Dubstepforum.com

m8son wrote:What i don't understand is how come australia can have this strict immigration policy and no-one bats an eye but if we consider the same it becomes racist?

australia is becoming very right wing bringing in loads of stuff the people don't like. they are comlaining. we don't hear about it because theyre several thousand miles away and it doesn't impact us much.

wub wrote:

jaydot wrote:

wub wrote:

jaydot wrote:

wub wrote:Why are you entitled to take out of the pot if you haven't paid in, but someone who has been working for 4yrs who isn't from this country isn't?

I have worked in the past and paid taxes, admittedly not much and not for long.

Right.

So why are you entitled and they're not?

I think you should pay "more" into the "pot" as a migrant who a.) previously hasn't done so. b.) to compensate for the public services you use. No one can calculate exactly how many immigrants come into the country what with illegals and then you have asylum seekers/refugees who won't contribute anything barely so I think there has to be a threshold of "compensation". Afterall, you're an "extra mouth to feed"

Well technically, in this example you're the extra mouth to feed. They're working, earning a wage, and paying into the pot.

You're on an extended sicky.

That's through no fault of my own. Immigrants make a conscious choice to come into the country My Dad and Mum pay taxes, they can cover my "sicky".

When I move to Mexico at the end of the year with the intention of taking a job which doesn't require me to speak the language does that make me as bad as the millions of Bulgarians and Romanians that didn't flood this country or does the fact that we're not in a political/economic union with Mexico means it's ok

jaydot wrote: No one can calculate exactly how many immigrants come into the country what with illegals and then you have asylum seekers/refugees who won't contribute anything barely so I think there has to be a threshold of "compensation"

well apparently, these guys did: http://www.cream-migration.org/publ_upl ... _22_13.pdf

you might not like their findings:

By assigning individuals their share of cost for each item of government expenditure and
identifying their contribution to each source of government revenues, we are able to provide
precise estimates for each year since 1995 (2001 for recent immigrants) on both the overall
expenditure on the respective immigrant populations and the revenues they have produced in
comparison to native born workers.(...)
The perhaps most important finding of our analysis is that immigrants are overall less likely than
natives to receive state benefits or tax credits, and similarly likely to live in social housing as
natives in the same region. Some differences do emerge, however, between immigrants from the
European Economic Area (EEA) and those from outside Europe (non-EEA). Whereas EEA
immigrants have made an overall positive fiscal contribution to the UK, the net fiscal balance of
non-EEA immigrants is negative, as it is for natives.
Recent immigrants, i.e. those who arrived since 2000, are less likely to both receiving benefits
and living in social housing than natives. Furthermore, recent immigrants, both those from EEA
and non-EEA countries have made a positive net contribution to the UK fiscal system despite the
UK’s running a budget deficit over most of the 2000s.

So, just to recap;

1) British 27yr old, in sick leave despite only having worked "a bit and not for long" = entitled to benefits

2) Immigrant 27r old, full time employed for 4.5yrs = not entitled to benefits


You're saying this setup is okay because your Mum & Dad pay taxes?

particle-jim wrote:When I move to Mexico at the end of the year with the intention of taking a job which doesn't require me to speak the language does that make me as bad as the millions of Bulgarians and Romanians that didn't flood this country or does the fact that we're not in a political/economic union with Mexico means it's ok

cerdo Inglés, que viene y tomar nuestros puestos de trabajo.

it's bare jokes when australia gets all racist and aggy about immigrants coming to their country...like ...u man have been there like 200 years or so and i don't think you're about to run out of space anytime soon

jaydot wrote:1.) Leaving the EU: We'd still continue free trade with our European counterparts but not have EU obligations, that means no mass immigration from countries like Romania and Bulgaria, and that's got to be a good thing.

I'm doubtful of that. The EU is an asshole. They know that the UK and EU depend on each other and would instate heavy tarrifs or other bribes on the UK to bribe them back in. I'm anti-EU myself, but this reasoning doesn't work.

jaydot wrote:2.) Scrapping of Bedroom Tax: Which is essentially a Robin Hood Tax.

I'm unfamiliar with the issue.

jaydot wrote:3.) No votes for prisoners: They should lose their right to vote as soon as they're incarcerated

Prisoners are the most aware of the unfairness of many drug laws.

jaydot wrote:4.) No cuts to frontline policing: Good thing, yes?

Don't know about this issue either.

jaydot wrote:5.) No benefits or private health insurance to immigrants for five years: As their manifesto points out they must "pay into before they take out, of the pot

That's a superficial sollution to a deeper problem (health insurance and the UK's immigration policy -- I support fully open borders however).

jaydot wrote:6.) Priority of social housing given to British people: YES! Finally! What I've been saying for nigh on ten years. I don't know how this will work (I read it on aleaflet through my door) but blue collar British workers, single parents, Brits on benefits (could be JSA, ESA, DLA) get first refusal on soial housing if their parents or grandparents were born in the area. As I say I'm not sure how they will implement it but hats off if they do, I don't know how many of you have applied for council housing or have any knowledge of the system but the wait is ridiculous and I know Manchester for one is regenerating areas only to put immigrants in the new houses they build.

Scrap social housing alltogether.

jaydot wrote:7.) No tax on the minimum wage.

That's not half bad.

jaydot wrote:8.) Make cuts to foreing aid that are "real and rigorous", another thing I've been wondering a while, why do we let our British people freeze and starve on the streets when we're giving millions if not billions in foreign aid?

I agree with cuts on international aid, but not for the reasons you suggested.

jaydot wrote:YOU decide.

Riddles wrote:cerdo Inglés, que viene y tomar nuestros puestos de trabajo.

Yep, and their women too

m8son wrote:What i don't understand is how come australia can have this strict immigration policy and no-one bats an eye but if we consider the same it becomes racist?

I dunno what their imports and stuff are like or how investment works but that could be a reason. Basically globalisation is based on freely moving capital/investment/labour.. you can have a strict immigration policy if you equally have a strict imports and investment policy. If you want to live in a globalised world you can't have completely freely moving capital and investment but really strict labour, it doesn't work like that. I don't exactly know about Australia but that may be the case, if they're quite strict on the movement of other things and are pretty closed off altogether then strict policy on immigration is fine. In a country like the UK or in Europe which is extremely open to trade and investment you can't be strict on immigration, its basically being 100% in favour of globalisation between monday-friday but weekend 100% against it lol.. if we are totally in favour of globalisation if its investment or materials but if its a foreigner fuck right off.. thats why its seen as racist or xenophobic.

If we did adopt what Jaydot is suggesting then realistically we'd have to restrict investment to "British only" and never import anything and rely on our own resources.

That really just boils down to whether you are in favour of globalisation or not.

If anybody has some info on whether aussies are as cut off as their immigration policy would suggest it'd be interesting to hear.

Ahh ok that makes sense, but i'm under the impression that we buy more off europe than they buy off us so surely they will want to trade with us whatever happens?

Judging by the few bits and pieces of Australian culture that I've imbibed, I would say that they are considered relatively racist compared to the rest of the developed world, even by themselves. Chris Lilley wouldn't be donning blackface as S-Mouse if he was British or American!

m8son wrote:What i don't understand is how come australia can have this strict immigration policy and no-one bats an eye but if we consider the same it becomes racist?

Australian immigration policy is informed by racist ideologies. i wrote an essay on it last year as part of my degree

this is the racial ideology its based on
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Australia_policy
its pretty much borderline what you can get away with without being racist


Jaydot reply to what i wrote on the last page

m8son wrote:Ahh ok that makes sense, but i'm under the impression that we buy more off europe than they buy off us so surely they will want to trade with us whatever happene?

While we import more than we export, if we were forced to pay more to sell our stuff to our main importers we would be fucked.

wub wrote:

Riddles wrote:cerdo Inglés, que viene y tomar nuestros puestos de trabajo.

Yep, and their women too

wub wrote:So, just to recap;

1) British 27yr old, in sick leave despite only having worked "a bit and not for long" = entitled to benefits

2) Immigrant 27r old, full time employed for 4.5yrs = not entitled to benefits


You're saying this setup is okay because your Mum & Dad pay taxes?

Look at it this way: Someone fresh into the country, maybe with a husband/wife, a couple of kids-low-skilled, poorly educated, doesn't speak the lingo, doesn't know the culture, basically out for anything they can get benefits wise. Will use more in public services than they pay in taxes probably.

vs

Someone who has every intention of working when fit, has paid taxes in the past, was born here (and yeah that should give you first refusal on jobs, housing etc by default I stand by that, people can't effectively argue why not seemingly), can speak the language, obviously knows the culture, well educated, upstanding member of the community through the 2 years voluntary work he's done.

I guess if they can speak the language and have integrated themselves into society it's a bonus, it's not always just about who's paid the most taxes.

Oh right ok, what is the economy like in australia? Are the 'racist' policies working for them?

Genevieve wrote:

jaydot wrote:1.) Leaving the EU: We'd still continue free trade with our European counterparts but not have EU obligations, that means no mass immigration from countries like Romania and Bulgaria, and that's got to be a good thing.

I'm doubtful of that. The EU is an asshole. They know that the UK and EU depend on each other and would instate heavy tarrifs or other bribes on the UK to bribe them back in. I'm anti-EU myself, but this reasoning doesn't work.

jaydot wrote:2.) Scrapping of Bedroom Tax: Which is essentially a Robin Hood Tax.

I'm unfamiliar with the issue.

jaydot wrote:3.) No votes for prisoners: They should lose their right to vote as soon as they're incarcerated

Prisoners are the most aware of the unfairness of many drug laws.

jaydot wrote:4.) No cuts to frontline policing: Good thing, yes?

Don't know about this issue either.

jaydot wrote:5.) No benefits or private health insurance to immigrants for five years: As their manifesto points out they must "pay into before they take out, of the pot

That's a superficial sollution to a deeper problem (health insurance and the UK's immigration policy -- I support fully open borders however).

jaydot wrote:6.) Priority of social housing given to British people: YES! Finally! What I've been saying for nigh on ten years. I don't know how this will work (I read it on aleaflet through my door) but blue collar British workers, single parents, Brits on benefits (could be JSA, ESA, DLA) get first refusal on soial housing if their parents or grandparents were born in the area. As I say I'm not sure how they will implement it but hats off if they do, I don't know how many of you have applied for council housing or have any knowledge of the system but the wait is ridiculous and I know Manchester for one is regenerating areas only to put immigrants in the new houses they build.

Scrap social housing alltogether.

jaydot wrote:7.) No tax on the minimum wage.

That's not half bad.

jaydot wrote:8.) Make cuts to foreing aid that are "real and rigorous", another thing I've been wondering a while, why do we let our British people freeze and starve on the streets when we're giving millions if not billions in foreign aid?

I agree with cuts on international aid, but not for the reasons you suggested.

jaydot wrote:YOU decide.

Scrap social housing altogether? Really?

jaydot wrote:Scrap social housing altogether? Really?

I'm so right wing, even jaydot is losing his shit over it

m8son wrote:Oh right ok, what is the economy like in australia? Are the 'racist' policies working for them?

no idea, but if thats enough for you to justify it...