|
|
Post by thomas on May 15, 2023 7:16:03 GMT
Migrant hotels scandal: Brexit voters fury with Tories over immigration
More than 40,000 people have entered the UK via small boats this year, most housed in hotels across the country. Both legal and illegal immigration is at record highs and after repeated promises to bring numbers down, the Conservatives are under increasing political pressure to act. The Telegraph’s Steven Edginton travels to various migrant hotels to investigate one of the most critical issues facing Britain.
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on May 15, 2023 8:33:43 GMT
. As regards political stability your dates stop at 1745 and recommence in 1820. I said that the benefits of Union were apparent within a few decades, Devine says c. sandy this is a nonsense , and yet more desperation on your part. You calimed the union provided "political stability" for the scottish enlightenment. The scottish enlightenment ran through the 18th century to the early 19th by common agreement.
I have given you off the top of my head a list of armed conflicts and uprisings in that period. There was no political stability in this period.
To get back to the wider discussion , you keep cherry picking devine quotes as though he agrees with what you are saying. He doesnt. I re read the whole chapter you quote from in devines book and clearly he is imlying a different economic scenario to what you are implying.
You cherry pick small quotes , with references to small sectors of the scottish economy , where as i said some things improved, others diminished , but devine gives the killer quote to yourr hyperbole where he talks about how the economic beneifts of union never materialsed.
You arent intrested in the historical truth. Only cherry picked quotes that can enforce your own unionist view.
Tell me though sandy. All these histrorians aside , lets ask a pertinent question and talk cold hard facts. If the unin was and is so successfull why are so many people unhappy with it? You have had three hundred years to up your game , but in that time , we have had 120 years of armed uprisings in scotland , a century of political arguments against the union , two devolution referendums and one indy ref so far.
Many english are also deeply unhappy with the union , and of course the 26 counties of ireland left after bloody rebellion and war , with 30 years of troubles in northern ireland and an uneasy peace , with the 6 counties half way out the door and still in the EU.
That doesnt come across as a happy well loved union with brotherly love , and everyone benefitting from so called english largesse. In fact the opposite is true.
Well 1745 to 1820 is the same length of time as from 1945 to 2020. I suppose it depends how you define political stability. But a period of 70 years with not much happening that you found significant by way of 'armed insurrection' may count as a period of political stability unless you are saying that our period from 1945 to 2020 was a period of political turmoil. Some in the EU and many remainers have described it as the longest period of peace enjoyed by Europe. I suppose we could class the Napoleonic wars as a period of turmoil but the effect of that seems to have been more unifying than divisive. People are unhappy with many things that are branded a success. The obvious one is immigration to the UK. The official position is it is an enriching process that brings with it much needed skills and valued diversity. My interpretation is that that is a nonsense and I am far from alone in that view. I am just trying to stick to facts. The Scottish economy falling off a cliff for 90 years seems at odds with many interpretations and direct measures of economic indicators. I am quite happy with the Union and the likes of Kenneth Wolstenholme saying the Eintracht Real Madrid game at Hampden was the best game ever seen on English soil (quickly corrected) is just something that even I got my knickers in a twist about as a callow youth but in reality is of little or no consequence and just grist to the mill for those who foster division and dearly love to hate the English. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2023 11:37:37 GMT
you arent making babies vinny. Are you really that stupid in light of the fact the majority of your fellow english on this forum are in meltdown over the tories failure to control mass immigration? So what is Scotlands excuse? - The fertility rate for England is 1.62 children per woman. In Wales its 1.49 children per woman - yet in Scotland its only 1.31 children per women. Is that the fault of the Tories or the SNP? I would argue that the more intelligent and successful Scots ended up in England and would even vote Conservative. It's England's fault for being so welcoming and taking the union seriously, where the UK was one country. |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on May 15, 2023 12:16:50 GMT
If you want to see why Scotland has struggled, take a look it's population growth or lack of it; it's about to happen again. I wonder what happened in 1707 to affect scotland popualtion growth in comparison with england?
Not to mention thatcher and her tory parties economic warfare on scotland , that between the years 1979 to 1999 , caused a fifth of our population to emigrate.
I agree mate. We need independence to control and grow our population , including the ability to encourage migration. Even with the weak powers of devolution , we have somewhat stemmed the fall.
More imprtantly , if i were you mate , i would be worried about the overpopualtion of little england. A country barely bigger than scotland with ten times the popualtion ,housing and infrastructure crises under successive governments.
Not to mention how your own tory party and labour are trying to breed the english out of existence with mass migration. I think your problems are far worse than ours.
Thank you for confirming how well the Scots did after the Union. :@ Now tell us whether the population rise was due to the Scots or to the migration to Scotland. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on May 15, 2023 13:47:13 GMT
India to push for UK to hand over Koh-i-Noor diamond as part of 'colonial reckoning' that 'dwarfs' Elgin Marble demands
The diplomatic effort to reclaim the artefacts centres on the Koh-i-Noor diamond, one of the largest cut diamonds in the world. The Koh-i- has been in the British royal family's crown jewels since 1849.
India's "reckoning with the past" would be the largest repatriation attempt the UK has faced yet, the Telegraph reported - dwarfing claims made by the Greek government for the Elgin Marbles, held in the British Museum.
The push comes from the top of the Indian government and is one of the priorities for Narendra Modi, the country's Prime Minister.
The efforts to get the treasures returned could even affect trade talks between the UK and India.
Bollox to the ungrateful curry munching ingrates. If it wasn't for the British, Indians would still be living in mud huts. We dragged them from the dark age into the industrial age, in fact the only reason so many still live in poverty in India is because they insisted on independence. We gave them the English language, democracy, the railways, a disciplined army, a free press, vaccinations, the rule of law, cricket, introduced social reforms, Christ almighty the list is endless. Ungrateful gits. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on May 15, 2023 16:38:46 GMT
So what is Scotlands excuse? - The fertility rate for England is 1.62 children per woman. In Wales its 1.49 children per woman - yet in Scotland its only 1.31 children per women. Is that the fault of the Tories or the SNP? the fertility rate of englands isnt the cause of englands popualtion growth as the article makes clear. why are the tories flooding england with mass immigration if females are so fertile?
yet more desperate diversions. Havent you brexiter tories been telling me you are extremely pissed off with your parties mass immigration that you once thought was all the fault of the EU?
Well you are confusing 2 different issues - the fertility rate and the immigration rate - neither of which are linked. So care to have a stab at my question - why is Scotlands fertility rate that much lower than Englands? |
|
|
|
Post by Ripley on May 15, 2023 17:00:48 GMT
India to push for UK to hand over Koh-i-Noor diamond as part of 'colonial reckoning' that 'dwarfs' Elgin Marble demands
The diplomatic effort to reclaim the artefacts centres on the Koh-i-Noor diamond, one of the largest cut diamonds in the world. The Koh-i- has been in the British royal family's crown jewels since 1849.
India's "reckoning with the past" would be the largest repatriation attempt the UK has faced yet, the Telegraph reported - dwarfing claims made by the Greek government for the Elgin Marbles, held in the British Museum.
The push comes from the top of the Indian government and is one of the priorities for Narendra Modi, the country's Prime Minister.
The efforts to get the treasures returned could even affect trade talks between the UK and India.
Bollox to the ungrateful curry munching ingrates. If it wasn't for the British, Indians would still be living in mud huts. We dragged them from the dark age into the industrial age, in fact the only reason so many still live in poverty in India is because they insisted on independence. We gave them the English language, democracy, the railways, a disciplined army, a free press, vaccinations, the rule of law, cricket, introduced social reforms, Christ almighty the list is endless. Ungrateful gits. And all for a measly £45 Trillion. What a bargain, eh? |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on May 15, 2023 17:18:36 GMT
Bollox to the ungrateful curry munching ingrates. If it wasn't for the British, Indians would still be living in mud huts. We dragged them from the dark age into the industrial age, in fact the only reason so many still live in poverty in India is because they insisted on independence. We gave them the English language, democracy, the railways, a disciplined army, a free press, vaccinations, the rule of law, cricket, introduced social reforms, Christ almighty the list is endless. Ungrateful gits. And all for a measly £45 Trillion. What a bargain, eh? Ah the old look how evil the Empire was. Monbiot reiterates this false accounting from a ,strange as it may seem, Indian economist. For some reason the cost of running India is excluded and payment for goods and taxation are assumed to be the rip off. That is not the way it works. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on May 15, 2023 17:24:02 GMT
There should also be an opposing ledger entry with the total cost of the existing infrastructure immigrants from the Indian subcontinent have used, plus the net cost of benefits they have consumed, since they started arriving in large numbers after independence.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ripley on May 15, 2023 18:40:35 GMT
And all for a measly £45 Trillion. What a bargain, eh? Ah the old look how evil the Empire was. Monbiot reiterates this false accounting from a ,strange as it may seem, Indian economist. For some reason the cost of running India is excluded and payment for goods and taxation are assumed to be the rip off. That is not the way it works. Here is the way it worked: www.globalresearch.ca/colonialism-how-the-british-empire-stole-45-trillion-from-india-and-lied-about-it/5663064The £45 Trillion figure is conservative and does not even include the debts that Britain imposed on India during the Raj. There was almost no increase in per capita income during the entire 200-year history of British rule in India. In fact, during the heyday of British intervention in the last half of the 19th century, income in India collapsed by half. The average life expectancy of Indians dropped by a fifth from 1870 to 1920. Tens of millions died needlessly of policy-induced famine. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on May 15, 2023 20:06:20 GMT
"There was almost no increase in per capita income during the entire 200-year history of British rule in India."
As might be expected considering the population more than doubled over the period.
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on May 15, 2023 20:08:22 GMT
Ah the old look how evil the Empire was. Monbiot reiterates this false accounting from a ,strange as it may seem, Indian economist. For some reason the cost of running India is excluded and payment for goods and taxation are assumed to be the rip off. That is not the way it works. Here is the way it worked: www.globalresearch.ca/colonialism-how-the-british-empire-stole-45-trillion-from-india-and-lied-about-it/5663064The £45 Trillion figure is conservative and does not even include the debts that Britain imposed on India during the Raj. There was almost no increase in per capita income during the entire 200-year history of British rule in India. In fact, during the heyday of British intervention in the last half of the 19th century, income in India collapsed by half. The average life expectancy of Indians dropped by a fifth from 1870 to 1920. Tens of millions died needlessly of policy-induced famine. Just a quick look at your link and it seems that the EIC and then the Raj placed taxes on the Indians and used a portion of those taxes to purchase goods. For some reason raising taxes that are not spent on those from whom they are raised is a drain. That is certainly not the case in any tax situation. Without going into detail there seems no accounting for the costs of government in the UK and if people in India are paid by taxes raised in India how is that different from people in Britain paid by taxes raised in Britain? This is not to say that British rule was perfect fair and just at all times but there is a tendency to overegg the evil Empire pudding to some degree. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on May 15, 2023 20:11:53 GMT
there is a tendency to overegg the evil Empire pudding to some degree. Well, you can't really over egg strapping Hindus to cannons and then blowing them up. It was particularly malicious as Hindus believe they can't enter heaven if their body parts are mingled with those of other people. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on May 15, 2023 20:15:37 GMT
there is a tendency to overegg the evil Empire pudding to some degree. Well, you can't really over egg strapping Hindus to cannons and then blowing them up. It was particularly malicious as Hindus believe they can't enter heaven if their body parts are mingled with those of other people. I agree but neither can you step back and say well those who were strapped to cannons were seen to be the guilty parties in throwing British women and children into wells after mutilation and some alive. Not a pretty time but then we are dealing with past events in history. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on May 15, 2023 20:17:39 GMT
The Empire elites were able to find indigenous people in their conquered territories to do their dirty work. It's arguably the case that British people weren't better off than most in the Empire. The elites had no problem finding indigenous Britons to keep them oppressed, either. I doubt many Lords were seated on the backs of the horses that rode down those peacefully protesting for democracy at Peterloo.
|
|
