Immigrants 'must add to quality of life in Britain'

reply to post by tothetenthpower


Very well put!!!
I completely agree.

reply to post by Extralien


Yes but a normal person...gets a job before movng to another country, so that they can survive...by being able to have a place to stay, food, cloths, and transportation...or able use public transportation.
I think that they also need to be there legally, I am all for people coming here or any other place in the world, but do it LEGALLY and carry your OWN weight, meaning, you can support yourself...not a mooch or leach on the economy or society.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
I get the arguments of the whole 'open borders' or outright 'no borders' crowd..and if they want to play that sheer insanity in some backward region of the planet, be my guest. I'll enjoy the epic failure it turns into...but England?

When precisely did it become anyone's *RIGHT* to immigrate to any other nation in the world? Last I checked, it's 100% and entirely the province of the host nation to decide who...IF ANYONE AT ALL...may enter their nation for everything from tourism to residency. I'm glad to see England is finally showing some sense here. Nations like Australia, New Zealand, Iceland and others have been requiring this and MUCH MORE for a long time now. If you aren't well off financially or very well educated, it's NOT happening. End of story...with a few narrow exceptions.

If the United States would adopt these policies within our OWN house, perhaps we could get back to being a nation where the citizens weren't actually looking at legal requirements to LEAVE while every loser on Earth is still pushing hard to COME.

My hats off to England for showing common sense and a sense of self preservation before they lost everything that made them British.

edit on 2-2-2012 by Wrabbit2000 because: spacing change

:coo l:

One thing nobody has touched on, and should be considered..

Let's consider the scenario.. A UK citizen goes to another country to marry a foreign citizen, then brings them over to the UK to live..

They both work but are not paid enough to meet the 31k limit...

They now have three children together whilst living and working in the UK.

They still do not meet the 31k limit, so the government decides to kick out the immigrant..

This then leaves one of the parents with all three kids..

Who gets the kids? The person leaving for their own country or the UK citizen?

If it is the foreign citizen then the UK citizen will continue to earn to send money over to the family (this means money leaves the UK)

If the UK citizen is left with the three kids, then it may be necessary for the adult to leave work to attend to every daily need of the kids, whilst the foreign citizen must return to the home country alone and with pockets empty... meanwhile the UK state dishes out loads of money on an unemployed parent bringing up three kids alone.

Either way, a family is broken up.

Could the UK citizen move to the partners country? Yes, but you are still stuck with whatever that other countries laws are. Many countries, like the Philippines for example, will not let you permanently live there as a foreign citizen even if you are married to someone from that country.. You've got to have the money to keep renewing your visa and leaving the country once a year. Can't do that if you're not allowed to work, have a bank account or own property..

reply to post by JewelFlip


Oh god no, it take half the time, if that.

Thats why these people who move here and are nurses, builders, carpenters, what ever. they have the option to re train here within that 5 years given. EASILY. hence what i said in an earlier post, If they REALLY want to, its possible. Night schools and crap jobs can still work out. People just don't want to Sweat these days.

reply to post by Extralien


That wouldn't happen. If anyone marries a English citizen the couple are both protected, In fact its even better. I.e

If i married a Chinese women, she could live here the day after we get married and i would not require a Visa to go to china.

Originally posted by Kriltosthe2nd
reply to post by Extralien

 

That wouldn't happen. If anyone marries a English citizen the couple are both protected, In fact its even better. I.e

If i married a Chinese women, she could live here the day after we get married and i would not require a Visa to go to china.

Actually, you might just be a little bit on the wrong side there...

Any British citizen who wants to bring in a non-EU spouse should also meet a minimum salary level

www.bbc.co.uk...

This is not just aimed at single immigrants trying to come here for an easy ride or tax free work or any other fiddle or even for fair and true, honest work with the hope of a better life.. It's aimed at everyone..
As a reporter said earlier on TV news.. it's about 'who' comes in, not how many...

reply to post by Extralien


oh well that must be new with these laws they're bringing in.

before you could. well that'll stop all the polish flirting with the Single English men!

reply to post by Extralien


This is bollocks...We are all world citizens and we can go where we want when we want. Time for a paradigm shift.

reply to post by Kriltosthe2nd


Yes, you would. Your marital status doesn't change your nationality status. That's where the need for a visa rests.

And no, you would need to do some work there. Marriage and residence laws are messy. You really ought to read up on that stuff. There is nothing easy about marriages to foreigners.

reply to post by Kriltosthe2nd


Well then I guess all I can say is that you get what you give (as in effort for opportunities).

But I will agree with CosmicEgg that marrying foreigners is a difficult business. My husband has been waiting for his permanent residence for AGES. He doesn't want to give up his other country's citizenship either so he can't apply to be a citizen. So this will probably be a life long battle for us.

reply to post by JewelFlip


I'm the foreign partner in my story. I never got citizenship here because my embassy lied to me (so unlike the Americans) and by the time I found out it was just too much hassle to bother with. I think the worst part about not having dual nationality is that I have to have a valid US passport all the time. Our embassies abroad are considerably less than hospitable & considerably more than hostile to their expat customers. However, the Finns are just as unfriendly to foreigners so I'm just persona non grata at every port.

For a long time I was not allowed to own property, when I moved to a new place I had to have blessings from all the potential neighbors before I was allowed to sign the rental agreement. I had to be cosigned on everything by my then-husband. It was a humbling experience. Doing immigrant work because you don't yet speak the two national languages is good fun too. People who thing immigration is a free ride need to try it.

reply to post by CosmicEgg

I feel you
It's definitely not an easy thing to do (especially 1st world to 1st world)! My husband's problem is that his English is excellent and he's white - so people assume he's Canadian. Then every so often his syntax slips and he accidentally insults someone.

It's sometimes very awkward, especially when he busts out the phrase "You could have the dignity to..." when he means "You could at least..." That one has started a few fights between us too, but it does take the wind out of your sails when you have to stop mid-fight for a grammar lesson.

Good luck with the Finnish though, they do so love vowels, don't they? lol

reply to post by Extralien


Canada does it. In fact in order to even visit Canada, you must show enough funds to cover your stay.

www.cic.gc.ca...

Visas and exemptions
You may or may not need a temporary resident visa to visit Canada, depending on your citizenship. However, even if you are exempt, there is important information you need to know before you plan your trip.

Inadmissibility
Some people are inadmissible—they are not allowed to come to Canada. Several things can make you inadmissible, including involvement in criminal activity, in human rights violations or in organized crime.
You can also be inadmissible for security, health or financial reasons. Find out more about inadmissibility.

reply to post by Extralien


Well there are 60 million people on that tiny island, thats 634 people in each square mile

I dont blame them wanting to restrict immigration

Extralien

"intelligently selective ".... ????

This is not second world war Nazi Germany testing the intelligence of Romany people and Jews...this is England in the year 2012....

Extralien Your political correctness disgusts me! It’s “insensitive” and arrogant (in the extreme) to compare Nazi experiments, with what the vast majority of existing British citizens actually want (which is to keep people out of Britain’s economy, whenever Britain’s economy doesn’t need more of them).
E.g. Because accepting more of these people decimates the disposable income of our existing poor (it creates more competition for unskilled employment, and this reduces the wages available to those seeking such work, or whose qualifications are of little significance –in quantity or redeployment).

What this economy & government must strive for (to solve its problems) is get todays unemployed on wages, and todays employed on higher wages.
How will this happen if the government doesn’t discriminate against those coming in?

Who the hell are you to accuse the government of being like Nazi Germany, when all its doing (in this case, for once) is upholding the will of public opinion?

I’m curious…
Are you, a foreigner? (Normally) I tend to not mind people coming into those country, providing the average effect (of the total) is to permanently benefit the living standards of those who already dwell here.

However, I do hope that (that in your opinions case) some government comes to power that may hold the same contempt for popular opinion as you do, but that it does so against yourself. I need not hope massively, because I believe the following...
If more people advocated your opinions (and if those opinions had their way) then it should be a short time, before the public backlash against your policies -reduction in living standards, resulted in your own regime, being soon dethroned. And if not (as e.g. dictators prove is possible) it would surely be a tragedy? I say so since I’m not the only person who hates the thought of our poor getting poorer (this only serves an "alien" elite!) Most people believe the resident populations purchasing power, should be higher tomorrow, than it is today. I want this for every country, but I still want it for my own! Historically Britain is e.g. very technologically creative, and so it probably actually serves mankind's interests, if our economy is free to choose the best, and be burdened as little as possible by those it doesn't need.

I hope for environmental sustainability too; (but know that's a separate topic!) In my view: There needn’t be a link between worldwide environmental harm, and our increasing consumption (if the right technology & policy is used). But I believe this will happen if the public is educated by both political debates, and if democracy is subsequently allowed to choose -prevail. This doesn't happen well, if you associate those who disagree with you with Nazies!!!

eply to post by Extralien


It would seem that you would be very surprised learning that most other countries do not value immigrants themselves very high but for what those people bring into the country in terms of cash and/or skills. That is today's real world out there.

Countries across the world are learning that refuges and immigrants are a drain on their systems once their numbers exceed a particular amount. Basically, non-skilled or non-monied immigrants pull down the whole system of the middle and even lower classes with cheap, plentiful labor.

The elites love those hungry, willing bodies! They have the power to allow it and take the best advantage of it while those most effected can do little but watch and be angry as their standards of living erode or remain static.

These barely hidden problems will be part of what tears the EU if not the US apart at the seams.

Originally posted by Extralien


This is discrimination....

This is controlling who can and who can't live a free life by the size of their bank accounts.
Having "no workable proposals" is not an excuse.

This is on par with needing a license to have a child. On par with seggregating one member of society from another.

The damaging part is the need to have a minimum income. The recommended level is 18,600 to 25,700 GBP.

But, this level is nothing in comparison to the 31,000 to 49,000 that Mr. Green would like it to be.

He said;

Mr Green told BBC Radio Kent he wanted "to be much more intelligently selective about who we let come here", and that anyone individual seeking permanent settlement should be able to command a salary of between £31,000 and £49,000.

"intelligently selective ".... ????

This is not second world war Nazi Germany testing the intelligence of Romany people and Jews...this is England in the year 2012....

He goes on to say;

We need to know that you're not going to be living off benefits from day one of arriving here.

Rather, you need to know they've got money and only those with it can benefit from government policies.

If immigration is so much of a problem, don't penalise those with less money! Don't dictate your ideals and choose only the "intelligent" ones...

Just stop people coming in full stop!!!!

It's simple.. reduce the numbers overall. Close the borders. Take those who can actually speak English good enough to learn a trade etc... Those willing to learn the language should be given a chance...

I could have several million pounds and bring in somebody who cannot speak a word of English..

This is a touchy subject and difficult to discuss. What makes it worse is the way that they are judging people by the money they have or are making.

www.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

We are a small island with a finite amount of space and resources. I totally believe it to be correct that in future, immigrants (not refugees, different matter entirely) can only gain entry if they benefit the country.

Where i disagree with the proposal is on the income levels to be met. For example, a newly qualified doctor in Ghana who wants to come to Britain would not be earning the required amount. Or even more basically, we have need of people in certain professions that are skilled but do not necessarily earn much. They should not be barred entry because of that, in my opinion.

However, generally speaking, it is about bloody time this happened.

This is bull#.

As if previously gained results warrant a nice future...but...who really cares about the core issue? "Brain drain away boys!"

im a true brit
and i say
TF their is a god
ive been waiting years for this to happen
heres the first good point
the ball is starting to roll now and...
we didnt need the stupid bnp to set things in motion
there are good points and bad points in these posts
but it still comes down to 1 thing
if immigration gets to a stage where it threatens the national identity of its indiginous people
then its against the law
ok i know, dont start harping on about the romans because i wont respond

dave