Support NeoGAF

[kitch9]

No, it will treat a Californian different than a Bosnian. An Englishman in Spain is not English for immigration purposes, he's just a European in Europe.

I seriously cannot believe you can't see that; you've got to be trolling.

America will treat Americans different from Bosnians?

What?

 

[kitch9]

Thanks that is interesting and puts the whole we have all had enough into perspective.


Oh please!
We are not saying UKIP is racist (or to be more precise many UKIP members and supporters are) because they want a points based immigration system .

The paradox is though, that in order to not discriminate against immigrants based on where they come from you pretty much can only vote for one party. A party of idiots!

 

[cripterion]

can you translate what that says?

It reads :

We are waiting for our Croatian passport to be ready and then we are free, we can go wherever we want to. Because it's Europe so that's it!

Implying that although her family was deported for being illegal here, they can come back once they get their Croatian passport cause you know, it's Europe, no borders!

So they just took her quote and made a campaign ad. As I said it's in poor taste but it sure gets the job done.

 

[Boom Boom Pow]

It reads :

We are waiting for our Croatian passport to be ready and then we are free, we can go wherever we want to. Because it's Europe so that's it!

Implying that although her family was deported for being illegal here, they can come back once they get their Croatian passport cause you know, it's Europe, no borders!

So they just took her quote and made a campaign ad. As I said it's in poor taste but it sure gets the job done.

how is she getting a croatian passport though?

 

[Chariot]

No, it will treat a Californian different than a Bosnian. An Englishman in Spain is not English for immigration purposes, he's just a European in Europe.

I seriously cannot believe you can't see that; you've got to be trolling.

I think you're of. Europe has yet to become a union in the minds of the people. We still see people of other europaen countries first as that and sevondly as fellow europaen. I think most people in europe don't even know all memnbers.

 

[Nikodemos]

how is she getting a croatian passport though?

Maybe the poster implies she isn't a Croatian citizen, however Croatian officials are overwhelmingly corrupt therefore easily bribed in exchange for legal documents?

 

[Copons]

how is she getting a croatian passport though?

Also, being a member of EU, she wouldn't even need a passport to travel across Europe.

Spoiler

Now that I think about it, when I went to Croatia, somewhere between 5-10 years ago, I don't remember I brought a passport with me. AH illegal immigration FTW

 

[cripterion]

how is she getting a croatian passport though?

I think the story is some family members had expired Croatian passports so the rest of the family are trying to obtain theirs using the pretense that they want to accompany them in Croatia, something like that.

Valls has said there's no way they'll be coming back so we will see what gives.

Edit : watching the news, this UMP story is getting more and more interesting. Cope's ass is on fire lol

 

[Boom Boom Pow]

I think the story is some family members had expired Croatian passports so the rest of the family are trying to obtain theirs using the pretense that they want to accompany them in Croatia, something like that.

as in one family member has a croatian passport whereas the rest are from other countries, and the pretense is that the one with the passport can sponsor the rest to come to croatia?

Ah. hum. we've been doing this in the Us since forever...

 

[JesseEwiak]

I don't think he directed that at other GAFers. He was probably speaking in a general sense. .

I was using competing currency as a "crazy libertarian" idea just like I have "crazy lefty" ideas like getting rid of 80% of the handguns in the US and mandatory votes for unionization in all businesses with more than 10 employees.

 

[cripterion]

as in one family member has a croatian passport whereas the rest are from other countries, and the pretense is that the one with the passport can sponsor the rest to come to croatia?

Ah. hum. we've been doing this in the Us since forever...

Yup that's basically it.

I get the feeling 2017 elections will be a huge clusterfuck.

 

[Kabouter]

America will treat you the same regardless of where you came from, so no it isn't racist.

Do EU member states discriminate between different non-EU nationalities?

 

[CyclopsRock]

I don't think he directed that at other GAFers. He was probably speaking in a general sense.

Anyway, the Euro was originally designed as a way to prevent large-scale manipulation of the currency market (with high negative impact on the economies affected) by unscrupulous bastards with vast resorces, as Soros did with the pound on Black Wednesday.

The biggest problem with the Euro isn't that it's too integrated, but rather than it isn't integrated enough, and that causes other issues.

I don't think that's *the* reason - surely it's to mitigate the complications and expense of international trade within the free have bloc? Aside from anything, Soros may have gained a great deal but he didn't actually cause Black Wednesday in the first place.

He caused the dominos to fall but it was caused by a government trying to steer something that it's just not capable of steering.

 

[Copons]

Do EU member states discriminate between different non-EU nationalities?

Do you mean "officially"? Like, there are laws that obstacle immigration from, say Africa? I don't think so, no, but of course I couldn't speak for every state.

At the same time, that discrimination is here, in our real lives, with different extents in each state, but it's here.
Let's say, to oversimplify, Africa or Middle East are our Latin America (in the fact that "they took our jobs"), and China is, well, still China.

 

[kitch9]

I think you're of. Europe has yet to become a union in the minds of the people. We still see people of other europaen countries first as that and sevondly as fellow europaen. I think most people in europe don't even know all memnbers.

There's no appetite from anyone to become a United States of Europe either and there's certainly not mandate for it.

We are as far away from that happening as we have ever been.

 

[Chariot]

There's no appetite from anyone to become a United States of Europe either and there's certainly not mandate for it.

We are as far away from that happening as we have ever been.

Yeah. Some countries even struggle with their own regions. If GB can't keep Scotland in the UK, than I have a hard time imagine the EU can keep all this nations with long history and ego.

 

[Farks!]

Yes

Are you just the village smartass or are you always this haughty? Responding with empty oneliners doesn't make you look smart.

The anti-elitist values of the UKIP and similair parties in the EU is just about as right-wing populist as it can get. And making promises of a "more fair" immigration policy (read: more restrictive) only cements that further, because it's exactly what the xenophobes want to hear.

 

[Ding-Ding]

There's no appetite from anyone to become a United States of Europe either and there's certainly not mandate for it.

We are as far away from that happening as we have ever been.

Then something has got to give. You can't have a monetary union without a more integrated political union (at least if you want the currency to work).

 

[anonymous_abc]

There's no appetite from anyone to become a United States of Europe either and there's certainly not mandate for it.

We are as far away from that happening as we have ever been.

Speak for yourself, as stated very early on in this thread, I would welcome a USoEU.
Closer union especially amongst Euro countries is pretty much inevitable unless the whole thing collapses.

 

[MisterFalcon]

Speak for yourself, as stated very early on in this thread, I would welcome a USoEU.

That's a sentiment shared by a small percentage of the population. Should it be enacted against the wishes of the majority who are clearly to dumb to think ?

 

[kitch9]

Speak for yourself, as stated very early on in this thread, I would welcome a USoEU.
Closer union especially amongst Euro countries is pretty much inevitable unless the whole thing collapses.

You are in a minority though, a tiny one.

 

[Walshicus]

I think you're of. Europe has yet to become a union in the minds of the people. We still see people of other europaen countries first as that and sevondly as fellow europaen. I think most people in europe don't even know all memnbers.

Yeah but you are talking about a matter of perception while I'm talking about a matter of law. There is intra-EU migration just as there is intra-US migration. It's immigration only to the extent that a Texan can emigrate to California. One job market; that's what the Treaties stipulate.

 

[Acorn]

I may be talking rubbish, but in Football Manager 14 (lol I know) Croatia has absurdly low number of days to gain citizenship, maybe that's what its about?

Edit just checked, nope. 8 years residence unless you are a croatian descendent.

 

[kitch9]

Do EU member states discriminate between different non-EU nationalities?

Pretty much, any reason they can find to turn down non EU applications they will use.

 

[Doczu]

Yeah. Some countries even struggle with their own regions. If GB can't keep Scotland in the UK, than I have a hard time imagine the EU can keep all this nations with long history and ego.

It's almost impossible to do. You'd either have to:

A) take your time and evaporate national culture by teaching children from early age (it will take more than one generation though to achieve that)
B) force it

Both A and B will backfire and the amount of public hate towards the EU will only grow. I will not tolerate either options, or any other way to do it.

 

[kitch9]

Are you just the village smartass or are you always this haughty? Responding with empty oneliners doesn't make you look smart.

The anti-elitist values of the UKIP and similair parties in the EU is just about as right-wing populist as it can get. And making promises of a "more fair" immigration policy (read: more restrictive) only cements that further, because it's exactly what the xenophobes want to hear.

Its mostly a protest vote, you can use all the hyperbolic big words that you want, people felt the need to register their protest and have done so.

The UK voted Labour for over a decade who basically run an open door policy for the entire time to import as many voters as they could get. People obviously feel enough is enough and attitudes have changed on the subject.

 

[Farks!]

Its mostly a protest vote, you can use all the hyperbolic big words that you want, people felt the need to register their protest and have done so.

The UK voted Labour for over a decade who basically run an open door policy for the entire time to import as many voters as they could get. People obviously feel enough is enough.

People have registered their "protest" by voting for parties that, among other things, are xenophobic and homophobic and that's a good thing?

And are you seriously suggesting that a ruling politcal party ran the immigration policy they did simply to get more voters?

 

[JesseEwiak]

People have registered their "protest" by voting for parties that, among other things, are xenophobic and homophobic and that's a good thing?

And are you seriously suggesting that a ruling politcal party ran the immigration policy they did simply to get more voters?

It's a typical right-wing argument. I read conservatives online talking all the time about Democrats "importing" Hispanic voters via amnesty and such here in the ole' USA.

 

[Ding-Ding]

People have registered their "protest" by voting for parties that, among other things, are xenophobic and homophobic and that's a good thing?

And are you seriously suggesting that a ruling politcal party ran the immigration policy they did simply to get more voters?

According to former Labour speechwriters and the paper "Migration: an economic and social analysis" which Labour published points to that being the case

Its no secret that immigrants have historically tended to vote Labour

 

[Farks!]

According to former Labour speechwriters and the paper "Migration: an economic and social analysis" which Labour published points to that being the case

Its no secret that immigrants have historically tended to vote Labour

And now that Britian has a right wing goverment does that point to that immigrants have changed allegiance? Considering that immigrants includes people from different cultures with different socio-economic status, both prior and current, and the fact that minorites, especially those with a poor background, are less likely to vote, it indeed seems like pure right wing hogwash.

 

[kitch9]

People have registered their "protest" by voting for parties that, among other things, are xenophobic and homophobic and that's a good thing?

And are you seriously suggesting that a ruling politcal party ran the immigration policy they did simply to get more voters?

Labour did yes.

 

[CyclopsRock]

I don't think Labour intentionally encouraged immigration to get votes, but I also think it's statistically undeniable that it benefits them electorally that there has been such large levels of immigration. That adds a political context to something that already has pretty high emotions on both sides.

 

[kitch9]

People have registered their "protest" by voting for parties that, among other things, are xenophobic and homophobic and that's a good thing?

And are you seriously suggesting that a ruling politcal party ran the immigration policy they did simply to get more voters?

People didn't vote for the BNP.

I don't think Labour intentionally encouraged immigration to get votes, but I also think it's statistically undeniable that it benefits them electorally that there has been such large levels of immigration. That adds a political context to something that already has pretty high emotions on both sides.

The discussion on the benefits will have been had in cabinet meetings.

 

[CyclopsRock]

The discussion on the benefits will have been had in cabinet meetings.

Acknowledging the benefits is different to that being the reason for doing it, though; Perhaps it even affected their thinking - when they were making non-EU migration limits etc. But I don't think their main goal was to increase Labour's vote share.

Edit: On the topic of America, as we all know, Englishmen in New York are illegal aliens.

 

[kitch9]

Acknowledging the benefits is different to that being the reason for doing it, though; Perhaps it even affected their thinking - when they were making non-EU migration limits etc. But I don't think their main goal was to increase Labour's vote share.

Mass immigration goes against everything a Labour government should stand for, they are supposed to be a party for the working man, the party that will stands up for the working mans rights and against corporations.

They then allow in large numbers of cheap labour which is willing to hugely undercut wages on the people they are supposed to be protecting, to the benefit of corporations.

It doesn't add up, if anything the right should for mass immigration and the left against it.

 

[phaze]

Why are all of the anti-EU parties right wing? Maybe it's because I'm an American but the concept of the Euro seems pretty pro-free market.

As I understand it the National Front is on the left economically and that's also where the UKIP has been shifting for some time. The traditional left (socialist and progressive on social issues) and right ( conservative liberals) division is increasingly inadequate to describe the political scene.

 

[Ding-Ding]

And now that Britian has a right wing goverment does that point to that immigrants have changed allegiance? Considering that immigrants includes people from different cultures with different socio-economic status, both prior and current, and the fact that minorites, especially those with a poor background, are less likely to vote, it indeed seems like pure right wing hogwash.

Right wing this, right wing that... Blimey you have gone completely tribal on us.

For a start, we have a coalition government, not a right wing government. Plenty of right wing and left wing policies have gone bye bye because of opposition inside of the cabinet. Most of the policies made this term are because of necessity, not party politics.

Hell, the fact we have a coalition should be reason enough how much the political landscape has changed. 13 years of Labour, being led by Brown (who virtually no one liked) in a recession which was the worst in our lifetime. Yet somehow, no majority...

 

[Nikodemos]

I don't think that's *the* reason - surely it's to mitigate the complications and expense of international trade within the free have bloc?

Hah, yeah, it's been so long since the Euro appeared I'd actually forgotten about that. Having to exchange between peso, franc, mark, lira in the same day was a total bitch. It's a bit difficult for Americans to understand what a massive brake on the free market that was. Imagine every single state in the Union having its own currency. Imagine a multi-statal trading company continuously needing to simultaneously keep track of several dozen currencies.

Then something has got to give. You can't have a monetary union without a more integrated political union (at least if you want the currency to work).

Sadly, this. Going back to separate currencies would cause gargantuan economic damage, but there are considerable obstacles towards economic and fiscal policy integration, not least because of the German BVerfG, which has become a sort of "court of cassation" for economic legislation (a fact which the British government has repeatedly, if very privately, criticised).

 

[TitusGroan]

As I understand it the National Front is on the left economically and that's also where the UKIP has been shifting for some time. The traditional left (socialist and progressive on social issues) and right ( conservative liberals) division is increasingly inadequate to describe the political scene.

UKIP are many things, but shifting left is not one of them. Farage is a Thatcherite- he wants to deregulate the financial system, cut taxes for the wealthy, and get rid of a lot of the employment rights and laws that have been implemented over the last few decades, such as the minimum wage. UKIP also, IIRC, want to privatize the NHS. This is alongside their whole "Get the fudge out of the EU/National sovereignty!" spiel, and their refusal to commit to things like LGBT rights.

Economically and socially, they're more conservative than the Tories.

 

[Walshicus]

I don't think Labour intentionally encouraged immigration to get votes, but I also think it's statistically undeniable that it benefits them electorally that there has been such large levels of immigration. That adds a political context to something that already has pretty high emotions on both sides.

Their biggest failing was that they did let too many people in too fast. But then "too many" is only "too many" because we didn't put the required funds into the assimilation and integration processes these people needed, and we're just plain not building low-cost and council housing fast enough.

EU migration's easy; there're virtually no cultural barriers, language isn't an issue and the migrants tend to go home after a few years (unless you're an English ex-pat on the Costa Del Sol...).

Edit: On the topic of America, as we all know, Englishmen in New York are illegal aliens.

The lyrics are:
"I'm an alien, I'm a legal alien
I'm an Englishman in New York"

You might be thinking of the cover "Jamaican in New York"...

 

[danwarb]

Disappointed that the the BBC coudn't stop promoting comedy bigot Farage and ukip.

 

[anonymous_abc]

That's a sentiment shared by a small percentage of the population. Should it be enacted against the wishes of the majority who are clearly to dumb to think ?

In our form of democracy the silent majority doesn't get to decide diddly squat. Why do you think they are all unhappy and against.
They might just as well all be happy and content with the status quo thusly not seeing a reason to go out and vote.

You are in a minority though, a tiny one.

I was merely replying to you who said anyone which is clearly not correct.
And do you have any data to back your claim up?
I don't believe I share a majority opinion, but if we want to keep the EU and the Euro closer ties are inevitable, and I think a vast majority wants to keep the EU and the Euro.
Just look at the last page 100 of 750 parliamentarians are from openly anti EU parties. There are more than enough votes for openly pro EU parties to compensate that, even if all other 650 are pro/anti EU to varying degrees.

 

[CyclopsRock]

Mass immigration goes against everything a Labour government should stand for, they are supposed to be a party for the working man, the party that will stands up for the working mans rights and against corporations.

They then allow in large numbers of cheap labour which is willing to hugely undercut wages on the people they are supposed to be protecting, to the benefit of corporations.

It doesn't add up, if anything the right should for mass immigration and the left against it.

Well I think that's to do with the elements that cartesian wrote very well on earlier; That the modern Labour party basically replaced the old one wholesale; They're both "left" but their ideological, philosophical position has morphed entirely, which explains the apparent contradiction that you've pointed out. It's gone from supporting workers to supporting the vulnerable - a worthy goal no doubt, but it's the sort of thing that means LGBT rights, foreign aid, far more open immigration which, whilst not mutually exclusive from "working class people's party", as issues they have basically nothing to do with the trials and tribulations of the working classes and, sometimes, actively make them worse.

It's not dissimilar to the Liberal party transforming into the Lib Dems by merging with the SDP - the liberals were... well, classically liberal, and now they're far more left, only that change happened over half a century or so, not between Michael Foot and Tony Blair.

 

[phaze]

UKIP are many things, but shifting left is not one of them. Farage is a Thatcherite- he wants to deregulate the financial system, cut taxes for the wealthy, and get rid of a lot of the employment rights and laws that have been implemented over the last few decades, such as the minimum wage. UKIP also, IIRC, want to privatize the NHS. This is alongside their whole "Get the fudge out of the EU/National sovereignty!" spiel, and their refusal to commit to things like LGBT rights.

Economically and socially, they're more conservative than the Tories.

I was going mainly by this article but googling some more, it appears you're right.

 

[kitch9]

In our form of democracy the silent majority doesn't get to decide diddly squat. Why do you think they are all unhappy and against.
They might just as well all be happy and content with the status quo thusly not seeing a reason to go out and vote.



I was merely replying to you who said anyone which is clearly not correct.
And do you have any data to back your claim up?
I don't believe I share a majority opinion, but if we want to keep the EU and the Euro closer ties are inevitable, and I think a vast majority wants to keep the EU and the Euro.
Just look at the last page 100 of 750 parliamentarians are from openly anti EU parties. There are more than enough votes for openly pro EU parties to compensate that, even if all other 650 are pro/anti EU to varying degrees.

I want to keep the EU and Euro, I don't want what you want.

 

[CyclopsRock]

In our form of democracy the silent majority doesn't get to decide diddly squat. Why do you think they are all unhappy and against.
They might just as well all be happy and content with the status quo thusly not seeing a reason to go out and vote.

But "the status quo" isn't an option; legislation will be passed, changes will occur. If you're happy with the "status quo" then you'll need to vote for whatever party is currently calling the shots, so as to maintain the current direction at the very least. People who are happy with a system don't sit at home and not vote, unless the system is so heavily stacked in their favour that there's no possibly outcome that could result in them being less happy.

 

[anonymous_abc]

I want to keep the EU and Euro, I don't want what you want.

Almost everyone agrees the Euro cannot survive without further integration. The birth errors of the Euro will have to be solved sooner rather than later. We wont have a USE in my lifetime, at least even I am not that optimistic. But to think we can keep the euro and the EU as it is without moving towards the USE in one form or the other seems illusionary to me.

But "the status quo" isn't an option; legislation will be passed, changes will occur. If you're happy with the "status quo" then you'll need to vote for whatever party is currently calling the shots, so as to maintain the current direction at the very least. People who are happy with a system don't sit at home and not vote, unless the system is so heavily stacked in their favour that there's no possibly outcome that could result in them being less happy.

You are right, the status quo is not static, its more a trajectory.
Either way my point stands, in our form of democracy staying at home on election day gets you nothing.

 

[CyclopsRock]

You are right, the status quo is not static, its more a trajectory.
Either way my point stands, in our form of democracy staying at home on election day gets you nothing.

Not immediately, but I think it's a better way to register your dislike for an institution rather than voting for a party upon which you may only agree that single policy (but your vote helps them indiscriminately, whether they're trying to disengage from that institution or pass laws against homosexuals, for ex). It's hard, for example, to suggest that the EU Parliament has much of a mandate to pass laws that have reach in Slovakia.

 

[MisterFalcon]

Almost everyone agrees the Euro cannot survive without further integration. The birth errors of the Euro will have to be solved sooner rather than later. We wont have a USE in my lifetime, at least even I am not that optimistic. But to think we can keep the euro and the EU as it is without moving towards the USE in one form or the other seems illusionary to me.

You'll have the war the EU was supposed to avoid long before you can force (yes, force is the only way to do this) the kind of integration that can put Greece and Germany into once currency.

 

[anonymous_abc]

You'll have the war the EU was supposed to avoid long before you can force (yes, force is the only way to do this) the kind of integration that can put Greece and Germany into once currency.

You might have missed it but Greece and Germany have been using the same currency for over 12 years (14 years even if you count since when the currencies were fixed)