To think thank God we are finally doing something about mass immigration

[Ubik1]

By helping these people here

The Royal Navy expects to have saved more than 1,000 migrants by the end of today - in their biggest rescue operation in the Mediterranean so far.

Pregnant women - including one in labour - and young children and among the 700 desperate people already picked up by HMS Bulwark around 27 miles from the coast of Libya in the busiest day of operations in the Mediterranean.

Efforts are continuing near the war-torn country with those already on board having traveled for around 10 hours in four overcrowded rubber and wooden boats.

Thank God they are rescuing these poor people. I hope Europe gets organised to receive these people from the boats and helps the migrants washing up in Greece.

There is no evidence that we are learning from our mistakes, either. The UK is supporting the Saudi-led blockade of Yemen, leaving 20 million people at risk of hunger.

How long before they start the long trek to Europe?

How would we afford it.... By making more cuts to our own poor and vulnerable, that's how it would be done.

I think it would be a good thought experiment for us to imagine what would a country creaking under the weight of mass immigration look like? What would be the tell-tale signs of too much immigration, too fast? Perhaps these would be indicators...?

• High unemployment
• Suppressed wages
• House prices and rents soaring
• Housing shortages
• Long waiting lists for social housing
• Difficulty getting school places
• Difficulty getting GP and Hospital appointments
• Crowded public transport
• Congested roads
• Increasing social tensions
• Increasing ghettoisation of immigrant populations with whole areas / boroughs becoming foreign in character
• Schools where the majority of children (or even all) speak English as an additional language
• Rise in prevalence of disagreeable cultural practices (FGM, honour killings etc)
• Constant noise in the media / news about issues relating to race, culture, religion
• Rise in support for nationalist parties

One could go on....

If there is good, healthy immigration, it follows that there can be unhealthy levels immigration. No-one with an ounce of common sense can be entirely pro- or anti- immigrant. The argument is only about numbers. Currently the numbers who are arriving in the UK (13,000 a week according to official figures) is simply unsustainable.

I do wonder if the Mumsnetters cheering on the arrival of these waves upon waves of immigrants are missing future-time orientation. Never mind 10 or 20 years time, what is Europe going to look like in 2-3 years?

I often find the type of people who are massively in favour of immigration are the type of people who live in expensive houses and have well paid highly skilled jobs. They're unlikely to have to compete with immigrants for housing or jobs, and they're less likely to live in areas where immigration has negatively affected health services and schools.

The head of the public sector organisation I work for sends an email out about once a week telling us how marvellous immigration is. The same man gave himself a £150k pay rise last year, whilst refusing to increase the wages of the lowest grade workers like cleaners and porters. Y'know. The kind of jobs immigrants tend to do. I've no doubt immigration is marvellous for him when it gives an endless supply of workers who will do these jobs for low wages while he trousers the difference between the wages he pays and a living wage.

Also, there is evidence that the people coming through Libya are not refugees from Syria, but economic migrants from Subsaharan Africa.

It's also interesting that lefties appear to be getting very worked up about this, but don't appear that bothered when Christians are murdered in Pakistan, Egypt and Iraq and seem to be a lot less keen to offer asylum in those circumstances.

It's also interesting that lefties appear to be getting very worked up about this, but don't appear that bothered when Christians are murdered in Pakistan, Egypt and Iraq and seem to be a lot less keen to offer asylum in those circumstances.

And your evidence for such a statement?

Also, there is evidence that the people coming through Libya are not refugees from Syria, but economic migrants from Subsaharan Africa

Again - got any links for that? If that's true, can you blame them?

I often find the type of people who are massively in favour of immigration are the type of people who live in expensive houses and have well paid highly skilled jobs

yy to this. I do not know the answer to the issue of the mass wave of migrants coming across to Europe. I do however think that allowing a massive influx of unskilled labour into any country must be terrifying for the non-well off. I am referring to the millions of people in this country that work and are still scraping together a living. Business owners will just keep wages down as many people are willing to work for a pittance.

Maybe we dont blame them but the honest truth is that we cant support the amount of people that are arriving. These people are coming with no money, no jobs, no housing or medical insurance.

They have an entirely different culture to us and rather than integrate into ours they will set up their own communities and go on to disagree with and destroy our way of life.

Most of these people will have been told that by coming to Europe they will be given houses and money for free and sadly we know that wont be the case so what will they do then? They will end up living on the streets and resorting to crime.

If any of you dont believe this just take a look around you.

www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/24/libyas-people-smugglers-how-will-they-catch-us-theyll-soon-move-on

www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/17/death-mediterranean-africans-migrant-sea-libya

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-32381101

I could go on. I base my point about lefties not really caring about Christian persecutions on the lack of hysteria compared to the fate of these economic migrants.

In principle I support the idea of an asylum system. So yes, I do blame people who are prepared to exploit that system for financial gain, meaning that it's much harder for genuine refugees to get to safety and be taken seriously.

Make no bones about it, people smugglers in Libya do it for cash. Given that most genuine refugees have little more than the clothes they stand up in they are not likely to be on those boats. The people smugglers are not carrying out some kind of selfless humanitarian mission. They are criminals.

aermingers

Also, there is evidence that the people coming through Libya are not refugees from Syria, but economic migrants from Subsaharan Africa

Yet you linked to an article about someone fleeing rape and a war in Darfur?

I could link to a similar article about Eritrea and the conflict there.

Make no bones about it, people smugglers in Libya do it for cash

No shit, Sherlock.

iven that most genuine refugees have little more than the clothes they stand up in they are not likely to be on those boats

That is incredibly ignorant. Professional people, teachers, doctors, lawyers, engineers. Forced to flee their country. These are the ones who can afford to flee and pay the smugglers. The ones who can't are left there.

Are you suggesting that the people who are fleeing persecution in their country are not "real" refugees because they have the money to flee?

It sounds like it.

I base my point about lefties not really caring about Christian persecutions on the lack of hysteria compared to the fate of these economic migrants

The old point that if you aren't saying anything, you don't care about it.

Have you started a thread on Christian persecutions?

I remember the influx of Indian families kicked out of Uganda by Idi Amin in 1972.
Arriving with very little biut their education and skills, they became the doctors, dentists, financial experts and professionals that enhanced our economy. Their impact is still huge and beneficial.
So how can we absorb thousands more in the same positive and mutually beneficial way? What jobs do we see people having?

The situation in Sudan is a lot more stable.

And most refugees aren't 'left behind' they go to the closest safe country and stay there.

I know several of you have difficulty imagining a world where you can't just stick your gold card in the nearest cash point to get your money out, but in times of war even doctors, lawyers and teachers who become refugees will have little more than the clothes they stand up in. Whether their money is in a bank or under a bed it's likely to be stolen or inaccessible. In fact, it's highly likely that the people who can afford people smugglers have at some point either robbed it outright or benefitted from the endemic corruption in Africa.

The whole situation at the moment is encouraging an entire network of criminality. But it's far easier for bleeding hearts to assuage their guilt by worrying about a minority of sad faces that make it to their TV screens, rather than worrying about all the faceless people who die in less photogenic ways before they even get on a boat.

And most refugees aren't 'left behind' they go to the closest safe country and stay there

Yes - look at the picture on camps I posted upthread.

The situation in Sudan is a lot more stable

Would you want to live in Sudan or Eritrea?

In fact, it's highly likely that the people who can afford people smugglers have at some point either robbed it outright or benefitted from the endemic corruption in Africa

Well that's an interesting opinion.

13,000 a WEEK arrive here??

But it's far easier for bleeding hearts to assuage their guilt by worrying about a minority of sad faces that make it to their TV screens, rather than worrying about all the faceless people who die in less photogenic ways before they even get on a boat.

And your point is? Tell me, what is the most acceptable way of highlighting this form of migration? Should just say 'ah well there are much less photogenic ways of dying. What about those people, eh? Eh? '

HagofTheNorth I completely agree about Uganda. But this was before the asylum system was widely exploited by economic migrants.

We received just over 4,000 asylum applications in 1987. There were just under 24,000 in 2014, and that looks almost certain to increase this year. The number peaked at around 85,000 in 2002.

Less than 1/3 are accepted as genuine on initial applications are accepted. Only a quarter of appeals are accepted, so less than half of those claims are genuine.

Personally I would be a hell of a lot happier to see less money spent on economic migrants who leave safe countries to get to one where they can make more money; and a lot more spent on the vast majority of refugees who go to the closest safe country and stay there.

Perhaps by acknowledging that the best way of helping refugees isn't by picking up the minority who manage to make it to Europe and look a bit sad at the expense of all the other deaths on the way?

Personally I would like to see distribution of asylum seekers through other African countries. With enough money given to them to support the asylum seekers plus a premium paid to improve education and health services in those counties as an incentive, beyond the increased cost of supporting the asylum seekers.

Everyone's a winner. Cheaper for us, genuine refugees are safe, the host country receives a benefit and the financial benefits for people smugglers (which generally fund more war and violence to continue the cycle) are stopped.

'I would like to see distribution of asylum seekers through other African countries.'

Do you have any idea what happened to many of the Zimbabwean refugees arriving in SA? How would you prevent the beatings and burnings of immigrants by the indigenous populations?

I don't see why more refugees cannot be redistributed to other countries with similar culture and values. My dhs country is enormous politically stable with huge natural resources ((Algeria) and no need to cross the Mediterranean.