What about 5.1 do you prefer over 5.2?
3,021 karma · joined August 29, 2022
Bravo to you, sir.
The humane option is still available. It’s not too late to take it. But if you keep refusing it, don’t complain when you get something else.
They're certainly suspicious: all across the country, high street retailers are going bust, and yet somehow all these barbershops, nail salons, takeaway joints etc are staying in business, able to afford prime commercial real estate even though you never see anyone in there getting their hair cut or their nails done.
I don't know why the Turks in particular are being singled out, but that's the meme. The "American Candy Stores" in London are another famous example.
They're the ones who make the laws?
They'll roll them out gradually. You won't need one at first. You'll still show your passport, driving license etc, until one day you give up because the digital version is convenient and you "might as well". What's your problem? Why do you care? Have you got something to hide?
Then they'll attack the easiest target: porn. We already have age-verification laws, implemented through dodgy third-party providers. But now everyone has digital government ID: we "might as well" unify things so all the porn sites check your age using the centralised government system. What's your problem? Why do you care? Won't you THINK OF THE CHILDREN??? You want to let CHILDREN watch PORN???
Then comes online retail. After all, the Southport killer bought his knife from Amazon — that was the front page headline on every paper, remember how organic and uncoordinated that was? It could all have been avoided with better age verification. And hey, we already have a way to verify age with our digital IDs. We "might as well". What's your problem? Why do you care? You want to let CHILDREN buy KNIVES?
And what about social media? Kids shouldn't use Facebook, it's bad for them. Australia already bans under 16s from social media. We already have age verification for other things. We "might as well". WHY DO YOU CARE????? THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!
Oh, that's handy, everyone's social media accounts are now tied to their real identities. That'll come in handy when people say nasty things that the government doesn't like. After all, those riots only happened because of "misinformation". Why do you need to stay anonymous anyway? What's the problem? Why do you care? Got something to hide? You're in favour of HATE SPEECH??
The slippery slope has never been more lubricated.
Australia did exactly this (in the face of howling opposition) and it worked: illegal boat arrivals dropped from ~20,000 per year to almost zero. Thousands of people used to drown attempting the crossing, now no-one drowns. There's your moral case.
Legally, Parliament is sovereign. If the current legal framework doesn't allow it, change the law. Except they won't, because they don't want to solve the problem and they use the law as an excuse as if they aren't the fucking government.
Whether or not these laws are actually enforced is another matter. [Insert obligatory reference to Turkish barbershops]. But I've been asked to show ID at every job I've ever had, so companies obviously care about it even if the risk is low.
[0] source: https://www.irwinmitchell.com/news-and-insights/expert-comme...
They could stop them in a week if they actually wanted to.
And frankly, if you believe this is actually about immigration then I’m embarrassed for you. Everyone can see that they’re just using the current crisis an excuse to ram through the unpopular thing that they've wanted for decades.
It won’t stop the boats.
That’s true in some parts of the world. But the opposite idea — that the people who’ve lived somewhere for thousands of years have no moral claim to their inheritance over the people who just arrived — has been equally destructive in other parts.
> one of the legacies of colonialism is the Middle East and Africa being carved up in lines that didn’t match the underlying cultural groups.
That’s a bad thing, is it? Is diversity not their strength?
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/skilled-worker-vi...
And I only picked those two because they were particularly egregious. The list is full of jobs for which it's absurd to suggest we need to fill from abroad: are we really suffering for a lack of recruitment consultants? Human resources officers? Can no-one can find a homegrown Brit who's able to work as a restaurant manager?
As for the salary threshold, you're right: the basic threshold is £41k, although it can be as low as £25k (not £33.4k) in some circumstances: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/skilled-worker-vi...
I'd argue that £41k is still too low. It's barely above the median UK salary - we can't find anyone in the top ~50% of people who can do these jobs? And it doesn't even make you a net contributor (from what I can tell that threshold is around £50-55k, although for many of these "skilled" workers it's much higher as they bring dependents.) Nevertheless I'll accept a partial L.
Regarding English, maybe I'm wrong about the precise requirements, but I've worked with software professionals in London, here on a skilled worker visa, with whom I was barely able to communicate, so clearly we're doing something wrong.
In any case, my thesis still stands: there have not been "very high" criteria to migrate to the UK recently, in fact quite the opposite, and if you don't believe this then I suggest you go outside and look around.
GP mentioned “abandoning your parents” when you immigrate as if that’s absurd. In reality it’s the most normal thing imaginable.
I know hundreds of people who live outside their home country and I can’t thing of a single one of them who took their parents with them. When does that ever happen?
They were the most pro-immigration government in British history, by far.
You have no idea what you're talking about.