Yahoo Multiculturalism how could it have failed so much

[John ''True Grit'' Wayne]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...wait-here.html

We're on our way to Britain: In a year up to 29 million Romanians and Bulgarians will have the right to settle in Britain and claim benefits. And many from the gipsy community can hardly wait to get here
Since EU borders were opened up in 2004, 1,114,368 Eastern Europeans have uprooted to live in England
And more are set to arrive over the next 12 months, tempted by tolerance and a host of benefits

It is great that the UK can afford all the extra spongers.

But there will be a day when your country is full up, when you cannot afford to give benefits to any more people from Europe and the rest of the world, too. They hope to get there before that moment happens.’
Bobby, a good-looking 30-year-old with a pugilist’s nose, is probably right about Britain nearing its limits.
The latest Census, published this month, reveals how mass immigration has dramatically changed our country. Since EU borders were opened up in 2004, 1,114,368 Eastern Europeans have uprooted to live in England.
Last year, 40,000 Bulgarians and Romanians moved to the UK, joining 130,000 of their countrymen who have settled here during the past decade.
But these numbers are nothing compared with the flood of migrants expected when the rules change in a little over a year’s time.
Until now, migrants from the two former communist nations (officially barred from working or claiming benefits in Britain until the freedom of movement rule comes in on January 1, 2014) have neatly exploited a gaping loophole in the EU rules.
It allows Bulgarians and Romanians claiming to be self-employed to get a British national insurance number and a raft of hand-outs, including housing and child benefit.
Many of the new arrivals have worked hard, cornering the market in car-wash companies, for instance.
But others are less industrious, and include Roma gipsies who, remarkably, now sell a third of all copies of the Big Issue.
Even selling one copy a week of the magazine (created to help the British homeless) miraculously gives them self-employed status and allows them to beg with impunity outside shops and on street corners.
Bulgarian and Romanian incomers have been blamed by police in their own countries and in Britain for a massive rise in organised crime, including the trafficking of children to Britain to beg, pickpocket, milk state benefits and even enter the sex trade.
It is estimated that 2,000 children from Romania and Bulgaria are under the control of modern-day Fagins in our major cities.
According to Scotland Yard, a skilful child thief can make up to £100,000 a year ‘working’ on the streets, buses and Tubes in London — cash that is sent back to Roma villages and towns at home.
So critical is the problem that Bulgaria’s Deputy Prime Minister visited Britain earlier this month to meet Home Secretary Theresa May to discuss how child trafficking and other organised crimes can be controlled when the UK doors swing open yet more widely.
Meanwhile, Antoaneta Vassileva, head of Bulgaria’s National Commission for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings, warns that the UK is now the EU hot-spot for Roma child pickpockets from her country — a problem that will almost certainly get worse when the rules change in a year’s time.
In Sofia, she explained to me: ‘The children are trained by their parents, or another relative, to be thieves.

Can the UK cope with the invasion.Thatcher would not allow this.

[Enzo]

Eastern Europeans don't tend to sponge they work long hours in minimum wage jobs no-one else particularly wants to do so allowing native born Brits to sponge. What someone did once was offer natives going into a jobcentre the jobs Polish people tend to do and they had a 100% turn down.

[John ''True Grit'' Wayne]

Read this from the BBC

Mr Miliband said there had been a "six-fold increase" in the number of people turning to food banks in recent years, including "working people".
He said the situation was "getting worse" under the coalition.
Mr Cameron insisted that tax changes, including raising the personal income tax threshold, were helping the worst-paid, during heated exchanges on 19 December 2012.
He said the government had taken action to tackle inflation, increase employment and help with the cost of living.
The prime minister also paid tribute to the nation's volunteers and said those who help out at food banks "are part of what I call the Big Society".
But Mr Miliband responded: "I never thought that the big society was about feeding hungry children in Britain."
He accused the prime minister of being "out of touch", claiming that benefit changes announced in autumn statement would hit "the strivers".
He claimed the government was standing up for the rich while hitting the lower and middle-income earners.
Mr Cameron hit back: "What is out of touch is denying we have a deficit left by his government that we are having to deal with."

Yeah you are doing so well so many are in poverty.Do you want to have to raise taxes to pay for these migrants?And as for Polish the place is flooded with them.

What someone did once was offer natives going into a jobcentre the jobs Polish people tend to do and they had a 100% turn down.

Are you saying the English are lazy pigs

[Enzo]

Are you saying the English are lazy pigs

A certain section of the population are, some employers would prefer Eastern Europeans as they get a bit of back breaking labour done for little money without compliant.

[Sarissofoi]

Problem are not a Romanians or Bulgarians but their llocal Roms/gypsy communities.

[Karnil Vark Khaitan]

Yeah lets keep England pure without those ragtag pesto people! And Down with taxs!

/sarcasm

Im going to say the same as Jack, and pickpocketing just use your brain keep It a saxe spot.

[John ''True Grit'' Wayne]

It is estimated that 2,000 children from Romania and Bulgaria are under the control of modern-day Fagins in our major cities.
According to Scotland Yard, a skilful child thief can make up to £100,000 a year ‘working’ on the streets, buses and Tubes in London — cash that is sent back to Roma villages and towns at home.
So critical is the problem that Bulgaria’s Deputy Prime Minister visited Britain earlier this month to meet Home Secretary Theresa May to discuss how child trafficking and other organised crimes can be controlled when the UK doors swing open yet more widely.
Meanwhile, Antoaneta Vassileva, head of Bulgaria’s National Commission for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings, warns that the UK is now the EU hot-spot for Roma child pickpockets from her country — a problem that will almost certainly get worse when the rules change in a year’s time.
In Sofia, she explained to me: ‘The children are trained by their parents, or another relative, to be thieves.

Yeah put cash in your socks because the UK will not curb this.

[John ''True Grit'' Wayne]

Surely there is enough British on the dole to work these jobs?
What are Roma Gypsys going to bring to the UK job market?
There are not many new jobs being created so do we need to take more people in many who cant even speak English.
But hay I guess somebody getting called a pleb is more important to the future of the UK.

[Enzo]

Surely there is enough British on the dole to work these jobs?

There is but they're not bothering and combine that with an aging native population which is in decline you'll indeed to import some fresh stock.

[Prosaic Visitant]

I'm sure the Aborigines of Australia and north America can sympathiese with your immigration problem, they've had massive issues with immigrants over the years.

[Dalarna3]

I'm sure the Aborigines of Australia and north America can sympathiese with your immigration problem, they've had massive issues with immigrants over the years.

Because one group of people were pushed out of their historic lands and destroyed means that it's okay for another to meet a similar fate? Classy logic there.

[Prosaic Visitant]

Because one group of people were pushed out of their historic lands and destroyed means that it's okay for another to meet a similar fate? Classy logic there.

1) The British were the perpetrators of a campaign of genocide and (when that failed) forcible assimilation of the Aborigines in Australia, coupled with mass migration of British people into Aboriginal lands. While I get that whatever happened 200, 100 or 50 years ago isn't the fault of people alive today, I find it amusing when Europeans, British in particular, complain about comparatively mild immigration and integration concerns considering what happened in the New World and elsewhere. Perspective.

2) Please, 85% of Britain is 'white' (however you define that) and immigration patterns are not locked in stone. People generally move because of economic reasons. As the West stagnates economically while the third world is gradually improving in terms of living standards*, immigration from the south to the north will most likely lower and already there are cases of Westerners moving to third world countries. Last time I looked, it will take until the end of the century at current demographic rates for 'white' people to become a minority in Britain. 90-ish years, a lot can change in that amount of time. We may even be dead by then. Hell, in a few decades west European countries may even struggle to attract enough productive immigrants to nullify negative birth rates. And then there are falling birth rates throughout the third world coupled with stabilised Western birth rates.

An example would be that for the past few years there were more people leaving America for Mexico than the other way around. Because of economics.

3) Even if 'white' people do become a minority, so what? Are your concerns cultural? religious? linguistic?


*there's a huge amount of differences ranging from rapid growth to zero improvement, but overall there is a gradual improvement.

[AqD]

Because one group of people were pushed out of their historic lands and destroyed means that it's okay for another to meet a similar fate? Classy logic there.

No. The aboriginals didn't want it, but UK willingly invited all immigrants itself by opening its border.


And now they're complaining. How could they not have forseen this when they opened the border?

[Dalarna3]

1) The British were the perpetrators of a campaign of genocide and (when that failed) forcible assimilation of the Aborigines in Australia, coupled with mass migration of British people into Aboriginal lands. While I get that whatever happened 200, 100 or 50 years ago isn't the fault of people alive today, I find it amusing when Europeans, British in particular, complain about comparatively mild immigration and integration concerns considering what happened in the New World and elsewhere. Perspective.

You're line of reasoning is the same. Because Aborigines in Australia were pushed out, British people don't have to right to complain about non-British people flooding into Britain. London isn't British anymore, but that's OK because of what happened to the Aborigines. The Turks pushed the Greeks out of Anatolia; would you find it amusing if Ankara became majority non-Turk?

2) Please, 85% of Britain is 'white' (however you define that) and immigration patterns are not locked in stone. People generally move because of economic reasons. As the West stagnates economically while the third world is gradually improving in terms of living standards*, immigration from the south to the north will most likely lower and already there are cases of Westerners moving to third world countries. Last time I looked, it will take until the end of the century at current demographic rates for 'white' people to become a minority in Britain. 90-ish years, a lot can change in that amount of time. We may even be dead by then. Hell, in a few decades west European countries may even struggle to attract enough productive immigrants to nullify negative birth rates. And then there are falling birth rates throughout the third world coupled with stabilised Western birth rates.

An example would be that for the past few years there were more people leaving America for Mexico than the other way around. Because of economics.

So non-British people could, potentially, not come to be the majority in Britain? Well, thank Jesus for that. It doesn't mean that the issue doesn't exist. It doesn't mean that the people immigrating to Britain don't exist. If you remember correctly, you're the one who opened with a direct comparison between the fate of the Aborigines and non-British immigration into Britain. Was your opening comparison totally bunk?

3) Even if 'white' people do become a minority, so what? Are your concerns cultural? religious? linguistic?


*there's a huge amount of differences ranging from rapid growth to zero improvement, but overall there is a gradual improvement.

What do/would you feel about your own people becoming minorities in their own countries? Do/would you feel OK with that? Would you not be concerned?

No. The aboriginals didn't want it, but UK willingly invited all immigrants itself by opening its border.


And now they're complaining. How could they not have forseen this when they opened the border?

You're suggesting that by opening the border, Britain has dealt itself a fait accompli to accept whatever happens. That's pretty grim of you. Countries make mistakes, that doesn't mean that they can't correct them.

[AqD]

You're suggesting that by opening the border, Britain has dealt itself a fait accompli to accept whatever happens. That's pretty grim of you. Countries make mistakes, that doesn't mean that they can't correct them.

Can they expel those who're already there? Would they?

[tarvu]

You're line of reasoning is the same. Because Aborigines in Australia were pushed out, British people don't have to right to complain about non-British people flooding into Britain. London isn't British anymore, but that's OK because of what happened to the Aborigines. The Turks pushed the Greeks out of Anatolia; would you find it amusing if Ankara became majority non-Turk?




So non-British people could, potentially, not come to be the majority in Britain? Well, thank Jesus for that. It doesn't mean that the issue doesn't exist. It doesn't mean that the people immigrating to Britain don't exist. If you remember correctly, you're the one who opened with a direct comparison between the fate of the Aborigines and non-British immigration into Britain. Was your opening comparison totally bunk?



What do/would you feel about your own people becoming minorities in their own countries? Do/would you feel OK with that? Would you not be concerned?




You're suggesting that by opening the border, Britain has dealt itself a fait accompli to accept whatever happens. That's pretty grim of you. Countries make mistakes, that doesn't mean that they can't correct them.

You live in Britain?

Britain is a democracy?

Does it allow minorities to vote?

Then it is not just "your" (white anglo) country.

[mongrel]

No. The aboriginals didn't want it, but UK willingly invited all immigrants itself by opening its border.


And now they're complaining. How could they not have forseen this when they opened the border?

A foolish response. People have migrated to Britain over centuries. The first immigration law, the 1905 Aliens Act was designed to exclude Russian Jews who were facing persecution at the time. What Britain has done is surrender border controls on a specific group of people, EU citizens. But agauin ,by 2014 so would every other EU country. It would be daft to suggest that every potential migrant will head for the UK , as opposed to say, Germany.

What do/would you feel about your own people becoming minorities in their own countries? Do/would you feel OK with that? Would you not be concerned?

Ask any Celt. Other than Irish Republicans I would guess that they are not bothered.

[Dalarna3]

Can they expel those who're already there? Would they?

If there is a will, there is a way. The problem with deportation, first of all, is that the mainstream political discourse won't hear it.

Ask any Celt. Other than Irish Republicans I would guess that they are not bothered.

The Celts have been wronged by many different peoples many different times. Asking a Breton about an event that happened two-thousand years ago is not likely to draw much of a response. However, I think that if I were to ask a random, normal Irishman if he thought that plantations or the Great Famine were OK, I doubt that he would answer in the affirmative.

[AqD]

A foolish response. People have migrated to Britain over centuries. The first immigration law, the 1905 Aliens Act was designed to exclude Russian Jews who were facing persecution at the time. What Britain has done is surrender border controls on a specific group of people, EU citizens. But agauin ,by 2014 so would every other EU country. It would be daft to suggest that every potential migrant will head for the UK , as opposed to say, Germany.

What good would it serve by allowing migration of foreigners unconditionally? EU citizenship is hardly an indication of good human quality.

Besides, as one of most developed countries in the world, I don't think those without good background or profession could easily find a job to support himself in UK, and that usually means troubles.

[John ''True Grit'' Wayne]

I was eating a meal on in a Burger King in town and Roma Gypsy's came in and started begging while we ate our food.They are aggressive.We do not need Romanian and Bulgarian Gypsy's begging and robbing in the UK.They are not even wanted in their own country's not because of racism but they ROB AND STEAL