When a Government...

[belton rover]

Belton.
 Run it by me how someone could bar a British citizen living with the foreign person they have committed their life to because they earned less than the top 27% of earners in the country, without being racist?

So would you be happy to bar them if the threshold was lower?
If I was an unemployed scrounger who fell in love with an unemployed scrounger from another country, should they be allowed to come and sponge with me in the name of love?

[BillyStubbsTears]

The level before yesterday was about at that of the minimum wage. That seems fair, in an environment of pretty much full employment, there's not much wrong with expecting someone at least to be able to get a minimum wage job.

Setting the bar at a level that 73% of the workforce don't hit is barbaric.

[drfchound]

For anyone to say that elderly infirm residents in care homes are racists is beyond reprehensible.

I can't believe what I read on here at times.

Poll after poll after poll shows that the largest group by far who want to reduce immigration is over 65s.

I commented last night on the bitter irony that the very people who need immigrants to service the care sector are also the very people who support this rancid Government when they say those immigrants have to live without their families.

I said that attitude was "I'm fine for you to wipe my shitty arse as long as you accept having to live without your family."

Explain to me where the logic breaks down there. And why that isn't the very definition of racism.

Interesting that you think pointing out that fact is beyond reprehensible SS, but you haven't a word of criticism for the disgusting policies themselves.

PS. I do not say these things lightly. But there's a reason why this awful Government is enacting these measures. It's because they know that's how they whip up their support. And it's a fact that their support comes predominantly from pensioners. I do not, of course, think that all pensioners are racist. But I fail to see how anyone can support these policies and claim not to be racist.

you actually said "shitty old racist folk" bst.
You regularly post derisory comments about old people.
You should be ashamed of yourself.
You often back down afterwards, like this time, but deep down you really don't like pensioners.
And you wonder why such as myself don't like your general attitude on this forum.

[BillyStubbsTears]

This is real people having their lives f**ked up by this bunch playing to racist supporters.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-67630258

Simply disgusting.

[scawsby steve]

For anyone to say that elderly infirm residents in care homes are racists is beyond reprehensible.

I can't believe what I read on here at times.

Poll after poll after poll shows that the largest group by far who want to reduce immigration is over 65s.

I commented last night on the bitter irony that the very people who need immigrants to service the care sector are also the very people who support this rancid Government when they say those immigrants have to live without their families.

I said that attitude was "I'm fine for you to wipe my shitty arse as long as you accept having to live without your family."

Explain to me where the logic breaks down there. And why that isn't the very definition of racism.

Interesting that you think pointing out that fact is beyond reprehensible SS, but you haven't a word of criticism for the disgusting policies themselves.

PS. I do not say these things lightly. But there's a reason why this awful Government is enacting these measures. It's because they know that's how they whip up their support. And it's a fact that their support comes predominantly from pensioners. I do not, of course, think that all pensioners are racist. But I fail to see how anyone can support these policies and claim not to be racist.

Because I don't criticise policies doesn't mean I agree with them. We're so near a GE now that it's pointless getting stressed out over policies that a Labour government will reverse.

Or will they?

[BillyStubbsTears]

For anyone to say that elderly infirm residents in care homes are racists is beyond reprehensible.

I can't believe what I read on here at times.

Poll after poll after poll shows that the largest group by far who want to reduce immigration is over 65s.

I commented last night on the bitter irony that the very people who need immigrants to service the care sector are also the very people who support this rancid Government when they say those immigrants have to live without their families.

I said that attitude was "I'm fine for you to wipe my shitty arse as long as you accept having to live without your family."

Explain to me where the logic breaks down there. And why that isn't the very definition of racism.

Interesting that you think pointing out that fact is beyond reprehensible SS, but you haven't a word of criticism for the disgusting policies themselves.

PS. I do not say these things lightly. But there's a reason why this awful Government is enacting these measures. It's because they know that's how they whip up their support. And it's a fact that their support comes predominantly from pensioners. I do not, of course, think that all pensioners are racist. But I fail to see how anyone can support these policies and claim not to be racist.

Because I don't criticise policies doesn't mean I agree with them. We're so near a GE now that it's pointless getting stressed out over policies that a Labour government will reverse.

Or will they?

You just criticise people who point out the logic behind the policies, eh?

[scawsby steve]

For anyone to say that elderly infirm residents in care homes are racists is beyond reprehensible.

I can't believe what I read on here at times.

Poll after poll after poll shows that the largest group by far who want to reduce immigration is over 65s.

I commented last night on the bitter irony that the very people who need immigrants to service the care sector are also the very people who support this rancid Government when they say those immigrants have to live without their families.

I said that attitude was "I'm fine for you to wipe my shitty arse as long as you accept having to live without your family."

Explain to me where the logic breaks down there. And why that isn't the very definition of racism.

Interesting that you think pointing out that fact is beyond reprehensible SS, but you haven't a word of criticism for the disgusting policies themselves.

PS. I do not say these things lightly. But there's a reason why this awful Government is enacting these measures. It's because they know that's how they whip up their support. And it's a fact that their support comes predominantly from pensioners. I do not, of course, think that all pensioners are racist. But I fail to see how anyone can support these policies and claim not to be racist.

Because I don't criticise policies doesn't mean I agree with them. We're so near a GE now that it's pointless getting stressed out over policies that a Labour government will reverse.

Or will they?

You just criticise people who point out the logic behind the policies, eh?

It wasn't the logic I criticised, it was the rhetoric.

[BillyStubbsTears]

But the logic is the reason I used the rhetoric I did. These are overtly racist policies and they are aimed at people who want the benefits immigrants bring, but don't want the immigrants.

[normal rules]

For anyone to say that elderly infirm residents in care homes are racists is beyond reprehensible.

I can't believe what I read on here at times.

Poll after poll after poll shows that the largest group by far who want to reduce immigration is over 65s.

I commented last night on the bitter irony that the very people who need immigrants to service the care sector are also the very people who support this rancid Government when they say those immigrants have to live without their families.

I said that attitude was "I'm fine for you to wipe my shitty arse as long as you accept having to live without your family."

Explain to me where the logic breaks down there. And why that isn't the very definition of racism.

Interesting that you think pointing out that fact is beyond reprehensible SS, but you haven't a word of criticism for the disgusting policies themselves.

PS. I do not say these things lightly. But there's a reason why this awful Government is enacting these measures. It's because they know that's how they whip up their support. And it's a fact that their support comes predominantly from pensioners. I do not, of course, think that all pensioners are racist. But I fail to see how anyone can support these policies and claim not to be racist.

Because I don't criticise policies doesn't mean I agree with them. We're so near a GE now that it's pointless getting stressed out over policies that a Labour government will reverse.

Or will they?

If the Rwanda plan actually gets off the ground and flights commence it will be very interesting to see if starmer keeps to his commitment to reverse it.

[i_ateallthepies]

I listened to an interview on 5Live yesterday with a high ranking barrister who spoke about the laws - international as well as UK - that without the remotest doubt will prevent the Rwanda plan ever being remotely possible.  He said it is so clear that the only conclusion is that the government know this and that it is simply a play to attract votes.

[ravenrover]

For anyone to say that elderly infirm residents in care homes are racists is beyond reprehensible.

I can't believe what I read on here at times.

Poll after poll after poll shows that the largest group by far who want to reduce immigration is over 65s.

I commented last night on the bitter irony that the very people who need immigrants to service the care sector are also the very people who support this rancid Government when they say those immigrants have to live without their families.

I said that attitude was "I'm fine for you to wipe my shitty arse as long as you accept having to live without your family."

Explain to me where the logic breaks down there. And why that isn't the very definition of racism.

Interesting that you think pointing out that fact is beyond reprehensible SS, but you haven't a word of criticism for the disgusting policies themselves.

PS. I do not say these things lightly. But there's a reason why this awful Government is enacting these measures. It's because they know that's how they whip up their support. And it's a fact that their support comes predominantly from pensioners. I do not, of course, think that all pensioners are racist. But I fail to see how anyone can support these policies and claim not to be racist.

Because I don't criticise policies doesn't mean I agree with them. We're so near a GE now that it's pointless getting stressed out over policies that a Labour government will reverse.

Or will they?

If the Rwanda plan actually gets off the ground and flights commence it will be very interesting to see if starmer keeps to his commitment to reverse it.

Could it be beyond possibility that 1 flight will take off to Rwanda just days or weeks before the next  GE?

[BillyStubbsTears]

When are folk going to realise?

The whole Rwanda thing is a con. It won't work. It can't work. The Govt doesn't want it to work.

They want to blame Woke when it fails!

It's all a con to wind up thick racists.

[Pancho Regan]

Belton.
 Run it by me how someone could bar a British citizen living with the foreign person they have committed their life to because they earned less than the top 27% of earners in the country, without being racist?

I guess it may depend on how you define 'racism'.

In the link you provided to BBC News, two of the three foreigners featured in the article who fall foul of this new law are Italian and American. They could equally be French, Polish, Australian, Dutch ...... etc.
Does that mean the politicians who want to implement this legislation are racist?

I think that throwing the 'racist' label around only risks undermining your argument BST.

And by the way, I'm against this legislation and virtually every other aspect of this Government's immigration policies.

[Iberian Red]

Phoenix Nights summed up the mentality Pancho.
Send the buggers back

[belton rover]

Phoenix Nights summed up the mentality Pancho.
Send the buggers back

How can we send them back if they’re not allowed to come in the first place?

[Pancho Regan]

Phoenix Nights summed up the mentality Pancho.
Send the buggers back

How can we send them back if they’re not allowed to come in the first place?

This is a serious issue Belton but I have to confess I laughed out loud at that!

[BillyStubbsTears]

Belton.
 Run it by me how someone could bar a British citizen living with the foreign person they have committed their life to because they earned less than the top 27% of earners in the country, without being racist?

I guess it may depend on how you define 'racism'.

In the link you provided to BBC News, two of the three foreigners featured in the article who fall foul of this new law are Italian and American. They could equally be French, Polish, Australian, Dutch ...... etc.
Does that mean the politicians who want to implement this legislation are racist?

I think that throwing the 'racist' label around only risks undermining your argument BST.

And by the way, I'm against this legislation and virtually every other aspect of this Government's immigration policies.

Fair point at the start Pancho. Better to call it xenophobia rather than racism. Doesn't change the perjorative nature of the term though and I do mean that.

What else can you call a policy that would ban a nurse or a teacher from having their spouse live with them, for no other reason that that the spouse isn't British and the British citizen doesn't earn a salary in the top 27% in the country?

What else would you call a policy that services a need for foreigners to give personal services to pensioners, but then requires them to go back to an empty house because we won't let them have their family here?

Those are the very definition of xenophobic policies.

I don't use the term as an idle, thoughtless insult. I'm genuinely ashamed to be represented by a Govt that would implement those policies.

And sometimes you have to draw a line. This isn't something you can bothsides. Anyone who doesn't condemn such policies is accepting the xenophobia. We have a right, I'd say a duty, to say that loudly.

[Pancho Regan]

Belton.
 Run it by me how someone could bar a British citizen living with the foreign person they have committed their life to because they earned less than the top 27% of earners in the country, without being racist?

I guess it may depend on how you define 'racism'.

In the link you provided to BBC News, two of the three foreigners featured in the article who fall foul of this new law are Italian and American. They could equally be French, Polish, Australian, Dutch ...... etc.
Does that mean the politicians who want to implement this legislation are racist?

I think that throwing the 'racist' label around only risks undermining your argument BST.

And by the way, I'm against this legislation and virtually every other aspect of this Government's immigration policies.

Fair point at the start Pancho. Better to call it xenophobia rather than racism. Doesn't change the perjorative nature of the term though and I do mean that.

What else can you call a policy that would ban a nurse or a teacher from having their spouse live with them, for no other reason that that the spouse isn't British and the British citizen doesn't earn a salary in the top 27% in the country?

What else would you call a policy that services a need for foreigners to give personal services to pensioners, but then requires them to go back to an empty house because we won't let them have their family here?

Those are the very definition of xenophobic policies.

I don't use the term as an idle, thoughtless insult. I'm genuinely ashamed to be represented by a Govt that would implement those policies.

And sometimes you have to draw a line. This isn't something you can bothsides. Anyone who doesn't condemn such policies is accepting the xenophobia. We have a right, I'd say a duty, to say that loudly.

Yep, I'd go with xenophobia.

[ncRover]

https://x.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1525766106119606273?s=46

An interesting read and it shows the Tories are going down the wrong path putting this at the forefront.

Attitudes of the British public towards immigration have changed in recent years post-brexit.

It has gone from 60% thinking immigrants “take away jobs” to 60% thinking immigrants skills and labour are vital for the economy.

More people now also think immigrants have a net positive on British culture.

Less and less in recent years have wanted a deterrence approach to those crossing the channel. With more wanting a fair system even if that meant more asylum seekers.

Last year only 8% of conservative voters polled said immigration was an important problem.

Why try to stoke up the peak xenophobia of 2016 again if the majority don’t care ?

[BillyStubbsTears]

https://x.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1525766106119606273?s=46

An interesting read and it shows the Tories are going down the wrong path putting this at the forefront.

Attitudes of the British public towards immigration have changed in recent years post-brexit.

It has gone from 60% thinking immigrants “take away jobs” to 60% thinking immigrants skills and labour are vital for the economy.

More people now also think immigrants have a net positive on British culture.

Less and less in recent years have wanted a deterrence approach to those crossing the channel. With more wanting a fair system even if that meant more asylum seekers.

Last year only 8% of conservative voters polled said immigration was an important problem.

Why try to stoke up the peak xenophobia of 2016 again if the majority don’t care ?

Because they have nothing else to offer.

[Bentley Bullet]

Not only migrants NC.

Apparently if a British citizen married to a non-Briton and living and working overseas wants to return to the UK, they can only bring their spouse if they earn more than £38k.

I'm struggling to believe even this bunch of shit for souls could stoop that low to satisfy their racist supporters, but I've seen that reported by several people who don't tend to get this sort of thing wrong.

surely if a brit cit married a foreign national overseas, then that new partner would apply for british citizenship? thereby avoiding the need for this nonsense.

Why should they?

If I fell in love with someone from another country and wanted to share my life with them in that country, then I would embrace citizenship of that country, if that was the requirement for me to do so.

Actually, you wouldn't if your spouse earned less that £38k and that country was ours.

One of the requirements for taking UK citizenship through marriage is that you have to be resident in the UK for 3 years. But this Govt has just made it illegal for someone to bring their non-UK spouse to the UK if they earn less than £38k. So they cannot meet the residency requirement.

This is very personal for me. It means my father-in-law would not have been allowed to live in this country, and as a result, I'd never have met my wife.

All because of these Kitsons, pandering to racist Kitsons.

Have you reported those racist Kitsons?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Not only migrants NC.

Apparently if a British citizen married to a non-Briton and living and working overseas wants to return to the UK, they can only bring their spouse if they earn more than £38k.

I'm struggling to believe even this bunch of shit for souls could stoop that low to satisfy their racist supporters, but I've seen that reported by several people who don't tend to get this sort of thing wrong.

surely if a brit cit married a foreign national overseas, then that new partner would apply for british citizenship? thereby avoiding the need for this nonsense.

Why should they?

If I fell in love with someone from another country and wanted to share my life with them in that country, then I would embrace citizenship of that country, if that was the requirement for me to do so.

Actually, you wouldn't if your spouse earned less that £38k and that country was ours.

One of the requirements for taking UK citizenship through marriage is that you have to be resident in the UK for 3 years. But this Govt has just made it illegal for someone to bring their non-UK spouse to the UK if they earn less than £38k. So they cannot meet the residency requirement.

This is very personal for me. It means my father-in-law would not have been allowed to live in this country, and as a result, I'd never have met my wife.

All because of these Kitsons, pandering to racist Kitsons.

Have you reported those racist Kitsons?

1) I choose my friends carefully. I wouldn't have anything to do with people who supported those views.

2) What would I report them for?

3) Who would I report them to?

Do you need a break from this? You're struggling to make sense.

[Bentley Bullet]

I think after that reply it's you who needs a break.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Go on. What breach of what law would I report them for? Unfortunately, there's no law against supporting a bunch of Kitsons in power putting forward blatantly xenophobic policies. Just the knowledge that people who accept that are beneath contempt.

[Bentley Bullet]

You can report anyone for being racist. I see you've changed your racist accusations for the lower offence of Xenophobia, on the advice of someone rather more sensible.

[belton rover]

I think all racist Kitsons should be reported to the police if someone thinks they’ve done or said something racist.
Equally, I think anyone who falsely accuses someone of racism should be held to account too.

[BillyStubbsTears]

I think all racist Kitsons should be reported to the police if someone thinks they’ve done or said something racist.
Equally, I think anyone who falsely accuses someone of racism should be held to account too.

Well then you've no need to worry. No individual has been falsely, or in any way, accused in this thread.

But I'll stand by my comment. Anyone supporting these policies IS xenophobic.

[belton rover]

I think all racist Kitsons should be reported to the police if someone thinks they’ve done or said something racist.
Equally, I think anyone who falsely accuses someone of racism should be held to account too.

Well then you've no need to worry. No individual has been falsely, or in any way, accused in this thread.

But I'll stand by my comment. Anyone supporting these policies IS xenophobic.

Unfortunately, I do worry. I’m talking about society in general.
Thankfully, you eventually changed racist kitsons to xenophobes, but even after I told you it was wrong to label so many people as racists, you continued to argue that you were right.
As Bentley pointed out, it took someone else to say something similar to you before you reflected upon you initial thoughts and wording.
And does it make it okay for someone to call a group of people racists or xenophobes rather than any individual?
I actually think that’s worse.
I am glad that you did rephrase, but there are many people in society who would initially shout ‘racism’, as you did, as their first thought, who would not reconsider their words.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Belton.

I don't see "xenophobe" as a less perjorative word than "racist". They both mean a dislike of The Other because of the group they were born into, rather than judgement of people for who they are.

If people get offended because some of us consider people who support these xenophobic policies to be xenophobic, there's not much I can do about that. I'm not going to bothsides this. It is way too important.

[belton rover]

I don’t necessarily disagree with that, but if you think the words mean pretty much one and the same (which is what I think you are saying), then why did you feel the need to change your description of these ‘people’ as xenophobes, not racists?