And while you might not have said the British are mongrels it's usually how this sort of topic ends up, it already has if you haven't noticed.
So you're just imputing what I *might* say, when I've said nothing of the sort. GREAT debating skillz there, Dinkie. Strange no-one has commented on Prof Coleman being a rightwing eugenicist nutter with a skewed agenda.
Few projections of European populations have extended that into the future. The highest-migration projection in a set of variant projections for the UK (assuming the continuation of recent migration levels and a convergence of fertility levels) puts the crossover for the whole country (when the combined population of all ethnic minority groups together would exceed the population of ‘White British’) at around 2070
So you're just imputing what I *might* say, when I've said nothing of the sort. GREAT debating skillz there, Dinkie. Strange no-one has commented on Prof Coleman being a rightwing eugenicist nutter with a skewed agenda.
You cant really criticise anyones debating skills the way you're going.
I've just vainly searched the document - nowhere does it say "White British will be in a minority in 2066".
So you're just imputing what I *might* say, when I've said nothing of the sort. GREAT debating skillz there, Dinkie. Strange no-one has commented on Prof Coleman being a rightwing eugenicist nutter with a skewed agenda.
White Britons to become minority by 2066
White Britons will be outnumbered by 2066 if the rate of immigration continues, researchers have claimed.
Foreign workers will "change national identity" according to a population expert, unless the flow of immigration is dealt with.
The white British-born community (defined as English, Welsh, Scottish and Irish-born citizens) will fall to less than half of the overall population in just over 50 years.
The warning from Professor David Coleman, from Oxford University, comes ahead of an announcement today by the Migration Advisory Board of its recommendation for the proposed immigration cap for people outside the EU.
Figures from the Office of National Statistics show that if immigration remains at a long-term rate of around 180,000 a year the proportion of the white British-born population will fall from 80 per cent to 59 per cent by 2051.
In that time the white immigrant population will have risen from four to 10 per cent and ethnic minority population from 16 to 31 per cent.
I have found through experience that 'coloured' people do not particularly like dogs, where as white people do; I adore my dog & of course I take him for walks daily, where I used to live I was constantly getting scowled & glared at by 'coloured' people (this did not happen when I was alone), where I am now my dog & I regularly get smiled at. This is a fact & not a figment of my imagination.
Whereas my friend and her dog often get approached by Asian women who want to get their kids used to dogs.
Immigrants are not all the same, some are beneficial many are not. Immigration is like a medicinal drug, a small dose now and again makes you better, taking too much all at once makes you ill. The immigration proponents don't want to accept that numbers are way too high, so instead they lump all migrants together and claim we have been enriched by their diversity and they are essential to boost our economy etc.
Why are the numbers too high? Do you have any proof of this?
We could be just as economically well off with selective immigration, with much lower numbers and the predictions of 2066 would never happen.
Immigration should be selective. My problem is that our systems of control should not be in response to a Sun headline designed to whip up hysteria about 50% of people not being white.
i think you need to re-read Liams post. it's quoted above for you.
what's his ancestry got to do with anything? he isn't racist nor is he claiming he is pure 'english blood'. if you think he is racist, post a link to back up your claim.
he doesn't want to stop all immigration.still that doesn't stop the smear campaign being ramped up by the toreis and labour.
such as? (and try to ensure your reply doesn't mention food).
Considering there was a French Huguenot church built and several French named streets around the brick lane area I imagine they didn't integrated at first( I also descended from French Huguenots as well)
Funny I can't find any dictionary that says ..
Im-mi-grant : An invading ruling elite who supplant the existing rulling elite
That's because it's not the the definition! To repeat, the definition is
im·mi·grant
1. A person who comes to live permanently in a foreign country.
2. An animal or plant living or growing in a region to which it has migrated.
If it takes 5 years to sort out the mess and take stock of whats gone on the last 10,20,30,40 years.
That's not the (debatable) point - you asked 'since when has Farage been against all immigration'. The answer is since UKIP have stated that they are against all immigration, for at least the length of a parliament. Why he espouses this idea is another issue.
That's not the (debatable) point - you asked 'since when has Farage been against all immigration'. The answer is since UKIP have stated that they are against all immigration, for at least the length of a parliament. Why he espouses this idea is another issue.
That is permanent migration, not temporary immigrants like students or skilled workers wasn't it?
It is an old article based on the study but the study itself it has been updated and will be again next year.
Strange you STILL haven't commented on the Professor's background and political views which could conceivably have altered his treatment of the statistics ?
In 53 years time huh? :rolleyes: What per centage will be white europeans by the way?
In 53 years time some of those 'non-whites' will have been here for over a hundred years, such as the people who arrived in the Windrush era. I wonder if people will still be calling them unintegrated immigrants?
That is permanent migration, not temporary immigrants like students or skilled workers wasn't it?
I can't be sure, since their policy seems still to be under "review and update". Having looked at what they're still showing, you are correct in saying that their last plan was a five year ban permanent immigrants.
That's because it's not the the definition! To repeat, the definition is
im·mi·grant
1. A person who comes to live permanently in a foreign country.
2. An animal or plant living or growing in a region to which it has migrated.
Nope still not applicable. The Norman ruling elite of a couple of hundred at most(supported by a few thousand soldiers) nearly a thousand years ago hardly equates to what we've seen over the last 20 years. since the Norman conquest it's been a relative trickle that's been easliy absorbed and assimilated(because they wanted to be)
Nope still not applicable. The Norman ruling elite of a couple of hundred at most(supported by a few thousand soldiers) nearly a thousand years ago hardly equates to what we've seen over the last 20 years. since the Norman conquest it's been a relative trickle that's been easliy absorbed and assimilated(because they wanted to be)
There has been a large population difference and improved transport allowing for an increase in immigration. Please define what you mean by 'relative trickle', preferably with verified statistics.
Perhaps you might like to look here. You will see that immigration is not particularly high by historical levels and that the whole measure is considerably more complicated than you are willing to accept
You seemed to be unaware of that UKIP policy when you asked "Since when has Farage said he's against all immigration?".
Since when does a 5 year cap = ban all immigration for ever?
A 5 year stop, in order to take stock and plan for the future housing needs and general infastructure seems quite resonable to me. I take it you're quite happy with the current status?
Comments
I've just vainly searched the document - nowhere does it say "White British will be in a minority in 2066". So you're just imputing what I *might* say, when I've said nothing of the sort. GREAT debating skillz there, Dinkie.
Strange no-one has commented on Prof Coleman being a rightwing eugenicist nutter with a skewed agenda.
I meant we had already discussed Romans etc. so I used a modern potential invader of the recent past as an example.
You cant really criticise anyones debating skills the way you're going.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/8142176/White-Britons-to-become-minority-by-2066.html
Told you it was an old survey.
Whereas my friend and her dog often get approached by Asian women who want to get their kids used to dogs.
UKIP wants immigration stopped for 5 years.
Why are the numbers too high? Do you have any proof of this?
Immigration should be selective. My problem is that our systems of control should not be in response to a Sun headline designed to whip up hysteria about 50% of people not being white.
Funny I can't find any dictionary that says ..
Im-mi-grant : An invading ruling elite who supplant the existing rulling elite
If it takes 5 years to sort out the mess and take stock of whats gone on the last 10,20,30,40 years.
That's because it's not the the definition! To repeat, the definition is
im·mi·grant
1. A person who comes to live permanently in a foreign country.
2. An animal or plant living or growing in a region to which it has migrated.
Probably quite true. Same principle applies so if you don't want to integrate then prepared to be marginalized by society.
That's not the (debatable) point - you asked 'since when has Farage been against all immigration'. The answer is since UKIP have stated that they are against all immigration, for at least the length of a parliament. Why he espouses this idea is another issue.
It is an old article based on the study but the study itself it has been updated and will be again next year.
You seemed to be unaware of that UKIP policy when you asked "Since when has Farage said he's against all immigration?".
That is permanent migration, not temporary immigrants like students or skilled workers wasn't it?
He's aware of his own assumptions, and that seems to be all
In 53 years time some of those 'non-whites' will have been here for over a hundred years, such as the people who arrived in the Windrush era. I wonder if people will still be calling them unintegrated immigrants?
I can't be sure, since their policy seems still to be under "review and update". Having looked at what they're still showing, you are correct in saying that their last plan was a five year ban permanent immigrants.
Nope still not applicable. The Norman ruling elite of a couple of hundred at most(supported by a few thousand soldiers) nearly a thousand years ago hardly equates to what we've seen over the last 20 years. since the Norman conquest it's been a relative trickle that's been easliy absorbed and assimilated(because they wanted to be)
There has been a large population difference and improved transport allowing for an increase in immigration. Please define what you mean by 'relative trickle', preferably with verified statistics.
Perhaps you might like to look here. You will see that immigration is not particularly high by historical levels and that the whole measure is considerably more complicated than you are willing to accept
Since when does a 5 year cap = ban all immigration for ever?
A 5 year stop, in order to take stock and plan for the future housing needs and general infastructure seems quite resonable to me. I take it you're quite happy with the current status?