Immigration. That’s what we hear, that’s one of the central battlegrounds of the future EU referendum. It’s everywhere. Everyone is declaring that they’re taking our jobs. They’re stealing our benefits They’re killing our national identity. Curse those emigrants. There nothing but trouble.
It’s correct, there is little disputing how the 1992 Maastricht Treaty forced European borders to free passage of people, sparking an increase in European emigrants coming into the United Kingdom. Of this, there is no uncertainty.
Furthermore, let’s not pretend there are no concerns resulting from such changes, and it would be ill-advised to do so. We can call on Joanne Harris’s Chocolat Effect to see that when others come into a neighborhood with their different ways, they can start to shape the foundation of that community.
Plus now, with other nationalities bringing their individual cultures, languages, and ways of doing things, there will unquestionably be changes we witness on the streets of our communities, cities, and towns.
Plus it does become a numbers contest, the more newcomers that come, the more everything can be replaced, the more our distinguished British values will gradually change in front of our very eyes, whether they be queuing customs, driving customs, social conduct customs, whether it be communication obstacles in the classroom, at the doctor’s surgery, or in the supermarket.
New patterns of behavior have been adjusted and different foods have arrived on our high streets. Unquestionably, things have changed, the start of Polski schlep into our vocabulary is proof enough of it.
It becomes less when in Rome and more if you can’t beat them, join them.
My great grandmother came to Great Britain when she was a young teen from Russia because of the anti-Jewish pogroms in the Russian Empire. She and her two sisters put down roots, together with other Jews that were immigrants at the time.
However, there was still anti-Semitism even back then. In Britain, too, Jews were classified as a negative unrest within the nation, and they figured extensively as an advocate of representative government. In addition, Jews were continuously used as a negative foil for the meaning of what was English or British.
It is likely that throughout the ages, nothing much will improve since people don’t like reform, clearly, change is not sound. Nevertheless, when I was growing up, there were no corner shops that opened until the early hours of the morning, in some areas, or at least 7am until 7pm at night.
Presently we definitely rely on those corners stores, and if they disappeared from our neighborhoods, people would not know what to do. We rely on those stores, even though we whine that they are operated by newcomers, therefore we literally have no right to whine about them.
We appear to have separated ourselves from communities completely, though previously, societies held collectively, supported each other, nursed the weak and sick, and looked after each other’s kids when it was required.
We Britain’s were a force to be reckoned with, we were an assertive nation, and we attempted to stay away from hatred, particularly following the second world war. It took a long time to clean up the mayhem that was created by Hitler, and we should have learned from it.
Now all our government wants to do is go to war with other nations, and its weird that America wants to provide arms to other countries so that they can blow themselves up, and for some strange reason we get the blame for it in the United Kingdom, but of course, we are just as much to blame.
British firms ship military devices and technologies to handfuls of nations globally. Figures published prove what shipments are made and to who. In 2011, export Licenses were given for 45 different kinds of shipment to Egypt, 43 to Saudi Arabia and 38 to Iraq.
Licenses were given for the shipping of 10 types of weaponry and munitions to Saudi Arabia, comprising sniper rifles and submachine rifles. Things have not improved following World war 2.
The issue, nevertheless, actually, is how much of this is a dilemma? Or to put it another way, what aspects of our culture are we really striving to protect? After all, according to the newest developments from the Council of Europe, England and Wales have the largest prison population in Europe, balancing squarely with the United Kingdom, having some of the greatest rates of car robberies, brutal attacks, thefts and dog attacks in Western Europe.
This certainly shouldn’t be defended. Furthermore, in terms of education, according to the PISA report 2016, the United Kingdom has literacy rates behind Lithuania, Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Belarus, Ukraine, and Hungry.
Plus, the most struggling assembly is the ethnic assembly illustrated as white British. Again, something we certainly should try to improve. And in terms of health, according to the Food and Agriculture Organisation of The United Nations, Britain exceeds the list of the most overweight countries in the European Union.
In short, the United Kingdom has multiple problems inside its personal culture that we should not be proud of, and for which the small symmetry of immigrants coming into the realm cannot possibly be condemned.
Many of our difficulties are home-grown, they come from within. So let’s be realistic about this, the actual problem is not immigration. It might be a sideshow, however, it surely is not the central issue.
Immigration is not the source of all the evils in our society today. The true problem is that we, as a society, appear to be refusing to face up to the reality that our own citizens are far more accountable for the decay of what is good and grand about Britain.
The answer is not to be distracted by where people are from or what color their skin is or what doctrine hovers around their neck. These things distract from the actual point. What we should be concentrating on who is ready to roll up their sleeves, dig in, live by the law, look after their well-being, make the effort in our schools, and make our society cohesive in a way that serves for all of us, one that is secure for our children, nonviolent for our aging, and cleaner for our tomorrow.
And we can only do this if we work collectively and support each other. If we talk with one another and get to know the people in our towns, wherever they’re from. We each of us must support the lady next door and look after our neighborhood parks.
We collectively must ride mindfully through our roads and not bait our dogs. We communally must keep our roads clean and consider those around us. These are the things we should care about. These are the things we should embrace, our shared values.
It’s our collective duty to do so. Furthermore, we all need to buy in. As a nation, collectively. Since these are the things which are so frequently missing in our culture today. These are the things which are letting us down.
Furthermore, pulling up the EU drawbridge will not resolve our difficulties; it will just change the people we accuse. However, change, as they state, must begin at home. Additionally, there are lots that remain sound and excellent about Britain, it is solid, it is flourishing, it has an antiquity of freedom and liberty, and it is kind and generous. Additionally, we should be pleased that people want to come and live here.
Nevertheless, England is a pretty small place, and we can’t possibly provide for everybody. It’s not a case of not wanting people from other countries to come and live here, it’s a point that this is a really small country, and we cannot fit everyone in.
The land size of the United States is so immense, the whole of the United Kingdom could fit within it more than 40 times over. Whilst Russia, with the greatest land mass of any nation, is 8.5 million times larger than one of the smallest, Monaco.
Nevertheless, immigrants are not to blame. When nations that are under distress require assistance, they will go wherever to get away from that crisis, it is simply survival of the fittest, and they are escaping to preserve their life – can anyone blame them?
If we were in the equivalent position, and Great Britain was in the same position, we would do precisely the same, not only for ourselves but for our children, and it’s an animal impulse to flee from whatever is threatening, and take solitude anywhere they can.
Why would you stay in a country, even if it is your homeland to be blown up? You would want to shield your children, your family, and rightly so. After all, it’s an extremely solemn business, the continuation of your people, that’s why in countries like Africa, woman have more babies. Since, people from those countries, the survival percentage is lower, and more children die young, therefore, they tend to birth larger. amounts of babies.
However, for countless immigrants, the United Kingdom is a core for migrants attempting to find work and people wishing to further their studies. Work and study star quite profoundly as the grounds given by the 526,000 migrants who came to the United Kingdom in 2013.
The number of migrants traveling to Britain for family purposes from outside of the EU did decline, although the numbers have since started to rise. Work is usually quoted as the chief reason migrants come to the United Kingdom. Plus people traveling to the United Kingdom for work incentives is the biggest and fastest-growing category of immigrants.
However, this has not invariably been the cause. In 2011, 232,000 people traveled to the United Kingdom for formal education compared to 184,000 who came here to work. This has shifted since then and in 2013, 177,000 came here to study compared to 214,000 people who came here to work.
This does not imply that our education system is better, it just implies that our education system is better than theirs.
Tightening up visa controls would change how many people come into the United Kingdom.
Immigration is a typical part of an open economy and culture. The difficulty is the current measure of immigration, almost half of it now from the EU, which is just unsustainable. All nations have border restrictions and procedures about who to accept and who to turn away.
The important policy questions are about who and how many people are good for the United Kingdom, and Immigration procedures, just like any other policy area, should be conducted in the best interests of the United Kingdom.
We understand that most migrants come here for a very logical goal, to seek to better their lives and that many make a real contribution to our society and to culture. The problem is the scale that immigration has presently reached with severe results for the proportion of our population and for the ability of our public services to cope.
Great levels of net migration to the United Kingdom are a comparatively new happening. The United Kingdom has periodically encountered stages of immigration, however, never on this current scale. High net migration has produced in fast population increase. The UK population currently stands at about 65 million.
On a large migration situation, which estimates net migration of 265,000, outlines that the UK population will soon grow by about 500,000 a year, the equivalent of a new city the area of Liverpool each year.
This is unsustainable. It would result in the population increasing by almost eight million over the next fifteen years bringing it to 73 million. 75% of this development will be down to future migrants and their children.
The residual population increase will come from the United Kingdom’s existing population, comprising births to immigrants now here. Population growth would not end there. It would proceed to rise towards 80 million in 25 years and continue going upwards.
The United Kingdom is already densely populated by international standards and has a continuing lack of housing. England is twice as crowded as Germany and almost four times as congested as France. To cope with this population boom large sums will have to be used for the development of school places, roads, rail, health and other infrastructure.
This is at a moment when the government is operating a budget deficit and tries to decrease public spending over the long term. Enhanced migration will not create the additional tax income required to meet for such infrastructure development.
The only important inquiry ever administered in the United Kingdom into the financial influence of immigration was carried out by the Select Committee on Economic Affairs of the House of Lords in 2007/08. In April 2008 they reported that the overall economic impact of immigration is expected to be meager, although this disguises important differences across various immigrant groups.
These conclusions have been confirmed by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development which noticed in its yearly statement that accounts for the economic consequence of immigration vary, though in most nations it serves to be modest in terms of Gross domestic product and is about zero on average across OECD nations.
The UK economy is presently in a phase of financial increase that was determined by the Office of Budget Responsibility in 2015 to extend over the next few years. Mass immigration contributes to this increase, only because more people make for a healthier market.
This is why it is normal to understand the debate that immigration is great for the marketplace since it raises GDP. Nevertheless, it does not significantly boost GDP per head so does not significantly make for a healthier economy.
The most current Office for Budget Responsibility report estimated that prevailing raised levels of net migration would continue and that this further inflow would total no more than a tenth of one percent of GDP per head of the population. The House of Lords report previously referred to said that they had seen no proof for the debate, made by the government, business and various others, that net immigration, immigration minus emigration, produces notable financial gains for the present UK people.
The expanding marketplace is generating further work opportunities and the numbers of both UK born and migrants in work are rising, however, the vast supply of labour from overseas has been compared with sustained flat growth in wages as businesses have not had to give higher salaries.
Mass immigration is perhaps holding back salaries for those in direct opposition to work, which is usually those who are already economically paid, both British native and former migrants alike. A comparison conducted by the Bank of England recently concluded that the immigrant-native proportion has little bearing on the average occupational salary comparisons of that region and that the greatest influences were seen in the semi and unskilled services division.
Public sentiment is obvious. A vast majority of society want to see immigration reduced. That covers voters of all ethnicities. This is hardly surprising as we all share the same concerns about housing, schools, and the health service.
The higher number of new immigrants, the more challenging it is for everybody to become completely integrated into British society, and it was predicted back in 2005 that the United Kingdom was sleepwalking into segregation.
We are not a well-organised nation since there are no building blocks, and we appear to be at our weakest position, and we are gradually sinking. We appear to have various responses from different people about immigration, some state that they agree with it, some state that they don’t, most don’t.
Nonetheless, we as a nation, the people, people that work, don’t work, disabled or retired appear to have much to say regarding various matters, yet we rarely do anything regarding it. People appear to believe that they can express their way of thinking, however, it’s not essential to do anything regarding it.
You can’t have an appraisal over something if one is not ready to do something about it, if you have something to voice, then it’s important enough to do something about it since nothing is hopeless, and by going ahead with something that we feel strongly about could really end up being successful.
People will tell you it’s not feasible to do something since it will end up being wrong for you, except what if it isn’t? What if it really ended up being beneficial for us as a country? Would that not make us very pleased with what we had become since we had made it that way, and not the government?
Of course, as far as the government are concerned the individuals of this nation babble total and absolute garbage, and we have no concept of how this nation should be run! I beg to disagree with that notion, and I proclaim that we as a country know favorably than everyone else how this nation should be run, recognizing we are the ones that have to survive and endure in it.
Therefore, if that is the case, then shouldn’t we as the people of the country be permitted to determine our future? After all, it’s our continuation that the government is messing about with like some entertainment. We are not pawns on a chess board, we are human beings, and hence should be treated as such, and if that indicates that we should choose our own future, then so be it.
After all, it is stated that “The meek shall inherit the earth” Not Theresa May and her Tory electorates.