Flashermac Posted July 12, 2008 Report Share Posted July 12, 2008 So just why does the UK want need immigrants? It's not exactly a huge country but has a population equal to that of Australia and Canada combined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julian2 Posted July 12, 2008 Report Share Posted July 12, 2008 It's the curse of colonialism in which you allow the conquered masses to become members of your empire. That gave them the right to live anywhere in the empire they pleased. We should have just napalmed them every time they complained like the current world leaders do. Being wishy washy liberal leftists they also consider that they have a moral obligation to comfort and succor the survivors of the above mentioned napalming by giving them homes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckwoww Posted July 12, 2008 Report Share Posted July 12, 2008 So just why does the UK want need immigrants? It's not exactly a huge country but has a population equal to that of Australia and Canada combined. That was the Empire coming home to roost Julian. Now the conquered masses own chains of curry shops and rent slum houses to Eastern Europeans so small factory owners and service industries get cheap labour while they sit by their swimming pools in Marbella. It keeps the property market active, the government gets more taxes, English workers get dole money to spend in Pattaya. Everybody's happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted July 12, 2008 Report Share Posted July 12, 2008 The empire was surrendered 40 to 50 years ago. If Pakistanis et al. can settle in the UK (where they have no ancestoral ties) then why can't I? My ancestry is mostly British, with emigration ranging from the 1630s to the 1900s. When the US granted independence to the Philippines, there was a definite time limit on how long they could retain their US citizenship and right to move to the US. It has long expired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckwoww Posted July 12, 2008 Report Share Posted July 12, 2008 The empire was surrendered 40 to 50 years ago. If Pakistanis et al. can settle in the UK (where they have no ancestoral ties) then why can't I? My ancestry is mostly British, with emigration ranging from the 1630s to the 1900s. When the US granted independence to the Philippines, there was a definite time limit on how long they could retain their US citizenship and right to move to the US. It has long expired. Short answer....because India and Pakistan were (still are) part of the British Commonwealth and they were entitled to British passports. They could also bring dependents with them but I think that has become more difficult. I don't think you have much of a case unless one of your parents can claim British citizenship. Not sure what the Philippines has to do with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted July 12, 2008 Report Share Posted July 12, 2008 The Philippines was an American colony. But Filipinos nowadays have no special rights in the US. (Puerto Rico is a self-governing "commonwealth" and a part of the US. Puerto Ricans thus can come and go without any difficulty. Same same Guamanians, US Samoans Virgin Islanders etc. But not Flips.) I thought the UK government started a British Overseas passport - the one they gave to the Hong Kong Chinese in the crown colony. Don't see how Indians or Pakistanis qualify 61 years after independence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckwoww Posted July 12, 2008 Report Share Posted July 12, 2008 I don't know either. Maybe they qualify because of their parents....maybe all Commonwealth citizens are entitled to stay while they apply for citizenship. I don't know what percentage of immigration is from places like India and Pakistan....maybe it's more EU these days. I expect the info is on the net somewhere but I can't be arsed to look. I don't think Britain is any more doomed than the US BTW. Just a different kind of doom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julian2 Posted July 12, 2008 Report Share Posted July 12, 2008 When my niece went to the UK to work she was immediately granted permanent residency with no work restrictions because her mother was English. I think I remember her saying at the time that a single English Grandparent may have been sufficient. Didn't the Poms pinch a tennis player off the Canadians using that? Their great Wimbledon hope that went nowhere? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckwoww Posted July 12, 2008 Report Share Posted July 12, 2008 Right...one English grandparent is enough....I looked into it once. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted July 12, 2008 Report Share Posted July 12, 2008 Speaking of which ... what's it take for a Brit to emigrate to Australia these days? A friend says any Brit under 45 can walk right in and get a job. But what about folks over 45??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.