[andyt]

20% of immigrants to Canada are fully assessed for their skills and language abilities. So we could to a lot better. I guess Britain's problem is the idea that any citizen of the Commonwealth has an in. Not a good policy, don't know what they were thinking.

[martin14]

andyt andyt:

I guess Britain's problem is the idea that any citizen of the Commonwealth has an in. Not a good policy, don't know what they were thinking.

White man's guilt, paying for Empire.

[CommanderSock]

martin14 martin14:

andyt andyt:

I guess Britain's problem is the idea that any citizen of the Commonwealth has an in. Not a good policy, don't know what they were thinking.

White man's guilt, paying for Empire.

I would say it's more about good relations.

They could've gone the Japanese route, their former colonies (Koreas) hate them and want nothing to do with them. And if they were resource giants, they would be quite happy to NEVER sell them a drop of oil.

Britain is being strategic.

Same as France, they have over 10% population that is black (including overseas territories they still hold, and they just added another one on April 1 - (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayotte). And another 10% that is muslim. This is simply strategy, Britain let go of their colonies but kept them close by keeping the elites within the Anglo sphere of influence.

I understand the politics of it, and I understand why the English peasants (the poor whites who are constantly on welfare) are angry at this policy. If fucks them over because to let in another nation's elites, one must also let in a few dredges.

It's all part of global politicking.

Or, as I said Britain/France could've gone the way of Japan, hated, lonely, and eventually, starved of resources (Japan lucked out with the US' umbrella of protection) but look at how the Koreas and China treat them.
European politicians are smarter than that. They didn’t rule the world because of naiveté. “White man’s guilt” is what the poor and often ignorant whites who don’t understand the system use to justify their government’s policies.

[Thanos]

North America, and even the rest of continental Europe, don't have the same vicious class system that still exists in Britain. Add in the gutting of the old industry-based economy that preceeded by at least ten years the same sort of working class job losses that eventually occurred in North America, and it becomes easier to see why the "white trash" syndrome in Britain's become more entrenched there than it is elsewhere.

The whole thing is like the background society in one of Jerry Pournelle's "Co-Dominium" stories. Provide the underclass with enough welfare to keep them perpetually drunk and stoned, but not enough for them to rise out of their living conditions, and it seems (minus the occasional riot or two, and some mutterings about a 'revolution' that never seems to materialize), that these forgotten people really never end up presenting much of a threat to the overall system.

[martin14]

CommanderSock CommanderSock:

martin14 martin14:

andyt andyt:

I guess Britain's problem is the idea that any citizen of the Commonwealth has an in. Not a good policy, don't know what they were thinking.

White man's guilt, paying for Empire.

I would say it's more about good relations.

They could've gone the Japanese route, their former colonies (Koreas) hate them and want nothing to do with them. And if they were resource giants, they would be quite happy to NEVER sell them a drop of oil.

Britain is being strategic.

Same as France, they have over 10% population that is black (including overseas territories they still hold, and they just added another one on April 1 - (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayotte). And another 10% that is muslim. This is simply strategy, Britain let go of their colonies but kept them close by keeping the elites within the Anglo sphere of influence.

I understand the politics of it, and I understand why the English peasants (the poor whites who are constantly on welfare) are angry at this policy. If fucks them over because to let in another nation's elites, one must also let in a few dredges.

It's all part of global politicking.

Or, as I said Britain/France could've gone the way of Japan, hated, lonely, and eventually, starved of resources (Japan lucked out with the US' umbrella of protection) but look at how the Koreas and China treat them.
European politicians are smarter than that. They didn’t rule the world because of naiveté. “White man’s guilt” is what the poor and often ignorant whites who don’t understand the system use to justify their government’s policies.

The Japanese Empire did not last for hundreds of years, and would never in a
million years be considered 'beneficial'
so your analogy is hardly worth considering.

[BartSimpson]

Thanos Thanos:

North America, and even the rest of continental Europe, don't have the same vicious class system that still exists in Britain. Add in the gutting of the old industry-based economy that preceeded by at least ten years the same sort of working class job losses that eventually occurred in North America, and it becomes easier to see why the "white trash" syndrome in Britain's become more entrenched there than it is elsewhere.

The whole thing is like the background society in one of Jerry Pournelle's "Co-Dominium" stories. Provide the underclass with enough welfare to keep them perpetually drunk and stoned, but not enough for them to rise out of their living conditions, and it seems (minus the occasional riot or two, and some mutterings about a 'revolution' that never seems to materialize), that these forgotten people really never end up presenting much of a threat to the overall system.

The UK is on the brink of an accounting in this regard. Seems the spectrum of the right is mobilizing against the Council Tax (property tax) and they're gaining ground. Last month there was a takeover of some court that was trying to seize someone's home for non-payment of the tax (which is apparently quite onerous in places). Maybe the Brits will dial this back, but I doubt it.

[CommanderSock]

martin14 martin14:

The Japanese Empire did not last for hundreds of years, and would never in a
million years be considered 'beneficial'

Well, the term 'beneficial' is in the eyes of the beholder. The British themselves were not exactly the best or worst colonists, their activities ranged across the globe from malevolent to benevolent. In some countries they were torturing, executing, and segregating (Kenya, Zimbabwe, South Africa etc), in others they were working with the locals to create a better business environment and stability (Botswana, India etc) for everyone.

[CommanderSock]

Thanos Thanos:

North America, and even the rest of continental Europe, don't have the same vicious class system that still exists in Britain. Add in the gutting of the old industry-based economy that preceeded by at least ten years the same sort of working class job losses that eventually occurred in North America, and it becomes easier to see why the "white trash" syndrome in Britain's become more entrenched there than it is elsewhere.

The whole thing is like the background society in one of Jerry Pournelle's "Co-Dominium" stories. Provide the underclass with enough welfare to keep them perpetually drunk and stoned, but not enough for them to rise out of their living conditions, and it seems (minus the occasional riot or two, and some mutterings about a 'revolution' that never seems to materialize), that these forgotten people really never end up presenting much of a threat to the overall system.

It was because the poor whites in the UK for the most part had good lives. They may have been welfare sponges, but they were well fed, well clothed, an xbox and a playstation in the home, big screen TV, and children were guaranteed to be paid for by the government, so unprotected sex was also plentiful. All in all, everyone was happy.

Then some mortgage troubles stirred up across the pond, long story short the austerity is going to bite these people the hardest in the long run.

Mr. Cameron needs a scapegoat to justify what will inevitably be their social safety net being yanked under their feet.

It's all a bit messy really. Especially as many of them are completely skill-less, no prospects of finding meaningful employment in a service based economy. They couldn't even find work in today's modern factories; most of them barely know how to measure.

So now, these unemployable, skill-less, and soon to be extremely impoverished people are the number one priority for the government to deal with if it wants to avoid a possible social upheaval. What makes it even worse, the Indian and Nigerian guy across the street are working in offices and are driving BMW’s through London’s streets. Then they have to compete with the Pakistanis and Somalis (let’s be honest) for the dwindling welfare payments.

In the past, these people could simply export to the British colonies as farm hands and basic labourers, but today that's not an option. Not even kicking every immigrant out will solve Britain’s serious structural problems. They have to start exporting their yobs as they had in the past.

[Thanos]

These predictions are dependent upon how long the Cameron/Clegg government manages to exist and is able to push the austerity nonsense. The way I recently read it is that Nick Clegg is under incredible pressure, both from his caucus and from personal threats and intimidation that have been aimed at his family. If he quits or is toppled internally, the Liberal-Dems will probably revolt and the coalition with Cameron will collapse. If Labour takes over again with Liberal-Dem support, the welfare free-for-all will resume, especially now with the Blairites in the minority in that party and the old-school 1960/70's type of leftists mostly in control again.

The austerity cuts have caused the British economy to shrink over the last quarter anyway, so it's not like the Cameron system has much progress to fall back on if Labour manages to make a power grab again. All it means is that the 'revolution' gets pushed back to later rather than sooner, especially if the welfare addicts are mollified with their goodies restored by Labour so they get back to their usual daily routine of drinking, drugging, brawling, and fucking.

[Zipperfish]

I don't know..drinking, drugging, brawling and fucking seems a pretty good gig to me. If you threw sleeping in there, you've pretty much described me from ages 16 to 22.

[Thanos]

Well, it is a lot of fun to do it for a while, especially if you have long-term access to your parent's basement in which to sprout like a fungus.

Doing it into your thirties, fourties, and fifties, the way these folks in teh British yob culture do it, is something else altogether different. Even in welfare-friendly Canada the only places where we have this endemic attitude is on some of the Native reserves. In Britain it's like it's in every place where any sort of urban gentrification of the old cities hasn't taken place.

[EyeBrock]

CommanderSock CommanderSock:

Canada has the system that these countries want to adopt. Education based immigration. And immigration based on a skillset of points. And of course foreign student graduates are automatically given a PR if they find work after graduation.

Most Americans wish they had educated immigrants as opposed to violent gangs and maids from down south.

I just had to get that out there before we decent into a debate about Canadian immigration because our system on paper already globally clamoured for.

Now...onto Mr Cameron.

He's got a point. But there's only one group that causes most of the problems. The rest keep their heads down and find work.

Its not fair to beat the drums immigrant phobia before putting into context the realities and intricacies of the situation.

Well, we all know which particular 'group' Cameron is going on about. He can't/won't say it but everybody in the UK knows he's talking about the Pakistani/Bangladeshi immigrants.

I'm very impressed with your grasp on this aspect of the UK Sock. I used to think you were a bit anti-Brit but you really know your stuff on this and I'm not used to that. Great posts.

[andyt]

So, Brock, to the degree that you feel comfortable, what was your family's situation? Were they generations on welfare? If you see them as being stuck by their own lack of initiative, what made you different? Or was there a systemic problem that kept your family where it was?

[EyeBrock]

Irish.

[BartSimpson]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

Irish.

Part of my family is from Sligo and when I was over in 1983 for a visit they were still living in a peat heated stone hut with a thatched roof and a dirt floor and there was no electricity in Clooncha and barely a one-lane road in and out.

Things are much improved from then but now I have family from over there asking for us to sponsor them. Sometime in the summer Mrs. Bart and I will be the proud (defacto) parents of two high school kids.