4 ms·

“Lovely little picket-fence green England”, assuming it’s even a thing, won’t be destroyed by foreigners, but it is destroying itself because it hasn’t been gov

by mmarq 5y ago

“Lovely little picket-fence green England”, assuming it’s even a thing, won’t be destroyed by foreigners, but it is destroying itself because it hasn’t been governed since the 2008 crisis. It’s probably the only place in Western Europe where salaries haven’t increased since 2008.

throwaway22032 5y ago
> even faster than it already is. No arguments here!
- mmarq 5y ago
  > won’t be destroyed by foreigners Should I expand on this? Do I really have to show that countries with a larger foreign born population (such as Sweden or Germany or Switzerland) are doing better than the UK? You have made an exceptional claim, that is immigration will make England poorer. You should come up with some historical examples and maybe a description of how it would happen, because it would the first time it happened in the history of humanity.
  - throwaway22032 5y ago
    I don't believe that immigration will make England poorer. I think that immigration is generally a good thing. I think that unrestricted immigration would make any country worse off in a number of ways, not only the economic axis but social cohesion, physical space, etc. None of those countries have unrestricted immigration. It seems like you view my opinion as being in opposition to yours, but it's not, we feel the same way, I think. :)
    - mmarq 5y ago
      The point where we disagree is that I don't think passport equality implies unrestricted immigration. Also it seems to me that your comment implies that unrestricted immigration will result in millions of “undesirables” moving to the West. I don’t agree with that.
  - pc86 5y ago
    You keep arguing against points the GP didn't make. There is a huge difference between "immigration will make England poorer," which is a strawman that nobody is suggesting, and "completely unrestricted immigration with zero checks and balances would be bad," which is about the closest thing to an empirical fact you can get to with regard to immigration. This is what the GP actually said, emphasis mine: > > > I think that if my country accepted anyone from anywhere around the world, I think that...England...would turn into an absolute hellscape of poverty even faster than it already is. Your point about 2008 is irrelevant, whether true or not. It's already taken into account. They're not saying anything about "foreigners" but about unrestricted, unregulated, open boarders style immigration.
    - throwaway22032 5y ago
      I think in fairness probably the above poster saw my mentioning "lovely little picket-fence green England", took it to be some sort of nationalistic race-baity slogan, and didn't really read the rest of the post. I'm generally pretty direct in my speech and I'm not really ashamed of it; I'm proud of my country for all of its' political faults and refuse to let a bunch of racist wankers ruin that.
    - mmarq 5y ago
      The only straw argument here is that passport equality implies such a thing as: > completely unrestricted immigration with zero checks and balance EU citizens, whose passports are equal at least within the EU, can’t move to another EU country without the economic means to leave there. So one would expect this to be the most likely outcome of passport equality. Said that, even if we assume that passport equality implies totally unrestricted immigration, the notion that it will result in foreigners migrating en mass to the English countryside to found horrid shantytowns and make everybody poorer is extremely bizarre, for such an event would be unique in the entire history of mankind.

by mmarq 5y ago

throwaway22032 5y ago

> even faster than it already is. No arguments here!

mmarq 5y ago
> won’t be destroyed by foreigners Should I expand on this? Do I really have to show that countries with a larger foreign born population (such as Sweden or Germany or Switzerland) are doing better than the UK? You have made an exceptional claim, that is immigration will make England poorer. You should come up with some historical examples and maybe a description of how it would happen, because it would the first time it happened in the history of humanity.
- throwaway22032 5y ago
  I don't believe that immigration will make England poorer. I think that immigration is generally a good thing. I think that unrestricted immigration would make any country worse off in a number of ways, not only the economic axis but social cohesion, physical space, etc. None of those countries have unrestricted immigration. It seems like you view my opinion as being in opposition to yours, but it's not, we feel the same way, I think. :)
  - mmarq 5y ago
    The point where we disagree is that I don't think passport equality implies unrestricted immigration. Also it seems to me that your comment implies that unrestricted immigration will result in millions of “undesirables” moving to the West. I don’t agree with that.
- pc86 5y ago
  You keep arguing against points the GP didn't make. There is a huge difference between "immigration will make England poorer," which is a strawman that nobody is suggesting, and "completely unrestricted immigration with zero checks and balances would be bad," which is about the closest thing to an empirical fact you can get to with regard to immigration. This is what the GP actually said, emphasis mine: > > > I think that if my country accepted anyone from anywhere around the world, I think that...England...would turn into an absolute hellscape of poverty even faster than it already is. Your point about 2008 is irrelevant, whether true or not. It's already taken into account. They're not saying anything about "foreigners" but about unrestricted, unregulated, open boarders style immigration.
  - throwaway22032 5y ago
    I think in fairness probably the above poster saw my mentioning "lovely little picket-fence green England", took it to be some sort of nationalistic race-baity slogan, and didn't really read the rest of the post. I'm generally pretty direct in my speech and I'm not really ashamed of it; I'm proud of my country for all of its' political faults and refuse to let a bunch of racist wankers ruin that.
  - mmarq 5y ago
    The only straw argument here is that passport equality implies such a thing as: > completely unrestricted immigration with zero checks and balance EU citizens, whose passports are equal at least within the EU, can’t move to another EU country without the economic means to leave there. So one would expect this to be the most likely outcome of passport equality. Said that, even if we assume that passport equality implies totally unrestricted immigration, the notion that it will result in foreigners migrating en mass to the English countryside to found horrid shantytowns and make everybody poorer is extremely bizarre, for such an event would be unique in the entire history of mankind.