Immigration.

 We now have close to 120,000 illegal immigrants in the UK just from the channel dinghy crossings alone. These people are being housed in 4-star hotels across the country at huge cost.

Over the past week have now added to that figure by "repatriating" over 10,000 "refugees" from Afghanistan. We've also opened the doors to hundreds of thousands of people from Hong Kong.

Apart from the illegal channel crossers, in general I have no qualms about the people coming in from Afghanistan and Hong Kong. We have some moral obligation towards them. In Afghanistan we went in with size 10 hobnails and failed to sort out their country. In Hong Kong we gave them away to the authoritarian Chinese government lock, stock and barrel. 

But, and the is a big but.... where are all these people going to go? We are already in the midst of a housing crisis. We have hundreds of thousands of people homeless on the streets, we have people unable to afford rent on a single wage, let alone buy a property and pay a mortgage.

So where exactly do we put these new immigrants these new citizens of the UK? Where do we house them? How do we house them?

We don't have the housing to place them, we don't have the infrastructure to support the new houses that need to be built, we just don't have the facilities to keep the door open for ever, accepting everyone into the country.

Yet we spend billions on HS2. 

I firmly believe that the country's priorities are fucked up. First an foremost should be providing basic facilities to people at a cost they can afford. We need more houses and if necessary, legislation should be put forward to ease the planning burden and sad to say, encroach on the green belt. 

It's without a hint of self-awareness that the people that shout loudest about accepting immigrants into the country are usually the ones that shout loudest against new housing developments and roads. Well, you can't have it both ways. You want to allow all and sundry to come in, then your precious green belt is going to have to go. Your fault, no on else's. 

Think that virtue-signalling and being virtuous won't have an effect on your middle-class life? Think again. 

Want to keep your precious greenery? Want to preserve your idyllic towns an villages? Don't want them to be swallowed up by massive conurbations? 

Don't want your house price to fall as more and more houses are being built? Enjoying the increased value of your house? Don't want to experience negative equity?

Then start to reject the open-door immigration policies. Because at some point, you will have to pay the piper for your virtue.

I blogged a few years ago that the housing crisis can only be solved by classing it as a national emergency and giving national government special powers in order to solve it. Planning objections need to be swept away and the houses need to be built now.

Being a national project, we need to identify decent sized accommodation, not the poxy shoeboxes that developers cram into the smallest plots in order to maximise profit. The houses need to be built and sold with a small profit. The difference between material costs and the actual value of a house is huge. 

By contracting the building of houses and selling them at a small margin over the material cost brings in revenue for the government and provides affordable housing.

At some point one of the major parties need to run with this policy. Because if one of the minor parties like UKIP (Change that bloody name!) or Nigel Farage's ex-party Reform run with this, they could well collect a huge number of votes from the low-paid working class. 

Add a dab of virtue by housing the homeless and immigrants then it might also bring the middle-classes on board too. After all if they are so virtuous they want to save everyone, then surely a drop in house values is a small price to pay eh? 

Or is all that virtue available just so long as it doesn't affect them?

I'd also add in a dash of Tax reclamation from the Mega-corporations like Google, PayPal and the like to pay for it. Change the rules so they can't pay tax offshore. If they resist then they're denying homes for the homeless and immigrants, the selfish bastards.

The Channel Illegal Immigrants - Let's not Sugar Coat it, It's a National Security Crisis.

 The left is making much lightness of the migrants coming across the channel, saying how could we be so heartless as to stop all of these pregnant mothers and families with kids coming across the channel?

All very twee and ever so unthreatening. What's to worry about? These families will assimilate into our culture and before you know it will be model citizens...

Except that I know they won't. I've seen what happens first hand. I've lived through mass immigration. I've seen neighbourhoods become ghettos and for the immigrant communities to close ranks, close doors, close their own borders, even as the left insist we keep ours open.

I lived in a multicultural area. I have said this many times. Back in the 60's on our street you could find Poles, Romanians, Indians, Yugoslavians. Those from the Eastern Bloc displaced when the iron curtain fell were happy to be here. The Indians likewise wanted to be here to make a better world for their kids. They understood the benefits of being here and were grateful.

In the 70's we received a wave of different immigrants. They were unsure why they were here. Sure, they were shopkeepers, they took opportunities. But as more and more came, they became resentful. They installed enclaves and isolated themselves, establishing closed borders. Where the Poles and the Romanians and the Indians had happily shared their culture, their homes and their lives, the immigrants from Pakistan and other parts of the Muslim world thought their religion superior, their way of life better, they refused to integrate, except for a small percentage. Mainly those who had to deal with the world outside the community. Those within the community live isolated lives, insulated from Western values and as they see it Western imprudence. The isolated core that gives rise to the us/them extremist murderers and hides the child rapists. The other communities were pushed out, sometimes forcibly by the new, resentful neighbours.

Those people not intercepted by Border Force and get to the beaches melt away into the countryside. Mobile phone in hand they contact cousins who direct them to the isolated enclaves. There they can live and earn a living without the British authorities ever knowing about their existence. They are off the books, illegal. Driving cars insured in the names of cousins, holding driving licences in other names. Woe betide you meet one on the road.

The people arriving on the beaches are the most organised, the most resourceful, but not quite the most dangerous. That moniker is left for those that make the crossing at night. Those are the people smuggling not only people, but people of fighting age, with an ideology imbued in them. They run up the beaches and into the night to be picked up in vans. Sometimes they carry other things. They carry drugs, or weapons, and pass them to their brothers waiting in the white vans that drive to the coast of an evening.

Going back to the lefties, they say only 5000 have arrived, hardly a threat, hardly a drop in the Ocean, why can 't we accept them with open arms?

Because dear leftie, 805 of those 5000 are of fighting age and male. That's 4000 young men in the country illegally from who knows where.

Let's be hypothetical and assume that a low number, possibly 5 or 10% of those young males are not looking for employment, but are looking to cause mayhem. To use those smuggled weapons?

That's 200 men. Just think what a group of 200 organised men could accomplish. They can recruit, they can organise, they can attack. 

Even if only 10 percent of those men attacked a shopping centre as we have seen in other countries, that's 20 men. They can cover all the exits in a shopping centre and go on a shooting spree. 20 men is plenty enough to cause major carnage, cause more than 20 deaths. The trade off would be worth it for them. There would still be 90 percent of them available to continue and they could recruit more.

We can't keep those 200 men under surveillance.  Not all the time. And we already have more terrorist-grade radicals and extremists than we can keep an eye on. So why would we want to allow more in?

I hope that when the first atrocity occurs that involves an illegal immigrant or a significant number of organised immigrants that the left and the Labour party especially will eat humble pie. I would hope that they won't blame the government when they, the left were the apologists for terrorists.

This is a National Security threat. It threatens every single one of us. I'm not scared of Muslim extremists, I have no irrational fear of Muslims in general. I have had Muslim friends, I have Muslim family. But I have also experienced the extremists, I have knowledge of them and I know how they live, isolated amongst the Muslim community. I know how they manipulate not only their own community, but manipulate outsiders.

If you can't see the threat, then I suggest you have been manipulated buy the very people that despise you, are too trusting and cannot see what is very obvious.

Money, Money, Money..... The Root of All Evil.

Whether it's climate change, mass immigration or the inability to deal with Muslim Rape Gangs, what links all of these is MONEY.

You can spout all you want about ideology and religion and politics, but the pressures from above all that transcend everything. It's money, old money and big corporations, the people that have the ear of politicians and policy-makers that control things. Their only ideology is making more money. These are people that will sell their granny for a profit. They have no principles, no morals. Their goal is to amass ever more wealth.

The monied elite benefit from climate change taxes and rebates when they stick wind turbines on their land. Even if the turbines go out to sea, Queenie gets a bung in the form of a tariff paid to the crown. Also the monied elite will have shares in the big conglomerates building and installing the turbines, so it win-win for them.

If they have interests in the stock market, then most likely they are benefitting from carbon trading. You know the scheme where everyone - including the poor pay a premium on their energy bills as some sort of penance for existing and wanting to be warm in winter which then gets traded on the stock market through huge trading firms which extract a huge premium and share it amongst their elite shareholder friends.

Climate Warming is just a money-making scam with no scientific basis. The only "Science" involved in the Climate change argument are statistics. Scientists can see an increasing level of CO2 in historic warm periods without being able to scientifically prove that CO2 is causing the warming. They cannot pin down the mechanism, the smoking gun. All they can see is the smoke from the barrel and assume that there was a gun.

From seeing an increase in CO2, some bright spark then creates a computer model that assumes that CO2 is the causal factor. With no provable basis. The computer model then spews out a random range of outcomes (the so-called hockey-stick graph) that shows a wide range of "what-if" possibilities if CO2 were the causal factor. From the climate staying the same, to scorched earth, the range goes. Just like the predictions of the track of a hurricane, scientists can only predict a range of tracks the further out you get from where the hurricane is at this precise moment. What Hurricane track modelers do is to use available data an re-input it to make the predictions more accurate.

Climate warming modelers have not done this. The warming of the globe has stayed steady for a decade and has not followed the doomsday scenario predicted by the worst excesses of the hockey-stick graph. But climate modelers have not used this decade of data to find out why their models were so far off. They have not tried to produce more accurate predictions. Only the doomsday predictions get publicity and only they will suffice to get the public to meekly cough up Trillions in penance for using energy.

If climate warming were not a scam, then there would have been far more severe measures taken to reduce CO2, or the money would go directly towards offsetting the affects of global warming. But instead we tax CO2 and it ends up in the pockets of the top 1%. The monied elite, who do not spend it reducing CO2: they use it to buy luxury cars, or private jets or generally produce excessive CO2 emissions. That to me, is the classic indicator of a scam.

It's all about the money...

When it comes to mass immigration, there is a reason and it not about changing Western culture, multiculturalism or any of that ideological claptrap.

We all know that modern Western countries have a more enlightened view on birth control than the religious fanatics. So over the years, Western populations have been declining. With a declining population big corporations lose consumers. But this conflicts with shareholders who demand bigger profits and dividends year on year.

Ah, you say: why don't the corporations set up shop in those countries where the immigrants are before they come here and sell stuff to them there? That's a nice idea, but corporations would be setting up shop on bare earth: they would have to set up infrastructure (most of these countries don't even have roads) and building all of that infrastructure affects profits. Just import the population to the West where there is an already established infrastructure. Plus there's big money top be made trafficking people which is a net profit, as opposed to the losses to be made trying to build up from the arid dust of Africa.

As a quick aside, to indicate the difference between the Western elite's short-term money-grabbing and Eastern long-term thinking is the "Belt and Road" philosophy of the Chinese, where they are investing their profits in creating that very infrastructure in Africa. Winning hearts and minds and political influence, thereby controlling the supply of raw materials from African mines. I predict a clash between the West and the East over African influence in the distant future. Once the Chinese have built the infrastructure, the Western conglomerates will try and move in to make an easy buck. I doubt the Chinese will allow the West to exploit their hard work and money spent without a fight.

Corporations look at the declining Western population and understand that means reduced profits.
So what do they do? Create an atmosphere that permits mass immigration, especially of high-birthrate communities. As long as the immigrants buy products, that’s all good, the balance is restored and profits can continue to rise. They’re not illegals, they’re not Muslims, they’re not extremists…. they’re consumers.

In fact if you change "consumers" for the word "human", then that's almost word for word what the left are saying, or the people in the refugee camps or the jungle in France. Oh, these people are not  illegals, they’re not Muslims, they’re not extremists…. they’re humans.

I love that the far-left (Corbynites in the UK and the squad in the USA) think that they’re so anti-capitalist and leftist, when actually by pushing mass immigration and open borders they’re working for the big corporations.

I used to wonder how governments could continue to import a community and ideology that would effectively wipe them out. Then I came to realise, it’s not governments: it’s those that control and influence governments; the monied elite that are pushing this strategy.

They need an increasing population in order to increase corporate profits and dividends.

It's all about the money...

Now on to grooming gangs and the apparent protection that is afforded the Muslim faith. No other faith gets the same level of protection from policy-makers and Government.

Calling out a faith or religion for evil doings is not racist. But if you criticise the Muslim faith you are instantly branded racist. So why is that? And why is it that Muslim countries can build Mosques here and import their abhorrent extremist brand of Islam into our country unopposed? Why is it the Muslim faith above all has so much protection?

Money. The Gulf States have a pretty large percentage of their oil wealth invested in Western countries. Whether it' in the stock market, ownership of our container ports, investment in our universities or arms sales, some 20% of our economy is Gulf State Oil money.

If that money were to disappear we would be plunged into an overnight recession.

The price we pay for not being plunged into recession is subservience to Islam in our own Christian country. This is where the multicultural ideology has grown, where minority religious and ethnic groups have been given equal or even preferred status in a majority Christian country.

We have a financial gun to our head.

In fact even if you don't believe me, there is more evidence. Traditionally the Jewish community have been the money-lenders and money-makers of the world. They used to get the same protected treatment. But have you noticed how over the past decade the Jewish community and Israel in particular have not got the special status they once had? That's because Muslim money has overtaken Jewish money in the war for control. In Europe certainly, in America not quite as much. Yet. Hence the exodus of Jews from European countries that have a significant minority Muslim population to Israel.

It's all about the money... over and over.

I've just highlighted these three areas where money is talking and having a direct effect on political policy and Western society. Where the monied elites are taking Western Society to the detriment of that very society.

Back in Victorian times there was a more beneficial mindset amongst the elite. They worked to bolster Western society and our religious and societal values. But that has changed dramatically as money and therefore influence has moved away from Western control..

I’m still trying to understand where the new "war on plastic" fits into the money-making strategy. I suspect it’s to do with third-world countries refusing to deal with our trash for peanuts and affecting the bottom line… So back to recyclables. Useless paper straws, stinky terry nappies and mooncups.

The war on plastic has the look and smell of another elitist scam to grab even more money.

Then maybe in 30 year’s time when we have plastic-less solutions there will be a whole new set of consumables to make money off.

But I'm sure there is an elitist money-scam in the offing. It just has that vibe.

I'm not religious, but I know there are quite a few people in the USA that read this blog and there are a lot of religious people in the US. In a Christian context, Jesus warned about the money men in the temple. We still have to be wary of them. The bible does say money is the root of all evil...

So it seems, 2000 years later.

Huge Gains for Swedish Nationalists: We all Know Why

It looks like the Swedish nationalists have made significant gains in the latest elections.

So much for Sweden being a beacon of light and multicultural peace as European leaders keep telling us. Instead the voters there are so fed up with the issues raised by mass immigration the incumbent parties are losing huge percentages to nationalists.

But those of us at the bottom of the pile, forced to suffer the indignities of the muticultural mass-immigration experiment know only too well why these nationalist feelings have come to the fore.

Of course the many stories about immigrants and rapes of femaales, the inability of people to feel safe on the streets are false.  yeah, that's why the nationalists are increasing in popularity.

Let me be clear: this is not a far-right phenomenon.

No, this is ordinary people fed up with the political elite ignoring our complaints about "multiculturalism" and the elites trying to cover up the falout that ordinary people are having to suffer.

As an example, there have been two stabbing incidents in France involving Muslims. Anything on the BBC News website about them?

Nope. Not one iota of information about a serious security issue.

Here's the first: Paris stabbing: Two UK tourists among seven injured in knife attack outside cinema

Considering two UK tourists were injured, you'd think it would be more newsworthy than who Boris Johnson is nobbing. But not a squeak on the BBC News front page. Instead hidden on the world news page without even a picture headline there it lies. It's almost as if someone wants the story to die quickly...

But wait, there was a second stabbing where a postman was stabbed in the throat, hours after the other by an Afghani national:

Man 'stabs postman in the throat and attacks others before police Taser him in Paris' - hours after 'Afghan' knifeman wounded seven people the French capital

Not a peep on the BBC website about that one.

It's this hiding of the truth, the downright lies of the elite that everything is ok that the ordinary people are sick of. If the elites won't get a grip of the situation, then the ordinary people will.

Call it populism, nationalism, whatever. The people will be heard and they will have their say.

UPDATE: I see the Spectator is hailing the fact the Nationalists didn't win, but going up from 12% to 18% is still a gain, to almost half of the vote the two major parties got. They got almost 40% each, so almost 20% is stil a significant block of votes to have to deal with.

Enjoy it Sweeden...

Immigrants DO take all the Jobs.

Thanks to The Ranting Penguin for flagging up this interesting nugget revealed by a FOI request.

The statistics show that 106% of the private sector jobs created between 1997 and 2007 were taken by immigrants. So, not only did immigrants take all the new jobs, but some of the existing jobs too. I don't quite know how the figures work, but Fraser Nelson in his article promises to put all the data online. It will be interesting to scrutinise it in some detail.

Whether the 106% figure is credible, it does prove something that ordinary citizens at the bottom of the employment queue have known for some time: immigrants are taking a large majority of jobs, to the exclusion of UK-born workers.

Following on from this, needs to be some investigation of why employers prefer immigrant labour to home-grown. Is it that they are better educated, or is it something else? I know there is an element of the underclass that are considered feckless and workshy, but that's not the case with all UK workers. So just what is it that stops UK employers taking on a majority of UK workers?

I've seen the trend myself: I'm still unemployed after 18 months of looking for jobs. I've done a couple of very temporary jobs, but nothing substantial has materialised.

I'm beginning to wonder if this is isn't a reaction to the current job market trend. It seems pretty clear that the full-time, long-term job market has collapsed and that the majority of places out in the real world are short-term, temporary jobs. Those people on benefits would like to take up those jobs, especially if they pay more than jobseekers, or income support, but there's a trap: if you come off benefit, it takes weeks to get back onto it. So taking a one or two week temporary job means losing income for a further 6 weeks or so after that. With a raft of associated form filling as they re-apply to a succession of different agencies for jobseekers, council tax benefit, housing benefit, etc. People don't realise, but each benefit needs to be applied for seperately to a seperate government agency, each time necessitating the filling in of a 50-page booklet (thanks to New Labour's statist control-freakery needing to know everything about the applicant). Its no wonder that people are reluctant to take on such work if they are penalised for doing it: the risk involved in moving from benefit into work is too high. A phrase I used to hear when buying a house, or a car was "cost to change". Well, the cost to change from welfare to work for those in the system is currently way too high.

Enter the immigrant worker, who works outside of the benefit system. He lives in an overcrowded rented house, so that his living expenses are low. He will work for as short a period as necessary, for as low a wage as necessary, as he doesn't care about the minimum wage. He is outside the system, and is therefore flexible about working practices. Thats why he gets the job.

This is an area where the benefits system needs to move from the nineties into the new milennia. It needs to change in order to allow workers the flexibility to take on these temporary roles. It needs to allow them to keep that money they earn, and then go seamlessly straight back onto jobseekers, continue to receive tax credits, housing benefit, and council tax benefit without penalty. It also needs to acknowledge that it's a disgrace that people earning the minimum wage are taxed. People earning the legal minimum wage should not be taxed. The threshold for tax should be set at the minimum wage, plus a small amount, so that the amount of paperwork is minimal and there is no disincentive to drop in and out of work as required.

A seamless approach is the only way to incentivise people at the low-paid end of the spectrum back into work. The current system disincentivises people from getting back into work, because there is too much risk. The amount of risk and cost involved in changing from welfare to work needs to be significantly reduced as a priority in order to get people back into work.

This is where I am: fit, able and willing to work, but getting nowhere fast. I'm understanding rapidly that the minimum wage is a luxury, but is something I may get penalised for if I take on a role paying less and the authorities find out. I get no jobseekers, nor housing benefit, nor council tax benefit, because my wife and daughter work. Despite my wife not earning enough to pay the rent, let alone other bills. Despite my daughter moving back into the home because her debts piled up until she couldn't sustain their payment.
My life is constantly worrying about which bailiff's letter to acknowledge and pay first, paid by loans from parents that kill me every time I take them. I'm 46 and should be standing on my own 2 feet, but the system doesn't allow it, because I MUST comply with their rules and regulations. I'm regularly suicidal, because what's the point in living in this situation. I had pride, I had good jobs and a career, but New Labour's promises of help for those that needed it didn't materialise when it came to providing services for my autistic son. Now sometimes I think it'd be better if I went for a long swim and didn't come back.
I spit at those in authority and those that enforce it, because I know what the want: they want me to be dependant on them for everything and they want me to be beholden to them if I earn money.
Its a national disgrace and someone, somewhere should put a stop to it. But finding the who is an impossibility in a political system that doesn't give two shits to those like me at the bottom of the pile. We are statistics, to be pushed, progressed, oppressed, manipulated and promoted for political gain. I am the underclass.

UPDATE:

Fraser Nelson puts more meat on the bones of his original article here.