Immigrant / Freedom of movement What do we actually mean?

[bkgirl]

I voted leave and am against free movement. It seems apparent that most people think some sort of controls are necessary.
I guess it's like having a party - you can invite a certain amount but if it is open house, well it's gonna end up a disaster for everyone.
By the same token, who am I inviting? Yep, I would like lots of different people at my party but I also don't want them fighting. People should get along for the party to be a success.
So surely controls and balances are appropriate? It's not about limiting immigration (which can be very positive) to silly numbers but setting it at levels we can cope with and it will maintain tolerance between the groups.Every group should feel safe here that requires one group doesn't dominate another.It also requires that everyone conforms to our laws. I don't know what that figure is? No doubt ukip's numbers are too small but what is the right figure?
By maintaining a tolerant society, the extreme right wing will lose their energy/power.
Maybe some remainers would see the sense in this? Or do you still feel the freedom of movement makes sense? (Forget about what the EU wants, just think about what YOU want for here).

[MaidOfStars]

To be honest?

I genuinely feel that the fact I am British is merely a geographical accident of birth. I don't feel I deserve any special treatment for it. Given two people both applying for a UK job, one British and one French, I simply cannot make an argument for why the British person should, by similar accident of birth, have more of a right to it.

To use your analogy, I don't feel like it is MY party, therefore I don't think I have the right to stick a bouncer on the door.

More pragmatically, EU migrants are net contributors. That makes economic sense for the country.

[MaidOfStars]

To pick up on points in your post:
but setting it at levels we can cope with
We have low unemployment, so we have the work for people. We may not have the infrastructure to "cope", but that's the the immigrant's fault, it's the woeful lack of infrastructure funding and decimation of public services. The immigrant pays their taxes - they expect a GP's appointment too.

It also requires that everyone conforms to our laws
I don't understand. Which immigrant group doesn't conform to our laws? Have you reported them to the police?

[MaidOfStars]

Correction: that's not the immigrant's fault

[NikiSaintPhalle]

I guess it's like having a party - you can invite a certain amount but if it is open house, well it's gonna end up a disaster for everyone. By the same token, who am I inviting? Yep, I would like lots of different people at my party but I also don't want them fighting. People should get along for the party to be a success.

That metaphor really doesn't work.

Unless people regularly pay thousands of pounds to traffickers, trek halfway across the world and risk their lives in overcrowded dinghies to get to your party. Unless your sense of what kind of 'mix' of people you want at the party overrules all else. Unless the country is your private house. Unless you think you shouldn't invite Syrians/Muslims/economic migrants/whatever because them being a visible presence will make some of your other guests and racist Uncle Nigel uncomfortable.

[BreakingDad77]

So surely controls and balances are appropriate? It's not about limiting immigration (which can be very positive) to silly numbers but setting it at levels we can cope with and it will maintain tolerance between the groups.

Immigrants pay more tax than take in benefits, so hypothetically swap one of those with a UK person you would still have the same pressure on services. We are barely maintaining services based on taxes now.

[ApricotSorbet99]

I genuinely feel that the fact I am British is merely a geographical accident of birth. I don't feel I deserve any special treatment for it. Given two people both applying for a UK job, one British and one French, I simply cannot make an argument for why the British person should, by similar accident of birth, have more of a right to it

I am genuinely staggered at the childishness of this comment. Have you not bothered to follow it through to it's logical conclusion?

Do you feel this way about the entire planet? That basically any job here should be available to absolutely anyone anywhere in the world (with the funds for airfare) who wants it? Or are you confining this odd ideology to a few select countries in Europe?

What do you think about the border controls that we operate for 90% of the planet's population? Have a problem with that? Are we being "racist, xenophobes" for wanting to decide who comes in?

In a lovely world of equality, maybe the "accident of birth" stuff would work. If every country offered the same opportunities, the same standards of education, healthcare, housing, wages and so on then you could argue that we should all consider ourselves Nomads, moving to wherever we fancy. Under those circumstances there'd be as many people coming here as leaving and it would balance out.

But we don't live in a world....or even a Europe....like that. Some countries are going to be filled up much quicker than others which means, statistically, some British citizens are going to have to leave their home - against their will - to find work.

Because that's what we're talking about.....being British means "home" to many, many, many people. It's where they were born, brought up, where their families ties are. But this confers not the slightest right over anyone else anywhere in the world according to you?

What emotive, senseless crap.

We may not have the infrastructure to "cope" but that's (not) the immigrant's fault, it's the woeful lack of infrastructure funding and decimation of public services

I keep seeing this trotted out endlessly and again, I have to ask, have you not applied any logic to this either?

Yes, it's the government's (and the EU's) fault. No, it's not the immigrants. But this misses the point by a country mile.

How was the government supposed to know how and where to increase infrastructure when they had no blessed idea a) who would come b) how many would come and c) which parts of the country they'd want to settle in?

The numbers of people who have arrived has been massively underestimated time after time. Without some element of say in who comes here, and in what numbers, proper planning is IMPOSSIBLE. We currently have an open door invitation to 500 million Europeans.

Unless you're going to support the idea that they are all welcome, then we surely must acknowledge that there's a line to be drawn somewhere. But the fact is we are currently not allowed to draw any line for any reason and it is as a direct result of that that this country is buckling under the strain.

Yes...immigration is fantastic for us - culturally, economically, every which way. It always has been (we wouldn't have an NHS without it) and it always will be. But you can't built schools, hospitals and houses overnight....they must be planned.

Your reasoning is preposterous and is very, very typical of the kind of mind that has got lost in it's own "I'm not a racist" narrative and stopped there.

Controlling our own borders is neither illiberal, xenophobic or racist. It's fucking common sense.

[HubrisComicGhoul]

Very few EU migrants (proportionally) being their young children. The children tend to be born here, so I would expect shool places to be quite easy to sort out in the 4/5 years before they attend, especially as schools shouldn't be at capacity anyway. Classroom limits are not a target to be reached, they are the absolute limit at which teaching can be effective.

The NHS can be harder, but again migrants tend to be young adults, a group that as a whole puts little strain on medical services and there should be some leeway so that Drs and hospitals can adapt to increasing populations.

I firmly believe that if we had a mind to, we could provide the correct infastructure, the issue isnt being able to plan for it, it's having the political will to pay for it. Sure, it wouldn't be easy but that is what politicians and the civil service get paid to do.

[WidowWadman]

Without freedom of movement I would have neither my marriage nor my children nor my career, so I feel quite attached to it (and relieved that I can at least pass it on to my children, should British citizens have it removed from them). People don't leave their communities just for the heck of it, so why should anyone have less rights to build their lives where they want to than I had?

[Winterbiscuit]

I have no problem at all with free movement of labour, but do think the UK, not the EU, should decide how it works here. I'd be in favour of the Australian-style points system. I also like the idea of everyone in the world being considered on an equal footing, rather than particular preference given to Europeans.

I certainly wouldn't want anyone being sent away from the UK if they're already here, and we should definitely do as much as possible to help refugees. I didn't like Cameron's idea of restricting benefits as a deterrent to immigrants, as I think people would still want to move here, and things would be the same but with more poverty. It doesn't seem a kind solution.

[BeakyMinder]

The UK is (currently) an open, free democracy.

Total immigration control of the kind you describe is beloved of fascist and communist police states that are obsessed with controlling everyones behaviour and micromanaging the economy. No fucking thanks.

[merrymouse]

Unless you're going to support the idea that they are all welcome, then we surely must acknowledge that there's a line to be drawn somewhere.

You are right, you have to draw a line and we need to chuck some people out. I think we can do a lot better than Nigel Farage and Arron Banks.

[Nonreplicable]

You are about to have complex, high-risk heart surgery - do you choose the British born doctor or the better doctor?

You need a builder, do you go with the British-born or the good, reliable one?

Do you not see how immigration is a good thing?

If a place can attract the young, entrepreneurial, ambitious people of the world - do you not see that the recipient country is a massive beneficiary?

Would you stop someone from Liverpool moving to London for a better job? Why not? Surely London is crowded enough already!

[MaidOfStars]

Apricot I just don't see it. It's not part of my make up to apply any particular protection to any specific person based on geography at birth. I picked French, but it probably doesn't matter whatever country. And I didn't use the words you quote at all. Just saying how I feel

[bkgirl]

Where will the limitless money come from to pay for the limitless immigration? Seriously. This isn't about race, this has to be about the amount of resources.
Extreme groups of any kid are awful.

[MaidOfStars]

Tax.

[MaidOfStars]

EU migrants are net contributors. That Getman bloke down the road is as annoyed as you about the lack of school places. He's paid his tax, job done.

Now, who builds schools?

[bkgirl]

Right. Who will pay it? Maybe Panama would like to give us a few names?

[Sweetgreen]

"By maintaining a tolerant society, the extreme right wing will lose their energy/power."

Oh the irony

"Where will the limitless money come from to pay for the limitless immigration?"
Ahem, taxes? Many EU citizens working in the UK (they are not immigrants btw) are high tax payers, often with attractive workplace health insurance so not even using the dire NHS etc. Silly OP, Britian isn't that amazing compared with many other EU countries this the UK is backwards and has crappy public service, if any. Now that we are facing a rescission there will be less taxes. But enjoy your nationalistic dream.

"Extreme groups of any kid are awful."
Once again, the irony. Give your head a wobble OP, you come across as someone from the far right.

[Sweetgreen]

EU citizens working in the UK have been brilliant for our economy, did you know that OP? Don't you like a strong economy? Are you rather poor? Do you really have nothing else to be proud of than your arbitrary nationality?

What have you achieved personally? What education have you completed? How have you contributed to humankind? Are you a good, nice, decent person? These things are much more important than your nationality? Nobody likes a nationalist much, apart from other nationalists.

[Ankleswingers]

Apricot. Very sensible post.

[bkgirl]

Sweetgreen - there we go again. Calling leavers stupid! The sheer arrogance. I am a graduate who owns a company, house etc. I spend at least an afternoon a week raising money for a key humanitarian charity. Yes freedom, democracy and equality are very important to me. I have massive respect for manual-labour occupations and in skilled, industrial work (amongst other jobs). I have friends who are CEO's who voted Leave. I am not elitist unlike many here and my hero is Bevan. I believe in a caring state that we can pay into when he work and pay taxes (not avoid them) and we all should benefit from the same state when it's needed. I value immigration and feel it makes the country richer in many different ways. My codicil is that I cannot understand how immigration can be limitless. It simply doesn't make sense. It is simply a matter of resources (I guess unless you are a Malthusian).

[Fawful]

Sweetgreen, why are EU citizens in the UK not immigrants? Of course we are immigrants, what is wrong with it?
An immigrant is 'a person who comes to live permanently in a foreign country.'
Who are you trying to distance yourself from?

[bkgirl]

Sweetgreen, try travelling the world to see just how tolerant the world is. We are tolerant on the whole (Yes recent racist incidents are awful but still relatively infrequent.) unlike many other countries. We want to keep it this way and look after not just people who are already here but anyone else who comes to live here. Poverty anywhere is not something to ridicule.
As for your comment "Are you rather poor?"
That has got to be the most conceited, condescending comment of the week. I hope you have the good grace to think about that and feel at least a little shame.

[bkgirl]

" To Leave or Not to Leave the EU: A British Muslim Perspective

Is there a distinctly British Muslim case with regards to Thursday's referendum on Britain's membership of the EU? Dilly Hussain examines the arguments.
Other European states are far more Islamophobic towards their Muslim minorities. Any centralised, anti-terror policies and “integration initiatives” led by the EU will harm British Muslims. In addition, draconian assimilation policies will be easier to challenge and overturn in the UK because of the general sentiment towards the political right.
Outside of the EU, Britain will be able to reconnect and rebuild its relationship with Commonwealth nations, with whom it has always had deep historical links. This means it will be easier for Muslims from the Commonwealth to work and settle in Britain.
Tighter immigration controls and limited free movement from the EU means better services for Britons, including British Muslims, in terms of housing, employment, state benefits, healthcare and schooling.

Despite my own interest in the referendum and its aftermath, I will not be voting tomorrow; for personal and religious reasons. However, if a gun was put to my head and I was asked to pick a side, I would probably vote, reluctantly, for Britain to leave the EU."
For full article.......
ceasefiremagazine.co.uk/leave-leave-eu-british-muslim-perspective/

[bkgirl]

NikiSaintPhalle refugees are not immigrants and should be afforded the protections rightly due to them. As said in other threads I think detention centres are appalling and refugees should be proactively brought here as family units and supported.
I detest the way remainers constantly twist words of leavers into being the opposite of what they believe.