Uk immigration
 

Ok, so it's from the dm, but I have read about this before and the proposed changes, cannot see that this will actually help , uk has to do something, there simply isn't any more room, but interested to hear views on this proposal .
Sorry, not sure re Canada and how that works, believe the spouse has to have income minimum but isnt there also something where no benefits can be claimed by the spouse for a certain period of time?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...foreigner.html

Re: Uk immigration
 

There's no salary needed to sponsor In canada. You do have to sign that you can support for the first 3 yrs with no use of benefits.

Vancouver simply has no room in the same way certain areas of the uk don't. Maybe they should be more stringent here.

Re: Uk immigration
 

vancouver proper (which only comes down to arbitrary muncipal boundaries), but the metro area is no where near as constrained as anywhere in the UK. There are 1000 sq miles in the metro area, not including the valley. Delta, Surrey and Langley have lots of room for growth. There are not even a million souls living south of the Fraser. Granted we're limited due to geography, but there's plenty of space. And if ALR is released.....

i read an article sometime ago, where 70 million is the magic number for England...beyond that and they are maxed out...not enough water, space, power, arable land, limited infrastructure (which is in a serious state already)...etc.

Re: Uk immigration
 

seems ill thought out...maybe it should be a case of being able to support one's spouse, rather than coming up with a certain amount, which in some parts of the country, is below the average wage.

They have to do something. The welfare state has crippled the UK.

Re: Uk immigration
 

The infrastructure can't take it, is what I mean. Neither can house prices ;)

Re: Uk immigration
 

Why focus on the 250,000 immigrants, and not the >250,000 british born "job seekers"?

Changes to the social welfare system havent been quick enough or harsh enough to those who can but refuse to work.

Re: Uk immigration
 

it's not just about jobs though, it's about the whole resource and infrastructure foundations of the country being stretched to breaking point... Electricity, water, food, housing, transportation, the environment, land for development and agriculture etc - they're all buckling under the strain of our population size as it is. The UK's population continues to rise, making all these problems worse. And a good half of the population growth is being caused by immigration.

We really need to stop calling criticism of mass immigration racist.

Of course the irony is that we are all migrants ourselves... But it's a UK-specific problem - the UK is one of the few developed countries that is experiencing this population stress. Canada's situation is much much better.

Having said all that - this particular policy is pretty poorly thought out.

Re: Uk immigration
 

I doubt it's the population size, it's the lack of investment in infrastructure. It's amazing how quickly people appear to have forgotten why western economies are down the tubes since 2008.

I agree with the second bolded remark.

Re: Uk immigration
 

also add: more pollution and waste, an aging population, rising unemployment, requiring more resources and a disproportionate tax base. Add to that the unusually high amount of victorian era infrastructure.....looks grim, unless some major changes are made...and they have to made now.

Re: Uk immigration
 

the uk is one of the most densely populated places on the planet.

Re: Uk immigration
 

If the immigrants are working, what's the problem?
Or are you one of those who confuse the term "immigrant" with "refugee/asylum seeker"?

There is a far bigger problem with teenage pregnancy, kids dropping out of school etc, than there is with immigration.

Re: Uk immigration
 

nonsense.

Re: Uk immigration
 

Oh dear, I see another U-turn in the crystal ball. What a stupid proposal.

Re: Uk immigration
 

Interestingly the Guardian's version of this story puts the minimum salary at more like £25,000 and I'm not sure why there's a discrepancy. DM does usually like to pretend that immigrants can stroll into the UK with ease so maybe that's why.

The talk of an "attachment test" is pretty baffling. If you're in a position where you're married but neither have lived in the other's country and both only have economic and family ties to their own country, surely your combined attachment to each country is precisely equal. But Britain only wants to let the spouse into the UK if your combined attachment to Britain is greater than it is to any other country, which is all good and well until the other country implements the same policy. I guess those spouses can pitch up a marital tent in no man's land or something?

Any policy designed to effectively exclude British citizens from the UK probably needs a rethink.

Re: Uk immigration
 

Interesting thread...Although from my perspective, the issue is not with those who come from outside the EU, it is those who come from the EU itself. When I moved over to the UK nearly 5 years ago, I had to go through tons of paperwork, and paying like 1200 pounds to apply, and then again 6 months later when I was married, to get a spousal visa, and then to get indefinite leave to remain, I had to do the "life in the UK" test and pay again like 1200 pounds. Oh, and you can't claim ANY benefits.
They made sure to make life difficult and expensive to move over here. I know plenty of people though, who have come from other countries within the eu, and have received free university education, benefits etc, and basically it's just hassle free. They just pick up and move. In my mind, they are not hard enough on those coming from within the EU. Canada is a first world country, most people (not all mind) typically are educated to college or university level, and can offer something should they decide to pick up and move over to the UK, the same cannot be said for those poorer countries such as romania etc.
I agree that there is a population strain over here, and it's not just going to dissapear from creating better and new infustructure/housing.
There are 64 million people living over here, and only 34 million in all of canada. You can see why that is an issue surely.

Re: Uk immigration
 

Not where I lived.

Re: Uk immigration
 

That assertion does seem to be twaddle:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populat...ated_countries

though, by some measures, Jersey and the Isle of Man are a bit crowded:


http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0934666.html

Re: Uk immigration
 

you do have google don't you?

"With over 51 million inhabitants, England is by far the most populous country of the United Kingdom, accounting for 84% of the combined total.[163] England taken as a unit and measured against international states has the fourth largest population in the European Union and would be the 25th largest country by population in the world.[164] With a density of 395 people per square kilometre, it would be the second most densely populated country in the European Union after Malta"

Re: Uk immigration
 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...lation_density

53 rd most dense by this measure......if one factors out contries of less than 10 million the picture worsens (13 th).....|further if one looks at England in isolation from the rest of teh UK the picture is even worse still with a density of 395 persons per sq km vs about 255 for the UK as a whole.

If one wishes to include bermuda or Jersey...hell why not include Vatican City, maybe the UK looks good, but I stand by my original comment....the UK is one of the most dense places on the planet.

Which ever way you slice it,it's pretty grim. Maybe it's not as bad as China or India, but the way we're going it will before too long.

Re: Uk immigration
 

Manchester, yes.

Re: Uk immigration
 

The method of comparison is, of course, hopelessly flawed. Most of Canada is unhabitable tundra or rainforest so the great majority of the people live between Windsor and Quebec City. If we eliminate the rest of the country then we have a population density similar to the UK.

The suggestion that having neighbours makes a place "grim" and having more neighbours makes it "even worse" is also ill founded. The presence of people is what makes the UK a vibrant and exciting place and Canada (outside the part mentioned) a bit, well, empty.

Canada (outside the part mentioned) is better, of course, if you don't like people.

Re: Uk immigration
 

really? This is the best you can do? Talk about spinning.......bollocks if you ask me. Are you suggesting that when like for like comparisons are made, that Canadian cities are as cozy as UK ones?

Fact is, if one looks at pop density in England, its worse than Holland:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...in-Europe.html

Re: Uk immigration
 

Yet a lot of Brits want to move to Canada go figure eh or have already moved here.

Re: Uk immigration
 

I've given you a couple of links to show that your original assertion is wrong, your own link doesn't put the UK in the top ten crowded countries. No spin there.

Whether or not it's reasonable to consider the whole of countries such as Australia, Canada or Mongolia in such comparisons when most of the country is unhabitable depends on the purpose of the comparison. I suggest that, if the purpose is to look at the possilbity of a person living there then most of Canada is irrelevant.

Re: Uk immigration
 

attempting in your now familair way to defend the undefendable..yawn..If England is considered apart from the UK, it may well be in the top 10 (actually, top 10 greater than 10 million: England comes in at 7 above India). Not sure what your point is.

Now, how about your point that Canada is as equally cozy? Where are your links for that one? Canada's major urban areas are not as crowded as the UK, to suggest otherwise is not even worth debating.

As i said, bollocks

Re: Uk immigration
 

According to the statistics far fewer people from the UK settle in Canada than used to in the past.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/11-402-.../tbl02-eng.htm

Re: Uk immigration
 

It's probably because of the internet and cheap air travel.

Re: Uk immigration
 

From your own post:

"53 rd most dense by this measure"

how many countries do you think there are in world? Suppose 200, then 53rd isn't in the top quartile. You may come from a crowded house but not everyone does.

Re: Uk immigration
 

And that's probably a good thing.

Re: Uk immigration
 

ah, so you discount everything else and select one thing that, at least on first appearances, supports your view. When one takes out inconsequential comparisons, oh like, Jersey, Vatican City and Bermuda, things aren't as rosy. Top 13 in fact.

England is in the UK, most of us on here are from there. It is in the top 10 somewhere between Holland and India, even when including smaller nations (over a million).

Typical dbd33 approach..... "it's crowded so more vibrant" "its crime rate is higher, so more exciting" you talk a load of bollocks

Re: Uk immigration
 

seems like its on the rise though since 1990....

Re: Uk immigration
 

My issue was, and is, with your claim that:

"the uk is one of the most densely populated places on the planet"

It's not. See links above.

If you say it's in the top 13 countries when some are eliminated but this an odd method, which ones do you eliminate; the once with more dense populations?

Re: Uk immigration
 

You should read your own quotes....one of yours is where i figured out it's 13 th ranking, England would be 7 th on the list you posted.....are you not agreeing then, that England is not dense. It is not clear that i was referring to England?

major countries, ....god you're a thick t**t and dense at that....

Re: Uk immigration
 

Oh, you wrote "UK" so I thought you meant the UK.

Re: Uk immigration
 

Specifically, you said this...

Nonsense.