₦airaland Forum

Zahra29:
Point is, it is possible to reduce net migration if the political will and levers are there. Most western countries don't want to reduce it to zero levels, but as can be clearly seen by the policies being introduced by UK, Canada, Australia and others, they certainly want to control it, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

Not to hold brief for anyone but it's important to clarify (because you've said this multiple times) - The point has never been that there's anything wrong with the UK or any other country wanting to control immigration.

The point Goke7 in particular is making; as I understand it, is that the UK needs immigration and that's clearly shown in how the government has not taken the many steps open to it to stop immigration if it really wanted to, and instead chose to attack immigrants and make them political scapegoats for everything going wrong in the country.

Even for people who are arguing for more immigration, I don't see how that equates to them saying it's wrong for other people to want less immigration.

If the UK wants to stop immigration or reverse it, they should go ahead. Sebi it's bum-washing the immigrants are here to do anyway.

Zahra29:
Hardly you see many Nigerians selling all they have to go to Sweden....(fixed it for you).

Besides If Nigerians are trying to move to Germany, Netherlands, even Russia etc they would happily flock to Sweden as long as it remains in western Europe.

Sweden used to be a major destination for Africans (especially Somalia and northern Africa) and middle eastern citizens in the 2000s to 2010s. The major pull factors were the relative ease of claiming asylum and their generous social security system. Sweden was also a very peaceful and tolerant country.
Before Brexit, many used to cross over to the UK after getting their Swedish papers to join their family or for other reasons.
However in recent years, anti-immigrant sentiment has hardened in Sweden due to rising levels of gun/violent crime and gang violence attributed to immigrants or their children.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/swedish-pm-says-integration-immigrants-has-failed-fueled-gang-crime-2022-04-28/

Point is, it is possible to reduce net migration if the political will and levers are there. Most western countries don't want to reduce it to zero levels, but as can be clearly seen by the policies being introduced by UK, Canada, Australia and others, they certainly want to control it, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

A country of just 10 million what net migration are they reducing, you want to compare to Canada that used migration to increase their population to 41 million? If people are even crossing from Sweden on their own to uk it even shows they don’t even need to do much to reduce whatever they have there. And as for generosity that’s funny cos, their low population was definitely a drive to bring in more people and this growing tendencies to always use criminality as a reason to reduce migration is just ridiculous. Criminality exist everywhere or should we say the criminality in places like India or in Nigeria is due to influx of migrants? That’s why all these gaslighting always end up making no sense. There are laws everywhere to deal with crime but lazy politicians have found a sweet spot to always label migrants as criminals as a justification to rally their base. That’s why at the end of it all, it’s all talk and nothing.

Zahra29:
Point is, it is possible to reduce net migration if the political will and levers are there. Most western countries don't want to reduce it to zero levels, but as can be clearly seen by the policies being introduced by UK, Canada, Australia and others, they certainly want to control it, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

What exactly do you mean by 'want to control it'?
You're saying conflicting things- 'it's possible' but they 'don't want to do it' i.e they do control it. Except this another attempt to absolve governments of their actions, blame migrants or present a narrative of an invasion.

Are you trying to insuate that in prior to recent events, Western nations have not had control over who they issued visas to? The ability to increase or reduce numbers overnight is the very evidence of their control.

Goodenoch:
Not to hold brief for anyone but it's important to clarify (because you've said this multiple times) - The point has never been that there's anything wrong with the UK or any other country wanting to control immigration.

The point Goke7 in particular is making; as I understand it, is that the UK needs immigration and that's clearly shown in how the government has not taken the many steps open to it to stop immigration if it really wanted to, and instead chose to attack immigrants and make them political scapegoats for everything going wrong in the country.

Even for people who are arguing for more immigration, I don't see how that equates to them saying it's wrong for other people to want less immigration.

If the UK wants to stop immigration or reverse it, they should go ahead. Sebi it's bum-washing the immigrants are here to do anyway.

The bolded is and has always been my point.

Countries have the right to control/reduce/increase their immigration levels as they see fit.

jedisco:
What exactly do you mean by 'want to control it'?
You're saying conflicting things- 'it's possible' but they 'don't want to do it' i.e they do control it. Except this another attempt to absolve governments of their actions, blame migrants or present a narrative of an invasion.

Are you trying to insuate that in prior to recent events, Western nations have not had control over who they issued visas to? The ability to increase or reduce numbers overnight is the very evidence of their control.

The summary is simple; it’s all talk and do nothing. Which itself is not bad cos all stakeholders are aware of the potential economic impact. You can run campaigns with it but after all said and done that BBC article you posted here some days ago is where it all finally ends.

Goke7:
A country of just 10 million what net migration are they reducing, you want to compare to Canada that used migration to increase their population to 41 million? If people are even crossing from Sweden on their own to uk it even shows they don’t even need to do much to reduce whatever they have there. And as for generosity that’s funny cos, their low population was definitely a drive to bring in more people and this growing tendencies to always use criminality as a reason to reduce migration is just ridiculous. Criminality exist everywhere [/b]or should we say the criminality in places like India or in Nigeria is due to influx of migrants? That’s why all these gaslighting always end up making no sense. [b] There are laws everywhere to deal with crime but lazy politicians have found a sweet spot to always label migrants as criminals as a justification to rally their base. That’s why at the end of it all, it’s all talk and nothing.

Sweden used to have very low levels of violent crime, just like other Nordic countries. Gang and gun crime has spiralled in recent years. I think their government has the means and data to determine how and where this surge in violence has come from.

And as to the bolded, their government has put in tough measures to deal with the crime, unfortunately this has meant that their government and policies are no longer as welcoming, liberal or tolerant.

jedisco:
What exactly do you mean by 'want to control it'?
You're saying conflicting things- 'it's possible' but they 'don't want to do it' i.e they do control it. Except this another attempt to absolve governments of their actions, blame migrants or present a narrative of an invasion.

Are you trying to insuate that in prior to recent events, Western nations have not had control over who they issued visas to? The ability to increase or reduce numbers overnight is the very evidence of their control.

Sigh, this same argument every market day.

A brief walk through history might help.

(For reference, Control = Decide who and how many)

1. Before Brexit the UK government could control non-EU immigration but there was rising frustration, especially during the Eurozone crisis and other events like the Syrian war, that it couldn't control EU migration.

2. Post Brexit, the government now had the power to control both EU and non-EU immigration. Boris's government introduced policies, (mainly the reintroduction of the graduate route and the introduction of the health and care visa post COVID ), that led to unprecedented and unforeseen levels of immigration.
For context before Brexit/Covid net migration was roughly 250,000. In 2022, it was 764,000.

3. The public was almost apoplectic when the ONS migration figures were released. The last government then introduced measures to tackle the key contributors to the rise in immigration such as banning most post graduate and care dependants, increasing the minimum salary threshold, clamping down on care agencies etc. The Labour government has retained these policies in an effort to drive net migration down, and has stated its commitment to lean away from foreign workers and focus more on the domestic workforce.

4. Net migration has already fallen from its historic peak of 764,000 in 2022 to 685,000 in 2023, with expectations/predictions that it will fall further still and settle around pre-pandemic average levels of around 250,000 - 300,000.

It is quite simple really.

Zahra29:
Sweden used to have very low levels of violent crime, just like other Nordic countries. Gang and gun crime has spiralled in recent years. I think their government has the means and data to determine how and where this surge in violence has come from.

And as to the bolded, their government has put in tough measures to deal with the crime, unfortunately it has meant that their government and policies are no longer liberal or as tolerant.

and to tell lies too ba? Let’s even come back to the Uk, it was the same rhetoric until I watch the BBC some months ago where they dispel the notion through the same data that crime increase was not in tandem with increase in migration in fact they said there was a downward trend in crime despite the increase in migration.

Just lazy politicians everywhere always linking increasing migration with criminal gangs. A criminal is a criminal and has nothing to do with where he or she comes from.

Goke7:
and to tell lies too ba? Let’s even come back to the Uk, it was the same rhetoric until I watch the BBC some months ago where they dispel the notion through the same data that crime increase was not in tandem with increase in migration in fact they said there was a downward trend in crime despite the increase in migration.

Just lazy politicians everywhere always linking increasing migration with criminal gangs. A criminal is a criminal and has nothing to do with where he or she comes from.

Lol, it's lies because it doesn't fit your narrative.

Sweden now has the second highest level of gun death in the whole of Europe. Shocking if you knew what Sweden was like a couple decades ago.

No one is claiming that all immigrants are criminals, however in Sweden's case, police data shows that most of the violent crime is linked to a number of areas called "utsattas" which have high proportions of residents born outside Europe and second- and third-generation immigrants.

The above is not disputed, instead the discussion point is whether there are underlying causative or contributory socioeconomic factors such as poverty, unemployment and inequality.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/nov/30/how-gang-violence-took-hold-of-sweden-in-five-charts

Zahra29:
Lol, it's lies because it doesn't fit your narrative.

Sweden now has the second highest level of gun death in the whole of Europe. Shocking if you knew what Sweden was like a couple decades ago.

No one is claiming that all immigrants are criminals, however in Sweden's case, police data shows that most of the violent crime is linked to a number of areas called "utsattas" which have high proportions of residents born outside Europe and second- and third-generation immigrants.

The above is not disputed, instead the discussion point is whether there are underlying causative or contributory socioeconomic factors such as poverty, unemployment and inequality.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/nov/30/how-gang-violence-took-hold-of-sweden-in-five-charts

So has this been studied before jumping into conclusion that because an area is filled with 2nd and 3rd generation of immigrants the level of crime must be traced to immigration levels.

And this is how hasty decisions are made once they know they now have a narrative that can be used to arouse citizens all for cheap political gains. It doesn’t make sense at all

Goke7:
So has this been studied before jumping into conclusion that because an area is filled with 2nd and 3rd generation of immigrants the level of crime must be traced to immigration levels.

And this is how hasty decisions are made once they know they now have a narrative that can be used to arouse citizens all for cheap political gains. It doesn’t make sense at all

Hasty decisions lol, as if this all happened last week with Storm Bert.

If you read any reports on the Sweden crime situation, the evidence consistently shows that the gun and gang violence is disproportionately from people born outside Sweden or 2nd/3rd immigrants.

For instance, a 2017 study showed that 58% among those suspected for crime on reasonable grounds are migrants.Regarding murder and manslaughter, the corresponding figures are 73%.

There's emotion based argument and then there's fact.

Zahra29:
Hasty decisions lol, as if this all happened last week with Storm Bert.

If you read any reports on the Sweden crime situation, the evidence consistently shows that the gun and gang violence is disproportionately from people born outside Sweden or 2nd/3rd immigrants.

For instance, a 2017 study showed that 58% among those suspected for crime on reasonable grounds are migrants.Regarding murder and manslaughter, the corresponding figures are 73%.

There's emotion based argument and then there's fact.

Of course it’s hasty and I’ll continue to stand by that. Any area ridden with crime has socioeconomic factors responsible and it’s same everywhere. It has nothing to do with where people were born and this is too simplistic to conclude upon but because it will suit the anti migrant sentiments it becomes easier to rally people around that.

Imagine all the looting and riots that took place some months ago were mostly committed by migrants wouldn’t it be more convenient to conclude but it was easier to makes excuses that it was due to neglect bla bla bla so you see the disparity now. It’s obvious those areas in Sweden are highly neglected and lacking in basic opportunities and needs but who cares since most of them were born outside the country.

Goke7:
The summary is simple; it’s all talk and do nothing. Which itself is not bad cos all stakeholders are aware of the potential economic impact. You can run campaigns with it but after all said and done that BBC article you posted here some days ago is where it all finally ends.

True.. that article just delves a question I've been asking all along. This stuff is so easy to do if they want to.

Zahra29:
A brief walk through history might help.

(For reference, Control = Decide who and how many)

Thanks for the history lesson.

In summary, Brexit gave the UK significantly more control over immigration than they've had in decades. The government then used its new found powers to issue over 700k visas. They've also used that same control to cut down numbers. In essence, at no point in this whole process did they 'loose control'

jedisco:
True.. that article just delves a question I've been asking all along. This stuff is so easy to do if they want to.



Thanks for the history lesson.

In summary, Brexit gave the UK significantly more control over immigration than they've had in decades. The government then used its new found powers to issue over 700k visas. They've also used that same control to cut down numbers. In essence, at no point in this whole process did they 'loose control'

And talking more about control there is now a job vacancy advertised by the govt for an EU negotiator, they say it’s to reset relations with the EU, one thing I love is the vocabs they throw around to dribble people while using other rhetoric as a cover. Interesting times ahead
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cjw0xngdj2jo.amp

My brother I encourage you to apply, the pay is good o 150k per year 😜

Goke7:
Of course it’s hasty and I’ll continue to stand by that. Any area ridden with crime has socioeconomic factors responsible and it’s same everywhere. It has nothing to do with where people were born and this is too simplistic to conclude upon but because it will suit the anti migrant sentiments it becomes easier to rally people around that.

Imagine all the looting and riots that took place some months ago were mostly committed by migrants wouldn’t it be more convenient to conclude but it was easier to makes excuses that it was due to neglect bla bla bla so you see the disparity now. It’s obvious those areas in Sweden are highly neglected and lacking in basic opportunities and needs but who cares since most of them were born outside the country.

I don't disagree with the bolded. The Guardian article I posted earlier was in fact exploring the same driving socioeconomic factors in Sweden.

I'm glad that we can at least agree that the Swedish riots and violence in certain communities may have underlying factors - while you almost flayed me and refused to even consider that some of the areas in the UK riots may have similar socioeconomic issues and frustrations. Definitely not critical bias eh 😏

jedisco:
True.. that article just delves a question I've been asking all along. This stuff is so easy to do if they want to.



Thanks for the history lesson.

In summary, Brexit gave the UK significantly more control over immigration than they've had in decades. The government then used its new found powers to issue over 700k visas. They've also used that same control to cut down numbers. In essence, at no point in this whole process did they 'loose control'

"Lose" control.

You're very welcome.

The argument was not whether the UK had control powers or not. I suspect that is a debate you've been having with yourself.

The simple point is that in spite of your view that the UK needs migrants much more than migrants need the UK, the UK decided that net migration was too high and has taken measures to reduce it. Same with Canada, Australia and others. It's not a complicated concept, you just don't want to accept it lol

Zahra29:
I don't disagree with the bolded. The Guardian article I posted earlier was in fact exploring the same driving socioeconomic factors in Sweden.

I'm glad that we can at least agree that the Swedish riots and violence in certain communities may have underlying factors - while you almost flayed me and refused to even consider that some of the areas in the UK riots may have similar socioeconomic issues and frustrations. Definitely not critical bias eh 😏

We mentioned it here then that those rioting were targeting the wrong people (migrants) they believed were the cause of their problems. It was well articulated on this thread I remember.

Goke7:
We mentioned it here then that those rioting were targeting the wrong people (migrants) they believed were the cause of their problems. It was well articulated on this thread I remember.

Lol I also remember that you and some others forcefully rejected even the slightest notion that there might be underlying factors behind some of the UK riots, making accusations of supporting the rioters and condoning violence.

Now here you are, quickly jumping to cite those same underlying factors in the Swedish riots and violence because the perpetrators are largely Swedish immigrants. I doubt you would be so understanding if they were white.

Zahra29:
Lol I also remember that you and some others forcefully rejected even the slightest notion that there might be underlying factors behind some of the UK riots, making accusations of supporting the rioters and condoning violence.

Now here you are, quickly jumping to cite those same underlying factors in the Swedish riots and violence because the perpetrators are largely Swedish immigrants. I doubt you would be so understanding if they were white.

We said it here strongly that the grievances should be taken to Westminster who are responsible for the socio economic crisis except you want to act you didn’t see it. How can underlying factors be responsible for people trying to burn down an hotel where asylum seekers were staying. Imagine the farmers who went to protest at Westminster this past week taking it out at migrants? You see it now

ehizario2012:
I don't know if you're in Africa or not. However, nobody chooses where they were born and I don't think it's necessary to feel guilty when you emigrate outside Africa. As long as you're adding value wherever you go, that place can become home. Abraham wasn't born in Canaan, he migrated there and made it home.

Na because them open gate most of Youna dey talk things like this. Whenever it comes to conversation of developing Africa where you all come from that’s when you lot will start quoting one bible verse or parable.

They will still ask you to go back to where you came from.

babajeje123:
Home is where you live life to the fullest and fufil purpose. Africa in general and Nigeria in particular didn't give that to many. I like it here, I don't want to be a part of those who will be in Africa to make it enticing. Prayers for those with that unrealistic dream.

What if you haven’t been given visa. Would you not fight those depriving you in your country ?

Make we sha de deceive ourselves.

Goke7:
Migration is a global thing, in fact Africans are the least in the number game. So we are the even the ones staying back to develop our place.

Good to know you are the ones staying back. Hope you have seen the video of the captured Brit soldier.

Get your fighting boots ready for what might be ww3 and hope you know Africans will be the ones they will put at the frontline.

lavida001:
What if you haven’t been given visa. Would you not fight those depriving you in your country ?

Make we sha de deceive ourselves.

Fight with what, bro? Make I carry AK-47 or what? Protest? Rant on media? Using Nigeria as an instance, could you tell how to fight the leaders who were elected along religion and ethnicity lines? Whatever you come up with, make plans to return to your country and use it to fight those depriving you. Shalom!

Urgent please! Our biometric appointment is this morning. Applying for my sons visa, should I write a separate letter of consent or the consent letter they mean is the form I downloaded?

Thanks

lavida001:
Good to know you are the ones staying back. Hope you have seen the video of the captured Brit soldier.

Get your fighting boots ready for what might be ww3 and hope you know Africans will be the ones they will put at the frontline.

It’s comments like this that continue to form the perception we get out there.

I find this embarrassing for Labour, and it will be interesting to see how far this goes.

kwakudtraveller:
I find this embarrassing for Labour, and it will be interesting to see how far this goes.

Apart from the current policies by Labour it’s also a bandwagon effect from the American elections.

The Elon musk global influence with twitter or X is no longer a joke.

Viruses:
Trump is just lucky to be in an era where his opponents were women. People be pointing out mistakes Kamala did that made her lose the election, but I'm sure if they run that election again tomorrow Trump will still win because America is not ready for a female president let alone a black one hence they'll rather settle for trump.

Fact.

I still don't understand the dynamics that allowed Obama win.

Goke7:
And talking more about control there is now a job vacancy advertised by the govt for an EU negotiator, they say it’s to reset relations with the EU, one thing I love is the vocabs they throw around to dribble people while using other rhetoric as a cover. Interesting times ahead
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cjw0xngdj2jo.amp

My brother I encourage you to apply, the pay is good o 150k per year 😜

On a totally different note, £150k annually is massive!!! Whereas Salah, Bruno Fernandes, Rashford etc earn over £300k in ONE WEEK!!!!

Chai, these footballers don't deserve any rest. They should play football all day, all week!! C'mon

lavida001:
Na because them open gate most of Youna dey talk things like this. Whenever it comes to conversation of developing Africa where you all come from that’s when you lot will start quoting one bible verse or parable.

They will still ask you to go back to where you came from.

Sincerely, I don't know your antecedents or what your previous comments on this group have been like... I can say where the significant people like Zahra, Lexus etc stand.

However, with this your comment, you've lost any FUTURE respect I might have given you by mistake. This is pure envy and nothing more. You won't even leave Nigeria, that opportunity would not come again even if you've had it in the past. Stay there and chew the soil... Many of us who relocated still have better investments and ties in Nigeria than the likes of you.

Yeye.

Friends, I'm quite surprised nobody has talked about this ALL IMPORTANT bill to be debated on Friday.

THE ASSISTED DYING BILL.

Or did I miss it?? That bill is more important than some people think honestly. It's a slippery slope that must be avoided at all cost, Hitler's Aktion T4 comes to mind!!!