 You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
THIS IS NOT A TROLL POST
So, there's lots of talk (again) about dealing with the mass migration. However, I feel there is always an 'elephant in the room' regards some countries meddling and never acknowledging it. But surely, if we don't acknowledge certain factors then how can it get 'better'.
Wondered what others thought about it. Why's it happening and how to make it a bit better?
I depends on the question:
Why's it happening and how to make it a bit better?
Immigration, Emigration, etc? As always there are factors:
1) Open borders across the EU allowing freedom of movement
2) Civil wars across North Africa and the Middle East driving a refugee crisis
3) Elderly Britons deciding to retire in France or Spain.
When you say "better", I don't know what you mean - do you mean "better" as in "not let so many people in" or "stop fannying around and wake up to the humanitarian crisis on Europe's borders"?
Dustin Gee.
I mean better as in reducing theq numbers of people being displaced and living unsettled lives. I'm not wishing to discuss how we (UK) deal with numbers trying to enter. I'm wondering about the cause and effect of the start of the migration of people.
In no particular order....
Merkel.
Arms trade.
EU open border policy.
Russia.
Oil.
Saudi-Arabia.
Despite the above I think a large proportion of the blame lies with RELIGION....!
How to deal with it? Sterilisation for every on the list. (the list is long and very much all encompassing)
Sykes-Pigot and Churchill played a big part, though there has been fighting around the Middle East for ever.
None of the powers recognise the legitimacy of any of the others, and those in power are protective of all the oil revenues.
Religion is the fuel for a lot of it. I think the only solution is to find a way to use religion to end it too. Maybe for once it could do some good.
US Imperialism
Russian Imperialism
Significant fallout from the Proxy Wars fought during the closing stages of the Cold War.
"Dustin Gee."
😆
That's it. Thread done. End of.
Tony Blair.
Responsible for what's going on in Syria apparently...
[url= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Saudi_Arabia_proxy_conflict ]Iran - Saudi arabia proxy war[/url]
The parents... oh and that Thatcher woman...
[i]I'm wondering about the cause and effect of the start of the migration of people. [/i]
People have migrated since the dawn of time, and will continue to do so, allowed or otherwise.
In the past it was purely about survival, ie following the herd/harvest etc and then became economic and/or escape from persecution (although for some it is still about pure survival).
The answer? I guess the simple one is to make them feel that staying where they are means they'll have a decent life - how you achieve this, god knows.
Way to complicated to sum up in a simple sentence, but some of the causes are:
War, middle east and North Africa in particular
Oppressive regimes, China N. Korea as 2 examples
Agricultural subsidies, meaning farmers from poorer/less developed countries can't sell their produce on the international market.
As to whose fault that is, well everyone from EU, US, Russia well pretty much every government in some way, oh and the UN veto system.
Poverty
I don't think you can view all migration as negative (Although obviously when people feel desperate/forced to move halfway across the world this is negative, whereas someone moving for fun or to live out the rest of their life somewhere warm and comfortable through their own choice is probably positive), however I would suggest the following causes of migration:
- Instability (and ensuing war, famine etc)
- Vast economic differences
Blaming any one party for either of these is tricky. I don't for a second think we can stop people who are desperate from attempting to move from one country to another, and I don't really see what gives us the right to exclude anyone from any particular country.
The solution is to work to stabilise the warzones and bring prosperity to poorer regions. This is vastly easier said than done, but essentially our military interventions (and arms sales) are usually counter-productive and our diplomatic interventions can be beneficial, whilst economically offering technology transfer etc. is probably a good thing and crippling loans and disproportionately hight military spending tend to make a country's inhabitants want to leave (historically, see the Soviet Union).
Greed, intolerance, ignorance and apathy.
Not many people appreciate the positive side of immigration:
[list]
[li]Cheap skilled workers (and I don't really think they are doing our workforce out of a job, its just a convenient excuse for those who have become accustomed to a life on benefits - there are exceptions in deprived areas but I can't see Migrants making a beeline for ex-steelworkers towns)
[li]More workers to offset our aging population drawing their pensions to supplement their final salary pensions. (and the majority of migrants don't come here to draw benefits, they come here to work)
[li]Bolsters our GDP and helps use through/out of the recession.
[/list]
Of course we could just keep shouting Mine! Mine! Mine! and try to keep the 'poor people' out of our rich and affluent country. How bad would it need to be for one of you to either move abroad to the other side of Europe, with or without your family, to simply make a decent living?
Free movement of people helps limit the disparity of wages/cost of living across Europe and therefore is a fairer system...even if perhaps there are some negatives to those richer countries.
Human nature innit?
If you live somewhere shit, you want to go and live somewhere not so shit
Lots and lots of places are really, really shit
People have migrated since the dawn of time, and will continue to do so, allowed or otherwise.
^^^^^^^^^^^
[b]THIS[/b]
When people say they can trace their ancestry to 1066 and beyond i just roll my eyes. People have been back and fourth across the globe either by choice or not and those people played 'Pat-O-Cake' with people all over the globe.
If country's don't want no more people in then they shouldn't let people out.
The internet computers and smartphones.
They show people there is an alternative to the shit they live in so being human and wanting better they look for away to improve there lives, you cant keep people in ignorance any more ,unless of course your the boss of North Korea
Apple, Nokia, Motorola or who ever invented the smartphone
Put WWW in the hands of millions in the developing world who would otherwise have never really known how lucky we, in the developed, are ?
edit ... Damn you smart phone ... you my be the tool of all the world's wrongs ... but you are still not fast enough.... 😆
Blair and Bush sowed the seeds with various random wars, this in turn allowed Saudi money to fund ISIS (and other random organisations) The high moral standpoint of the west that assumed Gaddafi, Sadam, Assad, Arab Spring, Afghanistan were all bad for democracy.. we (the west) created this misery and now we are wowling (northern adjective for crying) about it - you reap what you sow I don't know how Blair sleeps at night he has indirectly killed more innocent souls than any of the individuals above
Lizards.
Makes you think.......
Islam. At the end of the day, Sunnis and Shia seem to be quite keen on killing each other when given the smallest excuse. Even without meddling from the west.
I blame squirrels.
Islam. At the end of the day, Sunnis and Shia seem to be quite keen on killing each other when given the smallest excuse. Even without meddling from the west.
Yeah right on man, cause no one in the west has ever migrated. No wars poverty or genocide has ever taken place in the west. They just stay put in the country they happened to be born in until they die 🙄 *shakes head and sighs
ISIS (Independent Squirrel Islamic Separatists)
Proper terrorism
Why should we expect people to be prisoners of the state they happened to be born in? Why shouldn't there be far more migration than currently? Having embraced the "free market" in every country, even the unlikely China etc, and allowed companies and whole industries to move across borders, why shouldn't humans be expected to follow? Who owns your employer? Who owns the shops you use? Who owns the companies that supply your energy, water and communications? Are they working across borders? Why have borders for humans but not for everything that effects their daily lives?
If we're just talking about people fleeing conflict… the answer is simple*, less wars.
[ *no, I have no idea really, especially the proxy wars between east and west played out in the north of Africa and the Middle East for generations ]
ISIS (Independent Squirrel Islamic Separatists)Proper terrorism
Nut-jobs, the lot of them.
I think the countries that are waging wars and doing the bombing are to blame.
So they should be accepting all the refugees.
OP the BBC had a World on the Move day today. Many speeches, I linked to one by ex head of MI6, Angelina Jolie spoke also. I think the stat. was that there where 60m refugees, 1 in every 122 people on the planet. Coverage on BBC website and I imagine on iPlayer
I think one major factor is simply the size of the World's population today, its exploded and this pressure on resources and potential for conflict have multiplied also.
I think the countries that are doing the bombing are to blame.So they should be accepting all the refugees.
Or perhaps they should just do nothing and let the populations try and wipe each other out in a "law of nature, survival of the fittest" sort of way ?
Sykes-Pigot and Churchill played a big part, though there has been fighting around the Middle East for ever.
I'd never heard of this before a couple of days ago, but it was totally responsible for the sectarian and religious strife that plagues North Africa now, and has pretty much led to the rise of militant Islamists, Tony Blair and Bush didn't help matters by effectively pouring petrol onto an already incendiary situation.
Of course, the tribes have been fighting among themselves for centuries, if not millennia, only stopping to join forces and fight any intruders trying to stop them from fighting each other; Afghanistan being a notable example.
History really should have told Princess Tony not to go galumphing into Afghanistan, but the vainglorious bastard just couldn't help himself.
History isn't going to treat him kindly, that's for sure.
Survival instinct.
@jamba ...it was listening to Angelina's speech on the radio at lunchtime today that prompted this post. Her words, whilst eloquent, completely skirted around the causes/details that posts on here have made. Made me question what do people really think about the situation since media talk often depoliticises the causes of the 'problem'. And it is a 'problem' since people are drowning alot and living in squalid camps on borders...or maybe life has always been like that and always will be?
your mum
Greggs steak bakes
Binners.
@eden - got it I did wonder. I think from her perspective she's more concerned about raising the issue and a little about the solution. yes there is an element of "its always been like that" added to the size of the world's population now IMHO. Specifically re the Middle East you had brutal dictators and no freedom of movement so the region had an unnatural lid on the problem which has now been removed. Also economically you have many people with enough money to pay $2,000 - $4,000 per person to people smugglers to move them large distances
the teaboy - Member
though there has been fighting around the Middle East for ever.
And Europe.
Yeah right on man, cause no one in the west has ever migrated. No wars poverty or genocide has ever taken place in the west. They just stay put in the country they happened to be born in until they die *shakes head and sighs
Sectarian religious conflict has driven many wars in Europe.
However, the divide between Sunnis and Shia is almost irreconcilable, partly due to the somewhat devolved nature of theological authority within Islam. The only thing that comes close to unifying the two, is when they are united against a common enemy - eg the west.
Poverty does of cause drive migration, but it has less to do with it than you might think - I've spent some time in third world countries and people are generally happy and positive about the future as long as the country is stable, growing economically and they have a roof over their heads. Wars are what drive people to risk their lives crossing oceans.
And Europe.
Ace! We can blame the Belgians.
Eddy Mercx, Jean Claude Van Damme, Plastic Bertrand, Tintin - I'm looking at you here!
The downside of migration from 3rd world/developing countries is that many of these countries lose their best people, this perpetuates the the situation that creates the desire for many to leave, if some of the money languishing in offshore accounts was invested and the investments managed responsibly (in places like West Africa for example ) then maybe people would be prepared to stay and make a go of it.
Then again, many of those people often return remittances which boost the local economy - and they often return to their country of origin bringing with them knowledge and experience gained abroad.
However, I have noticed a trend among young Filipinos who have managed to escape that seems to indicate that they have effectively given up on their country of origin.
[i]Dustin Gee
Your mum
Plastic Bertrand[/i]
I can't decide which one of those is the most guilty.
[i]Islam.[/i]
No I don't think it's him.
BBC World Service
Hora
Foreigners
Angelina Jolie's Speech, well worth listening to
Ace! We can blame the Belgians
Well, if you do a quick search on Belgium's role in Central Africa, specifically the Congo and Rwanda, you'll see that we can actually blame Belgium...
The wider point here is that everyone is responsible. Human history, especially in the last two centuries, can be read as a series of horrors and tragedies, each one sharpening the next. No one group can be held responsible, as we have all contributed to the problem.
So how to fix it?
The same way we broke it, together, over time.
As a few people have alluded to, migration is normal and required especially for an ageing population like ours. The majority of negative accusations thrown at it are debunked when actual real factual data is looked at. There is a really good article about it here
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg23030680-700-the-truth-about-migration-how-it-will-reshape-our-world/
If we just accept it, accept the money that migration brings us and use it to improve the country, all our "problems" with it would go away.
If we just accept it, accept the money that migration brings us and use it to improve the country, all our "problems" with it would go away
Can anyone actually provide a recent example in history where mass (not trickled or controlled) migration really benefited a host nation?
Mans greed and beliefs,oh and Tony Blair
Can anyone actually provide a recent example in history where mass (not trickled or controlled) migration really benefited a host nation?
Israel
UK when we had "mass immigration" from the commonwealth
Australia
America
UK currently
Everywhere basically
Its a leading question with the phrasing "mass" as we always have controlled immigration
Stewartc why not read the article?
Israel
UK when we had "mass immigration" from the commonwealth
Australia
America
Highly controlled,
Isreal - Jewish only
Australia - highly regulated including being outright racist in 1960's
US - again strict criteria (skills and health based) more recent immigration drives have had strict national quotas to ensure balance
UK - Commonwealth by implication focused on immigrants with a familiarity with British culture.
Using mass migration as an attempt to solve our pension / funding crises is full on lunacy - its just making the problem even worse.
The reunification of Germany placed a huge strain on the original West Germany due to cultiral differences and the huge economic rift between East and West. that wasn't even migration really and was purting back together a country. It was still very difficult
This says it all for me, simple and to the point
[img] 
[/img]
You talk about skills like they are something we are all born with. Most people can do most things if trained properly.
The poster talks of economic growth. The same thing delivered by immigration from the EU, no?
US might currently have a tighter control on immigration but it's recent history (as the OP asked about) had plenty of mass migration.
So do all the white people in Australia not count as migrants?
bodgy - Member
I blame squirrels.
[Daily Wail Mode]All squirrels or just those nasty grey ones? You know, coming over here, eating our nuts, pushing good, British Red Squirrels out of a job...
You know they breed quicker dontcha? All their baby squirrels putting pressure on the local trees and nut supply...send em' back I say.[/Daily Wail Mode]
So do all the white people in Australia not count as migrants?
To be fair the Native Australians had a pretty lack border control policy... 😉
Overpopulation of countries whose climate and land cannot support the population. So I blame the Catholic Church and Islam for encouraging people to have more babies.
Syria's population has boomed in the last 40 years and they have suffered a succession of droughts meaning that people have given up on farming and moved to the cities where the traditional village hierarchy doesn't exist and there aren't sufficient jobs. This leads to frustration and instability and ultimately it led to civil war. Same story in sub-Saharan Africa.
It's basically this. Imagine the terrible cost of moving all those arbitrary lines on a map [i]temporarily[/i]. Then imagine what we could have achieved by working together. Then vote remain 😉
Post deleted.
Not so much a person - more a symptom of our system.
We have created global inequality that has become more and more entrenched. The people this serves are not actually tied to a nation, so do not care who it affects.
+1 Poverty.
Oh and conflict.
It's the human success story, expanding from 1 billion to 7.5 billion in just 150 years.
Hopefully we can hit 10 billion by 2050.
It's trebled in the time I've been alive - 62 years. That's frightening. But we behave like any other life form, we continue to increase until some natural phenomena halt or reverse that trend. What will it be in our case?
But we behave like any other life form, we continue to increase until some natural phenomena halt or reverse that trend
Pretty sure we'll wipe ourselves out with a combination of resource exploitation / pollution.
Its maps. I blame the people who started printing them
If we were all scared of falling off the edge of the world then everything would be fine, and we'd all be happy in our little villages, eating mud
Sykes-Pigot and Churchill played a big part, though there has been fighting around the Middle East for ever.
Well, Sykes-Pigot agreement was, essentially, a short term sticking plaster over the wider issue of the sudden collapse of the Ottoman Empire, and what we have seen playing over recent years is really the longer term effect of that decline and collapse over several hundred years.
You could also blame Hitler for failing to recognise the strategic importance of the Suez canal, and thus missing the opportunity to seize it early in the war, one of the pivotal decisions of the 20th Century.
Blair and Bush sowed the seeds with various random wars
I'm by no means an expert or a fan of these two but I think it's extremely simplistic to suggest make out that they are to blame for all the ills in the world, especially the middle east. Sure they've stirred the pot but I think a lot of these seeds were sown long before they came along and I don't think it's helpful to ignore that history.
The only way to stop immigration is to make the place people are leaving better than the place they want to go to.
But you could ask what makes a better place, why do Brits go to NZ, Aus, Canada, Spain etc.
There is no one answer as to why people move, but if you consider the Poles moving to the UK for work, maybe ensuring that their is work in Poland might be a starter. You know some kind of regional development fund???
As for the ME, f*** knows what the solution is there, Nuke it???
The only way to stop immigration is to make the place people are leaving better than the place they want to go to.
Not necessarily better, just acceptable. As an example, you may have noticed that we haven't had the entire population of Rumania descend on us as some predicted. That's because most prefer to stay in their own country, providing conditions are OK-ish. A bit like us really otherwise all the Brexiters would all be off to Switzerland by now.
Its about greed and the subsequent inequality.
Do you think Ali from Afganistan would be keen to travel to the UK if he could get a job looking at the internet being mediaocre but still earn enough for an Audi and iphone 6 whilst living in down town Kabul.
At the end of the day, Sunnis and Shia seem to be quite keen on killing each other when given the smallest excuse.
Perhaps the most ridiculous response. The fight between thm died out years ago. One went on to become more successful, better know and dominant, the other died off.
Old battles long forgotten, people forget how they lived together successfully for many years before they split