I do not know a great deal about Minnesota but it looks like a great place to live, plenty of space to house 260,000 immigrants per year all you have to do is build a city the size of Saint Paul (population 297,640) every year to house them. How many new jobs did Minnesota create last year, they are going to need jobs to survive unless you are going to provide welfare and free housing.
You have chosen a good comparison Minnesota has a land mass of 87,000 sq. miles compared with the U.K. 94,000 sq. miles. Minnesota is really the front runner here with its population density of 67 per sq. mile compared to the U.K. population density of 622 per sq. mile. Shall we start shipping them over now.
You seem to be confusing the issue, the problem in the U.K. is not legal immigrants who I consider to be British after they have settled, the problem is uncontrolled immigration and a border that leaks like a sieve, we need to bring immigration and our borders under control and get our house in order, you cannot invite people into your house unless you can provide for them.
The last socialist government (Labour) followed the thinking of Oxford and that is why we are screwed today. You cannot take in large numbers of immigrants without building the infrastructure to serve them and this is what Labour failed to do, so now we are playing catch up but like other countries we are playing economic catch up which means that due to budget constraints we cannot go as fast as we would like to. At present the answer would be to limit immigration to genuine refugees only possibly Syrian from the refugee camps so they can be checked and visa’s issued before travelling, this would mean they could travel without trudging across Europe. By doing this and refusing economic immigrants we should be able to increase our intake of genuine refugee’s to 20,000 per year.
You must remember this is a conversation not an essay but I know that you will read this while playing your socialist violin so I shall expect a little sarcasm.
I hope that Minnesota is not suffering from the great storm, my thoughts and prayers are with those who are suffering its freezing blast
I could quote the Morning Star and prove you right or quote the BNP (filthy Rag) and prove you wrong. My position is you cannot put a quart into a pint pot so common sense has to prevail over unworkable ideals
I would not consider Saudi a safe haven for refugee’s especially if you are the wrong type of Muslim, their record on human rights is disgusting, they have recently chopped the head off a man for speaking out against the government and still have stoning as a method of execution.
I have just read a book revue although it has been slanted to get sales it does give an insight into what life is like for many immigrants and does explain what I mean by having to clean house and to do this we need to reduce immigration, that can only be achieved by leaving the EU
How Labour has turned London into a foreign city: Fewer than half the capital’s population are white British, gangsters from Somalia terrorise the suburbs and even the tramps are immigrants, reveals astonishing new book
By Harriet Sargeant For The Daily Mail
Published: 00:04, 23 January 2016 | Updated: 12:42, 23 January 2016
Read more: How Labour has turned London into a foreign city | Daily Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
There would be great upheaval if we took in 250,000 a year.
Out of a population of 5.4 million, we have approximately 404,000 immigrants total.*
You’re comparing apples to oranges with rose colored glasses.
*not including Iowans.
In other words you have absolutely nothing to refute the cites given but continue to cling to your ignorance.
Your first cite seems to be an opinion piece.
Your second cite seems to be referring to immigration in general, over an extended period of time (decades? centuries?). Hardly comparable to a sudden influx of millions of new moochers…
I can find information to refute your cites but they have a far rightwing bias that I find partly distasteful and I believe that they will not take the discussion any further.
I have posted a book review and some will complain that it is about London not Germany my reply will be that if it is not already happening in Germany and other countries it will not be long before it is happening in Europe
I have a very thick skin so comments about my so called ignorance tend to bounce Ignorance they say can be bliss it helps the issues to remain clear where an over abundance of intelligence can only muddy the water
Oranges do not wear glasses of any kind, much less tinted. While we all share your antipathy for Iowans, I suggest we make a special dispensation for Spavined Gelding, should he decide to flee.
My point is not that Minnesotans are remarkably generous or special in any particular way, they have a genius for avoiding being special. They do, however, exhibit a streak of what we like to think of as “common decency”, which, sadly, is not all that common.
Was it a pain in the butt absorbing these people. Yes. Was it the right thing to do? Yes. Any further questions?
The new scientist article does an analysis of 4 separate pieces of research from the World Bank, OECD, UCL and University of Oxford, pointing out that all of them agree that there is “a net positive effect of migrants on the economy”
I find it telling that you have to dismiss that as an OpEd. Of course, your reference to refugees as “moochers” is far more telling.
Our of interest, do you think that immigrants to the United States should be labelled as moochers? If so, can you advise just what date that label started to apply, and why.
I am glad we agree you cannot find any decent cites to support your claims.
No way are we in agreement. It is all to easy to surf the internet to find claims that back up a point of view. Some of these so-called learned papers are written by authors who are more mindful of their grants and reflect the thoughts of their paymaster. It is by no stretch of the imagination to realise that companies who have a financial interest in for example supplying temporary accommodation for immigrants could have a paper written extolling the values of immigration, it is a reality in a commercial world. Oxford and Cambridge universities are known for their left wing views so none scientific papers can reflect leftwing views. Would it be a good idea to upset your employer by expressing views that they do not agree with?
Immigration used to work when had a surplice of job vacancies, sadly today we do not have the number of job vacancies to allow us to take in great numbers of immigrant. As I have said elsewhere if we cut back on economic migrants we could increase the number of genuine refugee’s coming into the U.K. It is called striking a balance
So, you’d like to ignore evidence and continue on with your gut feeling, then?
So why is it you’re unable to do so?
At present things are moving so quickly there has to be a complete rethink the evidence being offered is now out of date
I think that my gut feeling is not far out as European governments are starting to make several U-turns
to serve what purpose? Does this debate only exist to serve up the thinking of people who are not taking place in the debate some of which is no longer relevant due to a rapidly changing crisis, surely a debate is about creating new lines of thought that are relevant to the present and not the past.
Examining the evidence for what has happened is plausible. For what will happen, not so much. It does, however, release your ship of conjecture from the surly bonds of fact and permit you to sail, unhindered, into the open ocean of imagination.
The unfortunate part is that if your castles in the polluted air are accepted as real, many people will suffer needlessly. Children who want nothing more than a warm place to sleep, something to eat, and a few hours to play where no one is trying to kill them. Perhaps it is good that children become accustomed to the harsh facts of life early on, so that they don’t develop dreams and illusions about their hopes, their futures. Other people’s kids, at any rate.
But they are ours, aren’t they? The Major Dudes all say that, don’t they? Scabby kneed, snot sleeved, antic chaos generators. When we wash away all those things that really don’t matter, they are whats left, the flecks of gold. What else do we have, what else is worth having?
We will love one another, or we will die. We will love one another, and then we will die. But at least we will have lived. Suffer the little children to come unto you. Here endeth the lesson.
You really are quite special, aren’t you?
Insisting on keeping your head firmly planted in the sand doesn’t do any good for the children, regardless of how often you remind us that it is them that you are thinking of, or how often you imply that others care not for them. I suppose it might serve to take the sting out of having all that sand work it’s way into your eyes and mouth, though.
Has BigT been giving sanctimonious lessons here lately?