Atilla
Legendary member
- Messages
- 20,848
- Likes
- 4,028
Just another thought to add into the melting pot. There is a theory, arising from different sources that the real reason for mass immigration and a reason why UKGov increases immigration YoY, rather than what they say they will do which is to reduce it, is all to do with bank profits rather than any unfounded, spurious reasons based on ageing populations or healthcare or to maintain tax revenue etc.
You are not being objective. They are not spurious reasons but FACTS and pure STATISTICS. How you use it is down to you. If there are 1m people over the age of 75 and brain related deseases become more pravelent with cost of care rising then ultimately it will mean a rising tax burden. What's spurious about that unless one is stupid to reject the argument put forward and chooses to brign to the fore freaking blood sucking banks. Yes Banks are pure capitalists and have no interest on customers creed or colour of skin. Only the colour of money they deal in.
Mass immigration creates demand for housing (amongst a whole other raft of services provided by the private sector and funded by banks), the banks invest into the housing market through various means, loans to builders, mortgages, funds, direct purchase, they make billions from this.
You are a blinkered bull being led by the nose. Can you think of other pros and cons other than what you are peddling here?
The simplistic equation is that more immigrants = more demand for housing = more £££££, more demand also drives higher house prices = even more £££££ profit, so it's an absoloute win/win for all concerned and maintains support from the banks for whichever govt is in power maintaining the balance between supply and demand in the housing market.
Reducing immigration has the opposite effect on bank profits, banks don't care about the social consequences, in fact it may create even more opportunities for profit as whole new industries spring up to deal with the 'issues' of migration, until it looks like their monopoly might be under threat from say, a populist govt.
The whole thing from top to bottom is a state controlled monopoly, it benefits house owners into the bargain. Then the state controls the narrative, shuts down dissent and free speech and has us believe that multiculturalism and diversity is good for us and is a strength.
The job of government is to support poor 3rd world immigrants with housing/benefits/healthcare etc, they are state dependent for life, generating cash to pay for the consequences of immigration is easy by taxing those who work, the circle is complete. Working people of host nations are implicitly complicit by paying tax for which they have no choice and little say in what happens to it, the only choice is to vote.
You can see why UKGov (and other Western Govts) control a deep state in order to support their monopolies, we don't live in a Democracy we live in a Corporatocracy, Orwellian indeed.
You do come out with a shed full of r0llicks.
Thatcher broke miners back by importing coal from Poland. Bet you didn't argue back then.
Thatcher's policy also broke the trade union and wage spiral inflationary pressures endemic in UK economy by bringing in cheap-er migrant labour. I'll hazard a guess that doesn't fit with your freaky perception of reality does it now.
Go and suck on some lemons and you might come to your senses.
Last edited: