Immigration

  • Please check your spam/junk folder after registration, for your email. Thank you
Welcome to our Swinging Community
Join now to meet other like-minded swingers.
Sign up
M

meet_the_fockers

Max-the-3rd said:
even so my point is that it is 0.18%. even add on asylum seekers, economic refugees, immigrants and illegal immigrants I am still thinking we will be lucky to top 3% and that's being generous. last time i was at any airport or dock i did not see mass queue's at the immigration. again we have the media to thank for selling headlines!
Click to expand...
They dont come via the airport.. Nothing to declare ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mr_F
T

Tigress

Out of interest @Max-the-3rd do you have children? Our schools are fit to burst and certainly when we lived in London mine were in the minority as English speakers. It was noticeable when we moved out that this had held back their education.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mr_F and Pearls
M

Max-the-3rd

Tigerinthesunshine said:
Out of interest @Max-the-3rd do you have children? Our schools are fit to burst and certainly when we lived in London mine were in the minority as English speakers. It was noticeable when we moved out that this had held back their education.
Click to expand...
I do have kids, and there is a lack of room in the schools here as well. and I would say it is about 50/50 with white kids and other ethnicity. but this is not a modern day problem. it was the same when i was a kid! this is a government funding problem and a wealth distribution problem, rich get richer while our kids squeeze into classrooms, perhaps if we were to take say the billions of pounds spent on football and used that money for education we would be in a better state. or maybe the billions spent on the royals or to astronomical wages of the m.p's and bankers. or even all that old money tucked away with family's such as the duke of Buccleuch. this is where the problem lies, plenty money around owned by greedy aristocrats happy to sit back and watch people stave.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pearls
Pearls

MOTM

Pearls

18 July 2015
55,117
121,122
I agree on the football, I have always said the same. Just look at our NHS, nurses are so underpaid and work like hell. Disagree with the royals I'm afraid, they bring a hell of a lot of money into this country and I'm a big supporter of the Prince's trust.
Mp's well say no more there eh, they give themselves pay rises :rolleyes:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mr_F
M

Max-the-3rd

Pearls said:
I agree on the football, I have always said the same. Just look at our NHS, nurses are so underpaid and work like hell. Disagree with the royals I'm afraid, they bring a hell of a lot of money into this country and I'm a big supporter of the Prince's trust.
Mp's well say no more there eh, they give themselves pay rises :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I have nothing against the royals, I just think they get far to much money. I mean what the hell are we paying the likes of princess Beatrice.

  • The Sovereign Grant has risen 18% since 2011, to £42.8m - which represents a fraction of the total annual cost of the royals.
  • A more accurate annual cost of the monarchy is £334m. That includes many hidden costs such as security, costs met by local councils, unpaid taxes and revenue from the Duchies of Cornwall and Lancaster.
  • With 18 so-called working royals, each royal costs an average of £18.5m a year. This includes the likes of Princess Alexandra and the Duchess of Kent, who most people wouldn't recognise and haven't heard of. Although not officially counted as working royals Prince Andrew's daughters Eugenie and Beatrice also bill the taxpayer for travel, accommodation and security.
  • It is wrong to claim the monarchy costs just a few pence per person. That claim, usually quoted as 56p each, is spin made up by Buckingham Palace. The figure divides the official cost by every person in the country. More importantly no other public spending is dismissed in this way. £334m - or even £42m - is a lot of money. The higher figure would pay for 15,000 new nurses or police officers.
  • It is wrong to claim the monarchy is good for the British economy. Despite some spurious reports to the contrary there is no evidence to support claims about tourism or trade. Tourists would continue to flock to Britain if there was no monarchy and our history, heritage and palaces would still be there for people to visit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pearls
Pearls

MOTM

Pearls

18 July 2015
55,117
121,122
Max-the-3rd said:
I have nothing against the royals, I just think they get far to much money. I mean what the hell are we paying the likes of princess Beatrice.

  • The Sovereign Grant has risen 18% since 2011, to £42.8m - which represents a fraction of the total annual cost of the royals.
  • A more accurate annual cost of the monarchy is £334m. That includes many hidden costs such as security, costs met by local councils, unpaid taxes and revenue from the Duchies of Cornwall and Lancaster.
  • With 18 so-called working royals, each royal costs an average of £18.5m a year. This includes the likes of Princess Alexandra and the Duchess of Kent, who most people wouldn't recognise and haven't heard of. Although not officially counted as working royals Prince Andrew's daughters Eugenie and Beatrice also bill the taxpayer for travel, accommodation and security.
  • It is wrong to claim the monarchy costs just a few pence per person. That claim, usually quoted as 56p each, is spin made up by Buckingham Palace. The figure divides the official cost by every person in the country. More importantly no other public spending is dismissed in this way. £334m - or even £42m - is a lot of money. The higher figure would pay for 15,000 new nurses or police officers.
  • It is wrong to claim the monarchy is good for the British economy. Despite some spurious reports to the contrary there is no evidence to support claims about tourism or trade. Tourists would continue to flock to Britain if there was no monarchy and our history, heritage and palaces would still be there for people to visit.
Click to expand...
Wow you had your weetabix this morning:D first too much there for me to handle before Ive had my third cuppa :whistle: Second well I like em ;):whistle:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mr_F and Admin
T

Tigress

Max-the-3rd said:
I do have kids, and there is a lack of room in the schools here as well. and I would say it is about 50/50 with white kids and other ethnicity. but this is not a modern day problem. it was the same when i was a kid! this is a government funding problem and a wealth distribution problem, rich get richer while our kids squeeze into classrooms, perhaps if we were to take say the billions of pounds spent on football and used that money for education we would be in a better state. or maybe the billions spent on the royals or to astronomical wages of the m.p's and bankers. or even all that old money tucked away with family's such as the duke of Buccleuch. this is where the problem lies, plenty money around owned by greedy aristocrats happy to sit back and watch people stave.
Click to expand...
I do agree to some extent, but I feel we are at breaking point right now. I don't disagree with immigration, but problems do occur when it's uncontrolled, in my opinion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Therapon and Pearls
M

Max-the-3rd

Tigerinthesunshine said:
I do agree to some extent, but I feel we are at breaking point right now. I don't disagree with immigration, but problems do occur when it's uncontrolled, in my opinion.
Click to expand...
point well made, full agree. and proper wealth distribution within the U.K and beyond could only help.x
 
Lips_Pearls

Lips_Pearls

19 March 2015
23,755
64,858
Tigerinthesunshine said:
I do agree to some extent, but I feel we are at breaking point right now. I don't disagree with immigration, but problems do occur when it's uncontrolled, in my opinion.
Click to expand...
I agree...

Quite simply; there's only so many people a boat can take before it capsizes.

Incidentally right now on BBC R2, Jeremy Vine is discussing the fact that the British Government has since dropped "Dubs amendment".
Whilst I genuinely feel at the situation;
We're at bursting point. Maybe as Max pointed out - yes, we have vast enough areas, but let's look at some things.
NHS, overstretched overrun
Police, overstretched overrun
Local Housing facilities - council et al, overstretched overrun
Schools, overstretched overrun
Doctors clinics, overstretched overrun
Dentists, overstretched overrun
Care for the elderly, overstretched overrun
Social care, overstretched overrun
Social welfare, overstretched overrun
See a common denominating factor here?
I wonder if it's because there's only so much we can actually do?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mr_F and Pearls
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom