cheaper and easier to access with much better safety net provisions.
If you can jump on a plane from siria to the UK (free movement ) or pay a people smuggler to get into the EU (no free movement) with all the uncertainties attached you will take the first

My in laws were refugees in Jordan, had to pay for the pleasure (no safety net), they would have preferred the EU but that wasn't an option.
 
If you can jump on a plane from siria to the UK (free movement ) or pay a people smuggler to get into the EU (no free movement) with all the uncertainties attached you will take the first

My in laws were refugees in Jordan, had to pay for the pleasure (no safety net), they would have preferred the EU but that wasn't an option.
If you're in the UK and there's no safety net then the incentive to go elsewhere would be strong.
 
If you're in the UK and there's no safety net then the incentive to go elsewhere would be strong.
Same as turkey but they still have 2.6m refugees open the boarders and we have 10 times more, even if 10% manage to make it into Europe still got an extra london roaming the country.
 
Same as turkey but they still have 2.6m refugees open the boarders and we have 10 times more, even if 10% manage to make it into Europe still got an extra london roaming the country.
And if they have no safety net at all then they'll find a place that does.

Turkey shares a land mass with two continents, the UK doesn't.
 
And if they have no safety net at all then they'll find a place that does.

Turkey shares a land mass with two continents, the UK doesn't.
They don't need to, just hop on a plane or slow boat. They are desperate to leave Turkey and get into Europe but only a small percentage can leave as Europe protect its boarders
 
They don't need to, just hop on a plane or slow boat. They are desperate to leave Turkey and get into Europe but only a small percentage can leave as Europe protect its boarders
I'm not sure if you've noticed or not, but you can't walk from the UK to the EU mainland.

Nobody would use the UK the way Turkey is used, because it can't be used that way. Getting from Turkey to Greece or Bulgaria has it's obvious difficulties, but nothing like a 20 mile swim.
 
I'm not sure if you've noticed or not, but you can't walk from the UK to the EU mainland.

Nobody would use the UK the way Turkey is used, because it can't be used that way. Getting from Turkey to Greece or Bulgaria has it's obvious difficulties, but nothing like a 20 mile swim.

Well actually...

Two bloody great tunnels, secured to the same level as the Spurs goal tonight.
 
I'm not sure if you've noticed or not, but you can't walk from the UK to the EU mainland.

Nobody would use the UK the way Turkey is used, because it can't be used that way. Getting from Turkey to Greece or Bulgaria has it's obvious difficulties, but nothing like a 20 mile swim.
Do you think that the majority of Eastern Europeans that came here came because of benefits or due to the fact the wages and potential standard of living is higher. If the former I am sure you are wrong, if the later this is the reason why you would have a flood of people coming to the UK until the differential between their country and ours is diminished (either theirs goes up or more likely ours go down). There are currently 100's of millions of people where this is the case and there is no safety net in their own country. They wont have to walk here as they can jump on a boat or plane as we will be allowing anyone to enter - not everyone would be able to afford the cost but a lot would, they may prefer to go to a country with more protection but they wont let them in.

Once here they may wish to go to another country with access to benefits but this would not be open to them without engaging people smugglers, only a small percentage would be willing / able to go down that route. There would be little to no incentive to go to another country other than the UK as it would be likely that the only other countries to allow access would be those with a lower standard of living.

Result would be 10's millions extra people on the Island, lower wages and very likely social unrest.

Sometimes you become entrenched in the "market knows best", its almost a religion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DTA
Do you think that the majority of Eastern Europeans that came here came because of benefits or due to the fact the wages and potential standard of living is higher. If the former I am sure you are wrong, if the later this is the reason why you would have a flood of people coming to the UK until the differential between their country and ours is diminished (either theirs goes up or more likely ours go down). There are currently 100's of millions of people where this is the case and there is no safety net in their own country. They wont have to walk here as they can jump on a boat or plane as we will be allowing anyone to enter - not everyone would be able to afford the cost but a lot would, they may prefer to go to a country with more protection but they wont let them in.

Once here they may wish to go to another country with access to benefits but this would not be open to them without engaging people smugglers, only a small percentage would be willing / able to go down that route. There would be little to no incentive to go to another country other than the UK as it would be likely that the only other countries to allow access would be those with a lower standard of living.

Result would be 10's millions extra people on the Island, lower wages and very likely social unrest.

Sometimes you become entrenched in the "market knows best", its almost a religion.
I agree that those who have immigrated from Eastern Europe have done so for work, what you fail to assess is that the in work benefit system the UK currently runs for all EU citizens makes that far easier for them than the system I am proposing.

If we (as we should) allow the market to dictate what a person's labour is worth then yes, unskilled labour will become cheaper until the differential is smaller - that's the point of the whole exercise. If there is cheap labour available we should be using it. If someone from Eastern Europe can do what someone from the UK can do for less then I will (and do) employ them.

Under that system I'm not concerned with a higher population because my taxes won't be supporting that increase and neither will anyone else's.
 
Back