Would you vote an 'extreme' group.
Yes
13.2% (7)
13.2% (7)
No
67.9% (36)
67.9% (36)
Not yet
9.4% (5)
9.4% (5)
already do
7.5% (4)
7.5% (4)
Want to vote? Register now or Sign Up with Facebook
Poll: Would you vote extremist in the current climate?

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

All the time I hear about how the 'goverment' should fix issues like immigration or the EU but the constantlt re-vote labour, tory or liberals when they know it wont fix anything?

You went wrong at the 'won't fix anything' part. If either of those parties 'didn't fix anything', the UK would've been a major shithole by now. And despite all it's failing real or perceived, it's not.

I mean, we Dutch also complain about everything, but at the end of the day we're pretty well off. We're just nagging eachother because good things can also be improved further.

Sorry went I said anything, I ment what one would want them to do about immigration or the EU.

But I don't really see what 'should be done about the EU'. You mean they should integrate closer, enter into the Schengen Zone for easier trade, maybe adopt the euro?

As for immigration, the problem doesn't lie there, the problem lies with integration. If a small number of immigrants doesn't integrate you've got a problem. A much larger number of immigrants who integrate aren't that much of a problem.

Yeah I know the problem that can come with immigration and EU can be economy (cant spell) or immigration depends what bothers you more I was just asking to see if like people would or will vote a party that seems much more 'stronger', maybe.

Olie Warr:
Yeah I know the problem that can come with immigration and EU can be economy (cant spell) or immigration depends what bothers you more I was just asking to see if like people would or will vote a party that seems much more 'stronger', maybe.

As Blab said, there's plenty of things that HAVE been fixed. The class system is gradually breaking down. You have free healthcare, a non-corrupt police force that by and large helps people, if you can't get a job you can receive basic financial security from the state.
People always find things to complain about - if you asked me why that is, I'd say that it's the other edge of our adaptability. We're as good at getting used to luxury as much as hardship.
But lets not forget that we are incredibly privileged compared to much of the rest of the world.

More OT:

It depends how you define extreme.
I'm not going to go voting BNP or Socialist, because in the case of the former it's rabid xenophobia coupled with non-cogent policy. With the latter it's just non-cogent policy. I'm not going to vote Respect UK, because Galloway is a prick. It's difficult to offer an opinion when I don't really know what type of 'extremism' you are commenting on.

If you give us a specific party or policy to debate the advantages and disadvantages of, I'd be happy to oblige!

It depends how you define extreme.
I'm not going to go voting BNP or Socialist, because in the case of the former it's rabid xenophobia coupled with non-cogent policy. With the latter it's just non-cogent policy. I'm not going to vote Respect UK, because Galloway is a prick. It's difficult to offer an opinion when I don't really know what type of 'extremism' you are commenting on.

If you give us a specific party or policy to debate the advantages and disadvantages of, I'd be happy to oblige![/quote]

I literally meant ANY extremist group or party.

Why would I vote for a party that's just going to make things even worse again? If their party line is constantly harping on about immigrants then chances are they have no clue about what they would do about things that actually matter, e.g. economy.

No. I wouldn't vote for the extreme unless the extreme was needed, and I believe that it currently is not.

Olie Warr:

OneCatch :

It depends how you define extreme.
I'm not going to go voting BNP or Socialist, because in the case of the former it's rabid xenophobia coupled with non-cogent policy. With the latter it's just non-cogent policy. I'm not going to vote Respect UK, because Galloway is a prick. It's difficult to offer an opinion when I don't really know what type of 'extremism' you are commenting on.

If you give us a specific party or policy to debate the advantages and disadvantages of, I'd be happy to oblige!

I literally meant ANY extremist group or party.

Well in that case, probably not; I don't think it's warranted at the moment, and any 'extreme' party is likely to do more harm than good - not necessarily on account of horrible ideology, but through lack of governing experience or knowledge.

Are you considering voting 'extreme'? Which one?

I sadly have nothing but tory, liberal and Green (stratford, Warwickshire) if I moved to maybe a bit more normal area probably UKIP, not that their extreme. BFP or BF and if it comes down to it in the future I think I would vote BNP like those in the last Euro elections. Anything to send a message to those in power. Warwickshire county council pay coventry city council to take immigrants so thats not an issue round here.

Crap, I meant to vote no but my touchpad failed me. :(

If we're talking UK parties here, I voted Liberal Democrat last time and intend to again until Labour or the Tories become tolerable to me.

I voted not yet because if I am completely honest, I can see myself voting for one in the future. Not proud to admit it but there you are...

Theres just a few problems in Germany that everybody ignores. Something is going to give sooner or later, and if extremist parties are the only one willing to tackle these problems...

I still wouldnt want any extremist party getting a majority, im thinking they could pressure normal parties into waking the fuck up.

Well, I'm not going to burn down my house to get rid of the three rats in the basement, that's for sure. So, no.

Depends on how you define "extreme" . I always voted for the most (economically) right wing parties which are also usually socially centre-right. If that's extreme than i'm proudly guilty. If it was however a reference to the economically centrist and socially right wing so called "Extreme Right" than no. They are just too much to the right socially and too much to the left economically for me to vote for them.

When I hear the word extreme then it is usually extreme right (fascistic) or extreme left (revolutionary socialist). These groups in effect would create civil war and probably provoke foreign intervention in what are relatively peaceful and settled societies. In the UK I would consider the BNP extreme right and Trotskyists, Marxist revolutionary groups and anarchists extreme left.

I would advise against voting for or joining any extremist group. They are all pretty dogmatic and toxic and dangerous. I used to be in the far left as a youth; I really don't advise it.

However, if you had used the word "radical" then I would be ok with that. We are in an era of centrism in the UK these days. Labour became New Labour and moved from left to centre and Cameron and his Tories have moved away from Thatcherism to the centre also. You can debate about whether that is centre right or centre left depending on your own politics, but centre they have all moved partly due to change and mostly to soak up votes.

I am a mixture of centre-left and centre-right myself, but mostly centre left by mainstream standards in Europe and the USA. (But that is relative and I know a few on these forums consider me more right than left lol).

Now I know that being centre can be rather boring politically so I do like it when the odd radical in or outwith those centrist parties adds a bit of colour or interest or counterbalance to the proceedings. I would consider old labour or Thatcherism or George Galloway or the UKIP (UK Independence Party) or the SNP (Scottish National Party) quite radical in UK politics these days.

So I think it is fine to vote for radical parties or people.

For example, I would vote SNP (Scottish National Party) if I lived in the UK these days. That is pretty radical imo.

Regards

Nightspore

While I feel as passionately about muslamic rayguns as you do I know for a fact that the first past the post system excludes third parties f rom political influence. The liberals having influence in the first place is bizarre but when looking at votes cast vs. seats alotted the system virtually excludes all choices but A or B, with any votes not for the second candidate working as a vote for the lead.

Edit: And being a social liberal I'm quite pleased with how things are.

I'd consider protest voting if we had any strong leftist parties with popular support. Not out of any desire to see them take power, but frankly the whole political system and the neoliberal economy its dead set on propping up seems pretty broken at the moment and any significant shift which brings that across would be welcome.

I'm not really bothered about "immigration" or "the EU" though.

Look, I know if you live some horrible white-bread suburban nightmare like the one I grew up in then you probably find immigration scary because it means having to live with people who have funny coloured skin and eat weird food. But stop, take a deep breath, maybe take a trip to London some time and thank fuck you live in a country with a growing population, because if you didn't we'd all be fucked. Do not let racism blind you to that, immigration is an economic necessity in any developed country, and those which have never relaxed about it (like Japan) are now staring into the financial abyss as result.

As for the EU. Well, put it this way. I presume that like me you're annoyed with the government having tried (and still trying, God bless them) to build an entire economy around a failing finance sector right? If there's ever going to be any alternative to that it will have to come from a growth in exports, and guess where most of the UKs exports go to? If the alternative to delegating some legislative powers to the big scary octopus in Brussels is wiping out the industrial and farming sectors in one fell swoop and putting millions of people out of work, UKIP can go suck a fat one.

The EU needs to change, but just pulling out of it doesn't fit with the economic situation of our country, which is why no party in its right mind is willing to do it.

If these are the issues which would drive you into the arms of the BNP, I genuinely pity you, because clearly tabloid newspapers have rotted your brain.

Olie Warr:
I sadly have nothing but tory, liberal and Green (stratford, Warwickshire) if I moved to maybe a bit more normal area probably UKIP, not that their extreme. BFP or BF and if it comes down to it in the future I think I would vote BNP like those in the last Euro elections. Anything to send a message to those in power. Warwickshire county council pay coventry city council to take immigrants so thats not an issue round here.

The problem with the BNP is that they are so out of touch with reality that even a protest vote is somewhat risky. What if they actually get in?!

If you want to protest vote, go Green - it sends the same message, and they aren't going to do something really stupid like outlawing Islam or nuking Bradford or whatever.

Istvan:
While I feel as passionately about muslamic rayguns as you do...

Behave yourself good sir! :P

Without the massive influx of workers from the EU then the UK would be sunk. Arguments against immigration are non-sensical. Just look at the demographics; we don't have enough young people to sustain our elderly population.

Voting for extremists, extremists of any kind, is a vote for somebody that either does not understand how complex things are or, more likely, is trying to obtain power by saying they have a simple solution to the complex world. It is a seductive argument and it is a lie.

Life is hard and the application of power will always hurt people, no matter how noble the cause. This is why extremists of all stripes are dangerous; they either do not know or do not care.

No. I know what my ideals are and extremism is contrary to those ideals. Plus, who would I vote for? If I go to the extreme left, I'd have to vote for Socialists or Communists, both of whom I disagree with fundamentally. I'm not opposed to Capitalism. I suppose I could vote for Die Linke, but I am wary of former SED members and operatives, so, nah, probably not. And if I'd go to the extreme right, there'd be zero overlap whatsoever because I'm neither nationalistic, nor racist, nor a Nazi, nor do I think their economic policies make sense. So what'd be the point except to vote against my own priorities? I support the party whom I agree with the most until either they change their program to the point where I don't or until I change my own opinions. Voting extremism, either to "fix a problem" or as a protest vote, won't help in my eyes. Fuck, we actually did get some far-right extremists into some Bundeslšnder governments a while back and although those were interpreted as protest votes in the broad media, I think that is far too high a price to pay for a protest, especially when your protest results in such a party actually breaching the 5% hurdle. If you want to protest, vote for the Yoga party or the Grey Panthers or something harmless like that.

evilthecat:
Do not let racism blind you to that, immigration is an economic necessity in any developed country, and those which have never relaxed about it (like Japan) are now staring into the financial abyss as result.

Don't mean to derail but can't help it.

And yet Japan is still the third largest economy: a 5.46 trillion dollar economic powerhouse and remains a manufacturing behemoth while the UK is at number seven with a measly 2.25 trillion dollar economy and is a manufacturing has-been by comparison. Japan is still ten years ahead of the rest of the world in certain techs; it isn't lumbered with a massive welfare state and endemic laziness like the UK; its deficit is less toxic than other countries since that debt is mostly owned by the Japanese at preferential rates; its people are stoic, hardworking and disciplined; and according to some voices the big story of the next several decades will be Japan's renaissance and China's relapse.

Now when the UK has a 5.46 trillion economy (you need to more than double your GDP to get there btw) and is number 3 in the world then you can act all high and mighty about the UK's fortunes compared to Japan.

Japan's economy has been in the doldrums for several decades but still remains more than double the size of the UK economy and concerning that downturn, well, you wouldn't notice it if you lived here. Familial welfarism keeps the majority in relative affluence; there are no ghettos here; no rampant anti-social behaviour like in the UK; no riots in Tokyo; the trains are clean and run on time; the people remain civil and polite and generally decent despite the economic downturn and despite the disaster last year etc. I could go on. Compared to Japan the UK really does look like "broken Britain", at least whenever I visit. Last time I was in the UK a group of about eight 13-14 year olds asked me to buy them booze from Sainsbury's and when I refused they called me a cunt and spat abuse at me: you NEVER see that shit in Japan.

Finally, you assume that only mass immigration can solve the pension crisis or the falling population in Japan.

There are other solutions like:

1. Free childcare, subsidies for people having kids, reducing the cost of education etc all which could encourage people to have more kids. Boosting incentives to have kids worked for France in the post-war years and could work for Japan, too.

2. Extend the pension age to 70 and enforce strict anti-age discrimination laws.

So yeah, I wouldn't be holding your breath for Japan entering some financial abyss any time soon. Even if Japan's GDP was slashed in half they would still be wealthier than the UK. I think you ought to be emulating rather than denigrating them.

Regards

Nighspore

Nightspore:

And yet Japan is still the third largest economy: a 5.46 trillion dollar economy and remains a manufacturing behemoth while the UK is at number seven with a measly 2.25 trillion dollar economy and is a manufacturing has-been by comparison.

Japan has a population over twice that of the UK - with both being advanced countries it jolly well should have a bigger economy, as it's got twice as many people to generate wealth. Crunch the resultant maths (GDP/population) to per capita, however, and the UK is richer than Japan. The faster decline in the proportion of Japan's population of working age will probably increase this gap - until the oldsters die and remove the top-heaviness of the distribution, anyway.

Secondly, less manufacturing - who cares? It's like arguing that in 1800 the UK with all it's industrial growth was an agricultural has-been. And for what it's worth, manufacturing output in the UK is about 20% greater than in 1980.

Although I'm fine with the rest, that there's a lot else about Japan's system that seems preferable to the way it's working out in the UK.

Agema:

Nightspore:

And yet Japan is still the third largest economy: a 5.46 trillion dollar economy and remains a manufacturing behemoth while the UK is at number seven with a measly 2.25 trillion dollar economy and is a manufacturing has-been by comparison.

Japan has a population over twice that of the UK - with both being advanced countries it jolly well should have a bigger economy, as it's got twice as many people to generate wealth. Crunch the resultant maths (GDP/population) to per capita, however, and the UK is richer than Japan. The faster decline in the proportion of Japan's population of working age will probably increase this gap - until the oldsters die and remove the top-heaviness of the distribution, anyway.

Secondly, less manufacturing - who cares? It's like arguing that in 1800 the UK with all it's industrial growth was an agricultural has-been. And for what it's worth, manufacturing output in the UK is about 20% greater than in 1980.

Although I'm fine with the rest, that there's a lot else about Japan's system that seems preferable to the way it's working out in the UK.

TBF the problem with the UK isn't the lack of industry, it's the prolificacy of the financial sector. That means that financial crashes and the like hit us harder because proportionally more of our wealth is generated by that one sector.
Regaining some industrial output would probably be a good thing as a safeguard, but it's by no means mandatory.

No. Never. In fact, the presence of extremist parties is the main reason i vote despite the poor choice available in the mainstream parties. Labour and the Lib-dems have disappointed me a lot recently, but I consider it a duty to vote to make damn sure those loonies in the BNP don't get in.

Nightspore:
When I hear the word extreme then it is usually extreme right (fascistic) or extreme left (revolutionary socialist). These groups in effect would create civil war and probably provoke foreign intervention in what are relatively peaceful and settled societies. In the UK I would consider the BNP extreme right and Trotskyists, Marxist revolutionary groups and anarchists extreme left.

I would advise against voting for or joining any extremist group. They are all pretty dogmatic and toxic and dangerous. I used to be in the far left as a youth; I really don't advise it.

However, if you had used the word "radical" then I would be ok with that. We are in an era of centrism in the UK these days. Labour became New Labour and moved from left to centre and Cameron and his Tories have moved away from Thatcherism to the centre also. You can debate about whether that is centre right or centre left depending on your own politics, but centre they have all moved partly due to change and mostly to soak up votes.

I am a mixture of centre-left and centre-right myself, but mostly centre left by mainstream standards in Europe and the USA. (But that is relative and I know a few on these forums consider me more right than left lol).

Now I know that being centre can be rather boring politically so I do like it when the odd radical in or outwith those centrist parties adds a bit of colour or interest or counterbalance to the proceedings. I would consider old labour or Thatcherism or George Galloway or the UKIP (UK Independence Party) or the SNP (Scottish National Party) quite radical in UK politics these days.

So I think it is fine to vote for radical parties or people.

For example, I would vote SNP (Scottish National Party) if I lived in the UK these days. That is pretty radical imo.

Regards

Nightspore

I agree with most of your post, although i would argue that Cameron has gone further than Thatcher (in free-market policy terms) what with the NHS debacle and talks about opening up police and highways to the private sector. He's just better at appearing centrist, but then he is a PR man. However, i have a left of centre bias, so i could be falling prey to a sort of 'political parallax' effect.

Nightspore:

evilthecat:
Do not let racism blind you to that, immigration is an economic necessity in any developed country, and those which have never relaxed about it (like Japan) are now staring into the financial abyss as result.

Finally, you assume that only mass immigration can solve the pension crisis or the falling population in Japan.

There are other solutions like:

1. Free childcare, subsidies for people having kids, reducing the cost of education etc all which could encourage people to have more kids. Boosting incentives to have kids worked for France in the post-war years and could work for Japan, too.

2. Extend the pension age to 70 and enforce strict anti-age discrimination laws.

So yeah, I wouldn't be holding your breath for Japan entering some financial abyss any time soon. Even if Japan's GDP was slashed in half they would still be wealthier than the UK. I think you ought to be emulating rather than denigrating them.

Regards

Nighspore

But isn't a huge surplus of children being born the cause in many countries of the so-called pension crisis?

I agree on your second point. As people live more healthy lives, they will live longer, and thus should be working longer.

AlotFirst:

Nightspore:

evilthecat:
Do not let racism blind you to that, immigration is an economic necessity in any developed country, and those which have never relaxed about it (like Japan) are now staring into the financial abyss as result.

Finally, you assume that only mass immigration can solve the pension crisis or the falling population in Japan.

There are other solutions like:

1. Free childcare, subsidies for people having kids, reducing the cost of education etc all which could encourage people to have more kids. Boosting incentives to have kids worked for France in the post-war years and could work for Japan, too.

2. Extend the pension age to 70 and enforce strict anti-age discrimination laws.

So yeah, I wouldn't be holding your breath for Japan entering some financial abyss any time soon. Even if Japan's GDP was slashed in half they would still be wealthier than the UK. I think you ought to be emulating rather than denigrating them.

Regards

Nighspore

But isn't a huge surplus of children being born the cause in many countries of the so-called pension crisis?

I agree on your second point. As people live more healthy lives, they will live longer, and thus should be working longer.

It's about the ratio of those of pension age to those of working age rather than population size or number of kids.

Japan has the highest (or one of the highest) life expectancy rates in the world with a declining birth rate. A terrible combination.

I think they will increase the pension age and reduce pensions first.

And finally they will reduce education costs - crazy expensive here, even within state schools it costs you an arm and a leg - which is one the major reasons why many Japanese parents only have one kid.

I don't think they will ever agree to European style mass immigration and I think that would be wise on their part. In saying that, Tokyo is a tremendously international place and every bit as cosmopolitan as London, New York or Edinburgh.

Regards

Nightspore

Nightspore:
snip

One tiny number missing from your analysis.

The UK population is just over 60 million.

The Japanese population is nearly 130 million.

If Japan's GDP wasn't double that of the UK, there would be a serious problem. If that GDP was slashed in half, GDP per capita would only be about half that of the UK. So yes, it would be a big fucking problem.

Do you think Japan should be aiming to be more like China? After all, China has a higher GDP expressed as a gross figure. Obviously people there are living the good life and there isn't any poverty whatsoever..

There are ghettos in Japan, in fact they are far closer to the original meaning of the term than the so-called inner city "ghettos" in the West. Go and visit a registered "assimilation district".

Similarly, there is crime and violence, however, social attitudes to crime and police reporting practices tend to force the statistical figures down. Still, go looking for crime and you'll find it, generally fairly well hidden and disproportionately targeted at women relative to other countries, but it's there.

And as mentioned, the idea that Japanese people are incredibly hard-working is kind a myth in some ways. 12 hour days do not meaning getting anything done.

Nightspore:
I don't think they will ever agree to European style mass immigration and I think that would be wise on their part. In saying that, Tokyo is a tremendously international place and every bit as cosmopolitan as London, New York or Edinburgh.

Have you even been to London?

I've been to Tokyo several times. Your statement is a joke.

I would never vote for an extremist party because, quite honestly, they tend to be one trick ponies.

Most extremist parties are formed around one or two fundamental ideals... the BNP, for example, are primarily dedicated to "British Purity" or whatever bullshit they are trotting out these days.

Even if I did agree with that side of their party.. and god knows it makes my physically sick to think of doing so... I'd want to know what their policies on taxation, foreign affairs, healthcare, education, etc were.

I can't help but feel a group who want to kick all the "non British" people out of Britain wouldn't be very good at dealing with other nations.

evilthecat:

Nightspore:
snip

One tiny number missing from your analysis.

The UK population is just over 60 million.

The Japanese population is nearly 130 million.

If Japan's GDP wasn't double that of the UK, there would be a serious problem. If that GDP was slashed in half, GDP per capita would only be about half that of the UK. So yes, it would be a big fucking problem.

Do you think Japan should be aiming to be more like China? After all, China has a higher GDP expressed as a gross figure. Obviously people there are living the good life and there isn't any poverty whatsoever..

There are ghettos in Japan, in fact they are far closer to the original meaning of the term than the so-called inner city "ghettos" in the West. Go and visit a registered "assimilation district".

Similarly, there is crime and violence, however, social attitudes to crime and police reporting practices tend to force the statistical figures down. Still, go looking for crime and you'll find it, generally fairly well hidden and disproportionately targeted at women relative to other countries, but it's there.

Nightspore:
I don't think they will ever agree to European style mass immigration and I think that would be wise on their part. In saying that, Tokyo is a tremendously international place and every bit as cosmopolitan as London, New York or Edinburgh.

Have you even been to London?

I've been to Tokyo many times. Your statement is a joke.

I am getting confused here. Are we saying that population should correlate with GDP? My original response was a redress - perhaps overstated - against a claim that Japan was essentially FUCKED because of its refusal to accept mass immigration while the UK was apparently in much better shape. Btw, I didn't just mention GDP, I mentioned other things. Japan is in much better shape than the UK imo and GDP is one of them and I think it was others - including yourself - that brought up population size as some barometer of what GDP should be. You said abyss and I said a Japanese 5.4 trillion dollar GDP abyss is better than a 2.2 British trillion dollar GDP abyss and I did so to give yeh some perspective on how far Japan would have to actually fall to be an abyss - GDP-wise - like the UK is now.

That aside. I live in Japan mate. Married to one. Lived here for over, lemme think, about eight years on and off. I have lived in three different cities (including western Tokyo) and worked and drunk booze in about thirty more. The place I live now is as close as you can get to a working class city in Japan and it and its neighborhoods don't even scratch close to the British ghetto.

You visited Tokyo and saw ghettos? I call BS. Tell me the name. Explain. Describe.

I wanna hear your description of Japanese ghettos that are equivalent to the ones in Glasgow, Newcastle, London and Edinburgh.

They do not exist.

You can do your google and you may find reference to yakuza, bosozoku, and burakumin but they are very rare things in everyday life and do not dominate entire residential neighborhoods like they do in the UK. I am interested in ghettos mate. I am fascinated by them because I grew up in one. Japan doesn't have them, at least like they are in the west.

Regards

Nightspore

p.s. btw China's rising GDP has helped lift hundreds of millions of Chinese citizens out of poverty. I am not saying they are they living "the good life", but I would say many are living better lives than when their GDP was a fraction of what it is now.

Craorach:
I would never vote for an extremist party because, quite honestly, they tend to be one trick ponies.

Most extremist parties are formed around one or two fundamental ideals... the BNP, for example, are primarily dedicated to "British Purity" or whatever bullshit they are trotting out these days.

Even if I did agree with that side of their party.. and god knows it makes my physically sick to think of doing so... I'd want to know what their policies on taxation, foreign affairs, healthcare, education, etc were.

I can't help but feel a group who want to kick all the "non British" people out of Britain wouldn't be very good at dealing with other nations.

Their manifesto is actually insane.
They think that if they promise not to meddle in the middle east, the middle east will take back their 'surplus population'. They want to ban the construction of mosques full stop.

They want to pay all non-whites to go home as part of "voluntary rehabilitation scheme".

Their education policy involves bringing back national service and teaching kids that homosexuality is sinful and that racism is ok.
They want to have British companies making everything that the military uses, and boost the size of it in general, but with no clear policy of additional spending.
They want Britain to stop importing things from other countries, but also reduce the cost of everything.

It makes no sense basically. It's full of contradictions and half-truths, and is nowhere near in-depth enough to be even slightly persuasive. You can probably find it on their website, but if you can be arsed, request a paper copy for free. It costs them money that way, so you can do your bit to make them go bankrupt (and they've been close to that recently)

Bertylicious:
Without the massive influx of workers from the EU then the UK would be sunk. Arguments against immigration are non-sensical. Just look at the demographics; we don't have enough young people to sustain our elderly population.

Voting for extremists, extremists of any kind, is a vote for somebody that either does not understand how complex things are or, more likely, is trying to obtain power by saying they have a simple solution to the complex world. It is a seductive argument and it is a lie.

Life is hard and the application of power will always hurt people, no matter how noble the cause. This is why extremists of all stripes are dangerous; they either do not know or do not care.

Not really sure about the UK but here is how it is in Belgium:
more than 10% unemployment
the socialist parties complain thet raising the pension age will take jobs away from the younger generation

Why do we need immigrants again? We still have plenty of workforce availible, this ain't the 19th-20th century anymore. The only immigrants we need are the ones with very specific degrees (such as engineers we lack), but those aren't the ones that are storming in.

generals3:

Bertylicious:
blah blah blah

Not really sure about the UK but here is how it is in Belgium:
more than 10% unemployment
the socialist parties complain thet raising the pension age will take jobs away from the younger generation

Why do we need immigrants again? We still have plenty of workforce availible, this ain't the 19th-20th century anymore. The only immigrants we need are the ones with very specific degrees (such as engineers we lack), but those aren't the ones that are storming in.

Good question. I think it has to do with mobility but also with the entrepreneurial impact lots of new people settling in an area has. After all these people spend money, buy houses, start business and so on.

There are also other industries which benefit from unskilled workers that one might not immediately consider. Care homes for instance.

It's also worth noting that people who have upped sticks and moved to another country to start a new life tend to be rather remarkable individuals, certainly from my observations from working in HR at any rate.

Saying that though, I have no evidence. My opinion is based on limited, anecdotal, experience.

generals3:

Not really sure about the UK but here is how it is in Belgium:
more than 10% unemployment
the socialist parties complain thet raising the pension age will take jobs away from the younger generation

Why do we need immigrants again? We still have plenty of workforce availible, this ain't the 19th-20th century anymore. The only immigrants we need are the ones with very specific degrees (such as engineers we lack), but those aren't the ones that are storming in.

Let me give you an example from growing up in a fairly high unemployment area of the UK.

Flower and other produce picking. The area I grew up in had alot of farms that grew pretty basic stuff. Pretty much the whole year around there was work for people just to walk the rows picking the produce and boxing it up for sale.

The prices for this stuff have been going down for years, compared to average income, due to influxes of imported goods. Many of the farmers started having real trouble not just selling it for a profit, but finding people willing to do the job for what they could afford to pay.

Few people actively want to do a dirty, exposed, job where you spend all day covered in plant juices that can cause rashes and other unpleasantness. Fewer people still are willing to do it for less than the money they would get from unemployment benefits, and probably less than their cost to get to the place.

There were however groups of people who thought nothing of walking for hours just to do a job which barely paid enough for them to eat. Immigrants from countries where walking for hours just to get water was fairly common. So the farmers started employing them.

Within ten years, idiots were blaming the immigrants for the lack of jobs. Problem is, when they first came to the country, these people were doing jobs that the locals actively refused to do. They worked hard, some of them almost working themselves to death, till they were able to better their lot in life.

Even with high unemployment there are jobs available, often jobs nobody is willing to do. Burger flipping, refuse collection and processing, sewerage workers, stuff that people just don't want to do.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here