youreavinalaff

You appear to have got lost with all your twisting and turning. My original post was in response to the above. Below is what you could have written to better explain your experiences: In some places I've been to in UK I you literally risk getting mugged or beaten up by local youths hanging around or simply in need of cash at all hours. . You can walk into some pubs, look at someone in the wrong way and get beaten senseless although that has never actually happened to me nor have i ever witnessed it. Never get that where I've been in Isaan.

You are doing it again. "In the UK" then giving certain areas of London as the only example.

All I said, please do look back at my comments, is that SOME areas and SOME pubs in UK are like you said. Look at your first post. No mention of "some" or " isolated". Likewise I said SOME areas of Isaan have a threat. Unless you have visited every corner of Isaan, that is something you cannot argue with. I've been to Specsavers. It seems you have not. Get some glasses, reread my posts and you will see several things you've accused me of saying that I have not said.

There are elements of undesirability about some of the residents in some of the villages. Speaking from experience. Maybe its changed since I was last there.

The questions were regarding an expired passport. I have answered correctly.

Because they generally don't want to work. Don't need to work.

That doesn't make your comment with regards to UK correct.

No. No. No.

I have. Doesn't make your comment any more correct.

Who said anything about hereditary? Second in line is just that. It's either "nearly there" or it isn't.

I have answered.

As I said, I'm not being pedantic. Andrew never has been "nearly king".

So, every Speaker of the Senate has nearly been President. No. They haven't.

That doesn't make hom "nearly king"

Employment based or what she has contributed for, yes.

Not pedantic. Realistic. Relying on the death of your mother and older brother to achieve something is far far from nearly achieving it.

To break a contract one must go against that contract. By law, Thai contracts have a notice period, for both parties. If that notice period is adhered to, the contract had been followed, not broken. Judging by your last paragraph, you don't seem to care either.

So, 40% of Muslims claiming state support is hardly a drain on the economy. Especially as much of it is employment based.

Immigrants working lower paid jobs do not get paid less. They are subject to national living wage. Also they have to earn enough to satisfy visa requirements.

Giving notice is not breaking a contract. As for how many serious matters, the OP did not say.

Employment based benefits. Proton is suggesting they are not contributing to the economy. Receiving employment based state support suggests they have been and likely still are. What percentage of all UK citizens would 40% of Mudlims be? My guess would be around 10%.

5555. That's funny. You've added figures together for effect. Those figures also include state pension. That is employment based. Meaning they have been working and paying dues, if on full pension, for 37 years.

Net migration is well under 1 million. Why use figures you can support? Anyhow, if there were not any immigrants working in UK, a very large percentage of care homes would be grossly understaffed or closed down due to lack of staff. Many people in need of domiciliary care would not get it.

The claim was "most immigrants" are on benefits. Also, the Government statistics show "state support" in their figures showing ethnic claimants. That includes government pension, which is not really a benefit as its been paid for. I would imagine the figures would be quite different if pensions were not included. Give it 10 or so years it will change a lot too as second generation UK citizens become pensionable age.

He completed "most" and ended "some". Not sure where you get "several" from. He also adhered to the contract by giving correct notice for serious matters. He seems to be taking contracts seriously.