TorquayFans.com | Torquay United Fans Forum

I think he maybe means second most crowded in the EU (at least, that's what I found when I did some research)

Scott Brehaut wrote:I think he maybe means second most crowded in the EU (at least, that's what I found when I did some research)

I love it when people talk about the "research" they have done when in reality they've probably just typed a question into Google. :na:

Strangely my "research" revealed that we are actually the fourth most crowded in the EU.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_ ... population

:Oops: Oops.. Sorry; I have a bad head this week.. Yes, I meant in Europe, and I got the info from here: https://www.visareporter.com/news-artic ... migration/ (Wikipedia is a very dodgy place for research).

Actually, England (where most EU migrants have settled), as opposed to the UK, is now the most densely populated country in Europe (excluding Malta). Indeed, on the scale of countries with populations over ten million, England is the third most densely populated country in the world after Bangladesh and India. http://presscomplaints.org/case/297/

So, is it better to suffer uncontrolled immigration from the EU, or to control our own borders and choose who we allow in from the whole world? Our Indian restaurants and takeaways are having to employ chefs from the EU because they can't bring in people from Bangladesh because of red tape (they are not allowed to employ Bangladesh chefs for less than £30k a year but they can offer EU chefs a minimum wage). We're told it's due to the single EU market, but half of Australia's foreign trade is with China and Japan, yet nobody is suggesting those countries should form a political union, and Australia has a half-sensible immigration policy (except for the way it actually treats its migrants and asylum seekers). Most of our foreign trade is not with the EU, but with the rest of the world! And as Nigel Farage says, if we leave the EU, even with the worst-case scenario of WTO rules and 3% tariffs, we would still be better off outside the EU.

But back to the topic (sort of): if things go on as they are, in a few years time China will have world-beating football players and we won't be able to employ them..

And what difference does crowding make anyway? Someone has to be the most crowded and someone has to be the least crowded, it's how statistics work. It's not like we're bursting at the seams anyway, plenty of open spaces to go out and enjoy.

PhilGull wrote:And what difference does crowding make anyway? Someone has to be the most crowded and someone has to be the least crowded, it's how statistics work. It's not like we're bursting at the seams anyway, plenty of open spaces to go out and enjoy.

So where would you draw the line? At what point would you say enough is enough? Would you be happy for the rest of the UK to be as densely populated as central London? It's not just about losing our open spaces and our traditional indigenous cultures. We are already no longer self-sufficient in food production. (That's the thing about our less populated areas: they're either needed for farming and water supplies, or they're places where it's impossible for anybody, not even much wild life, to live). And according to police statistics, the majority of crime in London is now committed by foreign nationals. But wait until we're actually bursting at the seams; I've a feeling you'll change your tune..

Gullscorer wrote: So where would you draw the line? At what point would you say enough is enough? Would you be happy for the rest of the UK to be as densely populated as central London? It's not just about losing our open spaces and our traditional indigenous cultures. We are already no longer self-sufficient in food production. (That's the thing about our less populated areas: they're either needed for farming and water supplies, or they're places where it's impossible for anybody, not even much wild life, to live). And according to police statistics, the majority of crime in London is now committed by foreign nationals. But wait until we're actually bursting at the seams; I've a feeling you'll change your tune..

Boom! There we go. So Gullscorer, just what exactly are these "indiginous cultures" you speak of? (Baring in mind the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is a mongrel nation of many immigrant communities - be it Spanish or Viking or Norman, or Saxon or Roman or, well you get the idea...)

Boom! That's exactly my point. They're disappearing so fast you can't even see them! But perhaps I should have mentioned our national identity. I've nothing against controlled immigration, but completely open doors? At what point will we begin to feel we're practically living in a foreign country, having lost our own? But that was always the EU project, of course: complete political union step by step, with loss of nation states replaced by 'regions', controlled by a central committee on behalf of the powerful elite. I for one don't want to risk our kids' futures for that.

Gullscorer wrote:Boom! That's exactly my point. They're disappearing so fast you can't even see them! But perhaps I should have mentioned our national identity. I've nothing against controlled immigration, but completely open doors? At what point will we begin to feel we're practically living in a foreign country, having lost our own? But that was always the EU project, of course: complete political union step by step, with loss of nation states replaced by 'regions', controlled by a central committee on behalf of the powerful elite. I for one don't want to risk our kids' futures for that.

But what is our "national identity"?
We are all descended from immigrants of one sort or another. Who is to decide this arbitrary point in time where we are suddenly all one homogeneous group and no more immigrants are allowed.

Jerry wrote: I love it when people talk about the "research" they have done when in reality they've probably just typed a question into Google. :na:

Strangely my "research" revealed that we are actually the fourth most crowded in the EU.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_ ... population

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ry-EU.html

I'll try and keep it simple for you Phil: national identity is what each person identifies with. Of course this will be different for different people, and of course it changes over time, but if a majority of people feel comfortable with a particular identity at this point in time, I think we can safely regard that as the national identity.

But who is saying no more immigrants should be allowed in? Nobody.

Yet every country in the world controls its own borders and decides who it will (and will not) allow in, and how many, and from where, and with what qualifications, and on what terms.

Unless that country is a member of the European Union..

Scott Brehaut wrote: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ry-EU.html

That was six years ago!

Jerry wrote:Strangely my "research" revealed that we are actually the fourth most crowded in the EU.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_ ... population

You researched on Wikipedia? Careful..

Gullscorer wrote: You researched on Wikipedia? Careful..

Yep. The 99.5% accurate Wikipedia.

http://www.zmescience.com/science/study ... -25092014/

Not only accurate but generally free of agenda and bias unlike most "sources".

Gullscorer wrote:if a majority of people feel comfortable with a particular identity at this point in time, I think we can safely regard that as the national identity.

Which surely means that the national identity can change over time as peoples "comfort" changes?

Therefore, we cannot "lose" our national identity as you fear.

Except it's not so much the individuals who change over a lifetime, but the numbers of people who identify. So the sense of losing the existing national identity increases with the rate of change (whether in or out) of the people migrating.