Thaiwine

^^ your last five words is why I am worried and my grandkids too.

Opps reply to post #1386

Apologies to nontabury for only copy and pasting part of his post at #1306 it deals with my comment

Quote "I did not gloss over your reasoning for the rise in the Muslim population in 1961 from 50,000 ( not 60,000 as I previously wrote ) to the present number of over 3,000,000. You are correct in pointing out the Muslim community does have a higher birth rate, for instance Pakistani born mother in the UK have on average 4.7 children, as apposed to a figure of 1.6 for the Whole of the British population. They also have a much youngest age profile. However this does not explain why their numbers increased from 1,600,000 on the 2001 census to 2,800,000 on the 2011 census. This was due in no small part to uncontrolled immigration,mainly in the form of the EU's open border policy." Quote

By my calculations we have:

In 1960 we have 50,000 people half male half female, so there are 25,000 couples, over 10 years they will have on average 5 children per couple.

So by 1970 we have 25,000 x 5 = 125,000 children half male half female plus the original 50,000 making 175,000 people

I give 20 years for the new children to mature,

So in 1990 we now have 67,000 new couples, they have 5 children per couple, so 335,000 new children now making 510,000 people.

So in 2010 we now have 167,500 new couples, they have 5 children per couple, so 837,500 new children now making 1,347,500 people

The next set of figures would be due in 2030, so in 50 years our 50,000 people became 1,347,500

Given that I have worked on 5 not 4.7 and not allowed for deaths the number is about one third of the three million.

What you miss from your calculation is that the original number of 50,000 is not static, it keeps getting added to each year by some percentage o new immigrants, 5% or 10% wouldn't be a bad number. As a result the calculation has to be performed again each year on the additional 5% and added to the total and that is not an insignificant amount, after seven years it represents an increase of 50% over the starting volume. On that basis, 3 million is easily achievable, even allowing for deaths.

If each couple have 5 children, you cannot keep adding more children in the following calculations for these same couples.

Of course all employees should be thoroughly vetted, and the last condition for employment should be to eat a bacon sandwich daily,

Hmm yummy.

Apologies to nontabury for only copy and pasting part of his post at #1306 it deals with my comment

Quote "I did not gloss over your reasoning for the rise in the Muslim population in 1961 from 50,000 ( not 60,000 as I previously wrote ) to the present number of over 3,000,000. You are correct in pointing out the Muslim community does have a higher birth rate, for instance Pakistani born mother in the UK have on average 4.7 children, as apposed to a figure of 1.6 for the Whole of the British population. They also have a much youngest age profile. However this does not explain why their numbers increased from 1,600,000 on the 2001 census to 2,800,000 on the 2011 census. This was due in no small part to uncontrolled immigration,mainly in the form of the EU's open border policy." Quote

By my calculations we have:

In 1960 we have 50,000 people half male half female, so there are 25,000 couples, over 10 years they will have on average 5 children per couple.

So by 1970 we have 25,000 x 5 = 125,000 children half male half female plus the original 50,000 making 175,000 people

I give 20 years for the new children to mature,

So in 1990 we now have 67,000 new couples, they have 5 children per couple, so 335,000 new children now making 510,000 people.

So in 2010 we now have 167,500 new couples, they have 5 children per couple, so 837,500 new children now making 1,347,500 people

The next set of figures would be due in 2030, so in 50 years our 50,000 people became 1,347,500

Given that I have worked on 5 not 4.7 and not allowed for deaths the number is about one third of the three million.

DC keeps going on about "but we have a veto"

But I have never heard him say it would be used

There seems to me to be a diffrence, even a con in there.

If one wants more of the same vote remain

If one wants change vote exit, IMO no change will come via remain

To do neither shows apathy.

Sadam was playing poker with the west, he lost.

Omar wouldn't give up bin laden so we had to go get him.

When someone hits you you're going to hit back.

Libya was part of the arab spring, as is most of what's happening in the middle east. arab on arab, civil war

Intergration takes generations, if it happens at all.

Wrong! Christianity no where mandates violence

Yes yes...those peace loving christians have no references to inciting violence in their little book called the Bible

The Bible is filled with refernces to insite violence, kill/maim people and commit genocide, your just as blind as the the muslim extremist

You clearly have no understanding of Christianity. Christianity is defined by the New Testament - not the Old. All the verses you quoted are from the Old Testament.

Jesus taught a doctrine of complete non-violence. For example, "But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also" (Matthew 5:39).

There is not a single verse in the New Testament that incites violence, maiming, murder or genocide.

Until you have even a modicum of understanding about Christianity I humbly suggest you refrain from commenting on it from a position of ignorance and bigotry.

It appears your speaking for all Christians, the same way radical muslims speak on behalf of all muslims ?

Lets look at some proven facts to support Christians are "nonviolent", this is not a fully incluesive list as the violence committed in the name of christ is that extensive starting in 315 right through to the 20th century

315 to 6th century - thousands of pagans killed

782 - 4500 Saxons killed

1234 - 11000 men women an children killed for not paying church tax

1099 - 60000 killed in jerusalum

Battle of Askalon 200,000 "heathens" killed by followers of Christ

Estimates from all the crusades put the number of deaths at christian hands at 20 million, jews, muslims and anyone else who wasnt a follower of christ

And lets not get into the carnage the christians caused among the native peoples in many countries and continents

Yes those followers of Christ are so non violent and peace loving and turn the othet cheek !

I've just read the Battle of Askalon, losses were 10 to 12,000

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ascalon

The Fatimids were led by vizier al-Afdal Shahanshah, who commanded perhaps as many as 50,000 troops (other estimates range from 20–30,000 to the exaggerated 200,000 of the Gesta Francorum). His army consisted of Seljuk Turks, Arabs, Persians, Armenians, Kurds, and Ethiopians. He was intending to besiege the crusaders in Jerusalem,

Some returned so not all died.

Your post doesn't add up to me, so you went to America and found that their pay as you go health care was better than the NHS, then you went to Asia Middle east and China and found out life was better there, so this first hand experience tells you young people will vote out because we got it wrong, as in we worked hard to buy our houses to live in instead of renting, so we blame immigrants because the EU lied to us about we were joining a trading block. ok I'll re read when I'm sober.

I do think the British are Nationalistic but not to a high degree, patriotic yes, but what is it to be British, it takes more than being born here, we have a character that is hard to explain, eccentric, sarcastic, quiet, tolerent, witty, humorous, taking the p out of ourselves and more, these are some of the things that make me proud to be British, apparently it’s in our Genes.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/joking-aside-british-really-do-have-unique-sense-of-humour-793491.html

Ok so if we leave the EU and Scotland leaves the UK to join the EU,

Will we have to rebuild Hadrian’s wall to keep the Europeans out ?

Then there may be tariff’s on whisky, beef and ????

We may of course import all the whisky and beef we want far cheaper

But I hear them say “Ha we have oil”

Ermm I think you will find that it belongs to the people of Europe, like our fish used to.

Have a nice time funding the great EU.

Just curious: If airports were to ban Muslims from working airport security, couldn't a Muslim person just not admit that he's a Muslim? He could say that he used to be a Muslim, but converted. Just saying...

We could probably narrow it down a bit by only employing Caucasian people.

Something i find quite strange is that such a high proportion of TV posters support Brexit and from the comments on here many have significant nationalistic or patriotic reasons for wanting UK to leave. So why are you living in Thailand and not the UK ??

Excellent observation:

Mostly retirees, an Englishman is not at home unless he's abroad (or similar, who wrote that).

The English are not happy unless they are miserable, the Irish are not at peace unless they are at war, and the Scots are not at home unless they are abroad.

George Orwell

IMO if push comes to shove in the divorce we don't need the EU,

Sure it will hurt divorces always do

Few people who divorce regret their choice.

Seems Oxfam is no lover of the EU

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/internationalist-vote-to-leave-eu-referendum-brexit-a7041126.html

Serious Question.

Can anyone tell me with regards to the ‘jungle’ why does France not seem to

1. Establish if the people there have a valid visa to be in France/EU,

2. ask if those without wish to ask for asylum in France,

3. Deport illegal aliens.

I have thought what does remain offer, here are 10 examples of their arguments

1. Maybe we can bring about change in the EU from the inside

2. Maybe we can evade further integration

3. Maybe the world will turn their backs on us

4. Maybe Turkey won't join the EU

5. Maybe the economy will fail.

6. Maybe the pound will plummet

7. Maybe the banks will leave

8. Maybe there will be job losses

9. Maybe the jungle from Callis will move to the UK

10. Maybe we will instigate world war 3

The exit side is a little more positive

1. We can take back our country

2. We can trade with whom ever we wish to

3. We can control our borders

4. We can sack incompetent politicians

5. We can take our place on the WTO

6. We can spend our money on what we choose to

7. We can throw out some of the EU red tape

8. We can fish our own waters again

9. We can Make 100% of our own laws

10. We can take back our sovereignty

So remain have only maybe's

Brexit can do

https://www.facebook.com/UKIP/posts/1143492492339306

Who do I believe Bloomberg, Tusk, or a career politician such as Cameron? or do I trust a politician with conviction,who is consistently being proven correct, as events have unfolded throughout the years.

Don't tell me you're a UKIP fan as well?

I have voted conservative all my voting life, until the last election when I voted UKIP.

The EU has done enough already, what of the rest of the world with these 'immigrants'.

My thought is the answer to that goes back to what/who created the cause of mass fleeing immigrants?

International racial and religious discrimination is being incited and capitilized on for a reason!

IMO the African migrants are a result of greedy people with no empathy who are in govenment in several countries, who will stop at nothing to remain at the trough, they are opposed by more greedy people with no empathy who will stop at nothing to get their turn at the trough, resulting in the population who have little, who see no future for themselves fleeing to the west to obtain a better life.

Then we have Afghanistan refugees from conflict there that was caused by Bin Laden and the Taliban, Then Iraq is the result of British and American aggression, the other conflicts in Arab countries are the result of the Arab spring which destabalised several countries giving ISIS room to move in.

If you look at these countries you can see the people running them have no empathy for their fellow people it's all me me me.

Looking at the passports for the city, I don't understand why the UK is excluded when the rest of the EU is included.

Still looking.

Trade deals sound to me like they are being over played, from what I have seen/ read the trade in goods are about 8% of GDP while this is still a lot of money the other 32% would therefore be in services like banking.

It's worth pointing out that foreign banks resident in the UK are passported to operate within the EU. If however the UK is no longer a member state that passport becomes void and the banks will have to relocate to a member state in order to continue to do business there - the impact of that could be enormous.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/e90885d8-d3db-11e5-829b-8564e7528e54.html

Your link to the FT gives a rather balanced view with as many of the city institution's saying brexit would be good as those saying it would be bad.

I did see that the banking sector is about 10% of our GDP.

My thought has to be that Switzerland in the middle of Europe has a massive banking sector and are doing very well without being in the EU, so your comment sounds to me like another scare story.

Can you give me an unbiased link to where it says the banks will have to relocate.

Edit, ok just reread the link JP Morgan boss was the quote, next paragraph imply's a maybe to his qoute.

BRexit exists only in hallucinations and wet dreams

Unless you are from the UK ( which I doubt) butt out with the ignorant crudities ........

Never had an opinion of another country's affairs John?

I thought Naam's comment was quite funny.

While what Boris said might be oh' so very unPC he is actually correct.

Tell it like it is, thats what people understand information without the spin.