Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Towards a rational immigration policy
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Towards a rational immigration policy
Turkey has mandatory conscription for men between 20 and 41. Gay men, however, are exempt. According to the official commentary to the army’s health regulation, to be exempted from service, “documentary evidence must prove that the defects in sexual behaviour are obvious and would create problems when revealed in a military context.” Many gay men have to endure pseudo-scientific tests designed to appraise both their homosexuality and the extent to which it might render them “unfit” for service.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Geobbels would approve of the style and structure of this header.
If it does turn out the UK voted for Brexit on the basis on some bad stats, then we really did screw the pooch.
Run that one past me again, Alastair...
https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet/status/902129889339469824
"I remain astonished that anyone thinks Nazis were right wing. They were National Socialists, FFS it is in the name. Are you wilful morons?"
The name Democratic Republic of North Korea rather nails that logic.
And just as a throwaway Plato tweeted PB is an 'Echo Chamber'. Pot and kettle springs to mind.
UK fertility is near replacement level. We don't have a desperate shortage of young people, and a rising pension age should encourage people to work longer.
It's not the job of the British government alone to provide sanctuary to gay men who want to live in the open. It could have a more meaningful impact if we said we will no longer give aid to countries where homosexuality is illegal. As we send Pakistan the best part of £1bn per year, it would help the deficit too.
Plenty of them aren't even people for a start.
Conversation on migration needs to include culture and integration. As long as we have the authorities turning a blind eye to mass child rape because of cultural sensitivities, or marches on the streets of the capital openly calling for violence against Jews whilst police watch, this can't be resolved by numbers alone.
It may even be the case that if a staunch defence of basic British values (things like not rigging elections, not raping children, and not mutilating little girls) were actually mounted that even the very high levels of migration we've seen recently wouldn't have substantial opposition.
But as long as there are more prosecutions for fulfilling Cameron's Twitter maxim than there are for FGM, that won't happen.
I have been reading quite a few of the tweets Plato links to. It is brain washing stuff.
To call PB an echo chamber when people robustly disagree on it, whereas Plato's twitter links are all of the same thread and are often completely irrational I think says it all.
Blaming everything on Brexit is as bonkers - or even more bonkers in this case - than blaming everything on Brussels.
In this particular case, I wonder if they got confused because he applied for a Right to Abode? That's an odd thing to do if you're a British citizen.
Good afternoon, everybody.
There is plenty of real stuff to worry about in relation to Brexit; why do people feel they have to make up stuff?
But numbers are not the only - or even the main - issue. Two other things matter: the type of immigrant and whether they are likely to or willing to integrate and become British rather than simply live here according to the mores and culture of their home. A peasant from Waziristan with few skills is far less desirable than a skilled engineer.
Second, we need to have an effective way of deporting those who break the rules.
Whatever system we have people should not be allowed to take the proverbial.
There’s going to be some serious pressure on her, if her department keeps making f...ups like this.
As a suggestion, any letters like this should be removed from any automated system and should only be able to be printed by a certain (high) level senior manager, after personally reviewing the case and taking representations from the person involved.
Mass immigration is undoubtedly here to stay. When we take back control, the trick will be to create a system that recognises that while also ensuring that the most talented people want to come and settle here rather than elsewhere. This will require politicians far braver than the ones we have currently.
@ShneurOdze: I've decided who I'm voting for in the #UKIPleadership and it didn't involve a pin. Just praying it doesn't involve a donkey!
https://twitter.com/Freeman_George/status/901506761403846656
It's odd how parties often focus on only one half of an argument. You've highlighted an economic policy, I did likewise on migration earlier. It also applies to tax, where there's often a focus only on what an individual or firm pays rather than the more important side of what the tax take is.
It is a pretty clear illustration of the nature of the Home Office bureaucracy, and the approach it's likely to take in enforcing whatever set of arbitrary rules we are going to be gifted post Brexit.
One thing that puzzles me about this case is that irrespective of his mother's birth status, as his father was British, he had a right to register for citizenship even if he did not currently possess citizenship:
https://www.gov.uk/register-british-citizen/born-before-2006-british-father
Why then was the Home Office so ridiculously heavy handed ?
What about the unknowns?
Who may well have been transported across the seas with less rights than the convicts sent to Oz 200 years ago?
The entrepreneur and the small business,and are the engines of a successful economy, government needs to make sure they can thrive.
Otherwise, I more or less agree.
The answer to your last sentence is probably just straightforward, old-fashioned bureaucratic bungling. As I speculated upthread, that might have been caused by him applying for Right to Abode, which is an odd thing to do if you're already a British citizen. However, we don't know the exact sequence of events.
What they all had in common however was that they left after fundamentally disagreeing with key planks of policy, be it on race or nationalism. They took with them a belief that violence worked and left behind the view that power was a means to an end rather than an end in itself.
Maybe some will leave, but where was this young man in today’s case supposed to go? He was born here of Commonwealth citizens and had lived in the UK all his life.
Though I reckon the Home Office are doing him a favour by sending him to Zimbabwe than let him attend Oxford University.
https://twitter.com/arusbridger/status/902918521281290241
(I have just about stopped laughing at Alistair's opening.)
"that might have been caused by him applying for Right to Abode, which is an odd thing to do if you're already a British citizen..."
No, he applied for a passport in the normal way of things, having no reason to believe he wasn't a citizen, and was turned down - which is what resulted in the rather alarming letter from the Home Office.
There then seems to be some confusion over whether he subsequently attempted to register as a British citizen, or apply for the right to abode.
Betting PostF1: given shocking luck and misjudgements recently, was rather loath to post this. But we'll see how things go.
Considered backing Ricciardo and Perez for a podium, but the top teams are pretty reliable and it shouldn't be a Red Bull track. Plus, the Pink Panthers may maul one another.
However, there are a number of bets I did see which I decided to back. These are:
Verstappen, not to be classified, 3.25 (Betfair Sportsbook). He's got a 50% DNF rate. So over 2/1 on a 50% shot looks good.
I backed Bottas to 'win' FP1 at 7.5 each way on Ladbrokes (each way is 1/5 odds for top 3). Providing Mercedes actually bother showing up (and they have from 2014-16) in FP1 this is eminently possible, and there's a realistic chance he might be top.
I also backed, Ladbrokes again, Bottas to 'win' qualifying at 6 each way (1/3 the odds for top 2). I think this should be a very good circuit for Mercedes, who are top dog on straights, and Monza is mostly straights.
Anyway, if recent performance is indicative, we may well see Verstappen win, and be joined on the podium by Ricciardo and Perez.
In 2005 the slogan "It isn't racist to impose limits on immigration" led to tremendous fuss... and accusations of racism. We're not going to get that mature and proper debate until people accept that the slogan wasn't racist.
But nobody could be that mean to donkeys, who are gentle, inoffensive and hardworking animals.
https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/aug/30/brian-white-student-with-oxford-place-does-not-know-what-to-do-if-deported-immigration
I would further guess this is because they are preternaturally stupid and/or lazy.
If he was legally adopted by a British man, he should be able to apply for British citizenship straight away as a child. My guess is that he’s been travelling around on a foreign passport and it’s only since he’s become an adult that he’s applied for leave to remain.
It is easier to deport honest working people with a home, much harder for elusive sofa surfers.
I look forward to your joining the Conservatives if they take the policies of George Freeman forward
"The power and devastation of Harvey is incredible. Estimates put the rainfall totals at 20-28 TRILLION gallons. For perspective, the entire Chesapeake Bay holds 18 trillion gallons."
For those who don't know, the Chesapeake covers 4,500 square miles, and 28 trillion gallons would cover that entire area to close to 11 meters.
There was an interesting piece on channel 4 a while back that covered this:
http://www.channel4.com/info/press/news/brexit-how-to-get-a-british-passport-channel-4-dispatches
Many of the children were EU with anomolies where one sib was considered eligible and others not, but othefs were because their parents brought tbem illegally. The failure there is that they were never deported years ago, and now have no links in their old country.
https://twitter.com/youngvulgarian/status/902924103052644352
Mrs Rudd needs to get a serious grip on this before it gets completely out of control. The whole HO ministerial team need to be on their game and inject some common sense into their decision-making processes. If that means that senior managers and ministers need to be discussing difficult cases then so be it.
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/08/30/trump-immigration-dreamers-242152
Oh dear.
The conversation is undignified and unacceptable. Must be the product of pretty stupid people if they don't realise by now that social media is far reaching, long lasting and eternally damning.
I’m running a course at the moment for parents of teenagers about the dangers of social media - maybe I should send these new YCs a copy for their own idiotic teenagers?
The upper class males could penetrate whilst the lower class/slaves had to be penetrated.
On no accounts could/should an upper class male be penetrated.
Turkish society today seems to hold to something similar i.e. only being penetrated is homosexual.
The reason we have found non EU immigration so hard to control is that the previous generations of immigrants from the sub continent continue to go there for spouses and work hard to bring over family members. No doubt we will have similar problems with many of our EU immigrants in a generation or two but at the moment they are not remotely comparable.
The other point I would make is that the Home Office is just completely overwhelmed by the scale of the movement of people. It is absurd to argue that senior officials should be reviewing individual cases when they are literally dealing with hundreds of thousands of cases at any one time. The backlog is immense and growing.
Enforcement by means of removal is expensive and the Courts interfere far too often. Letters have been written to Judges explaining that every cancellation costs over £10K but they are still routinely granted. In fairness to the Judges this is partly because the quality of decision making at the lower level is so poor as to fail very basic tests of rationality and reasonableness and Judges are aware that those who have claimed to be homosexual, for example, face genuinely life threatening situations if they are returned to several countries.
I think that the only realistic solution here is some form of amnesty. We simply cannot cope or police the present numbers. Even if we spent several billion a year more on this the system would still creak and groan.
I would argue that in many ways state spending slows down the speed at which help can be given, the effectiveness of state spending is dependent on the quality of the management, the control of waste and selection of program. Many areas of state spending failure has a high chance of gaining the upper hand.
The worst combination is the state handing large contracts to a small cartel of favoured suppliers.
- M. H. Thatcher, 1983.
The problem is our convoluted laws on the subject of residence and citizenship.
Any attempt consistently to enforce the law, rather than ignore it from time to time (and which tabloid would approve that ?) is almost certain to result in such cases.
Both bureaucrats and applicants for residence and/or citizenship are fallible human beings. Evidence required by the rules can often go back decades - to a time when bits of paper detailing continued residence weren't a matter of life and death.
(That he also had his fingers in the till may have reduced the family's sympathy for his transgression)
Not really the definition of "horlicks"
Incidentally I see now that there is a 'surprise’ surge in prisoner numbers causing severe problems. The blame for staffing inadequacy can, of course, be laid firmly at the door of the last Home Sec, one T May.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4834562/British-couple-s-adopted-son-wins-place-Oxford.html
PS converted square miles to square kilometers and gallons to liters in order to simplify calculations as to depth.
As a generation, they feel completely shafted by their elders. Brexit is the prime example of this, but just an example.