No limits to immigration

[Limehouse]

Just as a matter of interest, Limehouse, what's the thinking behind this?

Having a seatbelt on surely wouldn't restrict his plying for hire would it?

Hi Stephen

My husband tells me it's to do with the need to frequently leave the cab to assist passengers with luggage and to help passengers in wheelchairs etc. The cab lobby was very strong back in the days when they passed the seatbelt law and cabbies managed to get the same exemption given to the emergency services.

[TomTomKent]

Hi Glyn,

Like it or not, the fact is that without "unelected pressure groups", from the Peasants Revolt to the Chartists to the Suffragettes et al, we would still be living in country of such inequalities that neither you nor I nor 90% of the population would even have the right to vote, not unless you happen to own, say, half of Essex!!!

Best wishes,

Zodiac.

Nope, because with out pressure groups the parliment would still be unelected and selected by the king, with the pure reason for giving him money to fund wars. You would have the privalege to say aye or nay, not a right.

Good point though.

[Robert]

"One, Sikhs are not a race, it's a religion."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8535141.stm

[glyn]

sorry Glyn you've lost me now. What is the point? What does the Sikh religion have to do with immigration? And what does their exemption from the helmet regulation have to do with immigration?

If you scrolled back you would find a discussion started by someone else who mentioned this issue to highlight the "one lawfor me-one law for them"I believe you were involved in that same discussion,so unless you have the concentration span of a centipede,Ill be charitable and say that you just couldnt keep up.
My post regarding same issue,was made in reply to someone else who ,in turn had replied to the original post.Try not to be so transparent,if you need to confuse issues,why not just say you havent been here to post for a month or something,it would be in character.
As usual Tom tries to introduce side issues into the mix to try and hide the fact that he has no answer.
You really are a strange trio.,you have nothing to say,yet take all day to say it.With the benefit of hindsight,Im begginning to understand now, why not very many people can be bothered to dicuss things with you three.I only do it because Im testing out the theory "If you stick 100 monkeys in a room with a grand piano each, and leave them there long enough,sooner or later one monkey ,by pure chance will play the William Tell overture" or in your cases say something sensible.It seems that theory will have to be discarded,the experiment was a failure.

[glyn]

"One, Sikhs are not a race, it's a religion."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8535141.stm

Oh Oh Robert ,you shouldnt have said that..prepare to hunker in thy bunker.....the abuse will arrive soon.

[Zodiac]

Nope, because with out pressure groups the parliment would still be unelected and selected by the king, with the pure reason for giving him money to fund wars. You would have the privalege to say aye or nay, not a right.

Good point though.

Hi Tom,

I wasn't going to get into the whole Simon de Montfort/The Barons' Wars thing, let alone Magna Carta!!! Personally I've always found Chainmail to be heavy, uncomfortably and the cause of much painful chafing!!!

Best wishes,

Zodiac.

[babybird67]

"One, Sikhs are not a race, it's a religion."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8535141.stm

Hi Robert

Sikhism[note 1] ( /ˈsiːkɨzəm/ or /ˈsɪkɨzəm/; Punjabi: ਸਿੱਖੀ, sikkhī, IPA: [ˈsɪkːʰiː]) is a monotheistic religion founded in fifteenth century Punjab, India on the teachings of Guru Nanak Dev Ji and ten successive Sikh Gurus (the last teaching being the sacred text Guru Granth Sahib Ji).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikhism

Your link also demonstrates my point, in that the ONS has decided the section on religion covers the definition of Sikhism, and that is it not a matter of ethnicity.

[babybird67]

If you scrolled back you would find a discussion started by someone else who mentioned this issue to highlight the "one lawfor me-one law for them"

Ah right so if one person is ignorant you feel obliged to continue the ignorance? Oh fine. You fail yet again to distinguish what 'them' refers to, because Sikhism is not a race, it is a religion. It therefore has nothing to do with immigration.

I believe you were involved in that same discussion,so unless you have the concentration span of a centipede,Ill be charitable and say that you just couldnt keep up.

I can outrun you any day, however I like to challenge ignorance wherever it appears.

My post regarding same issue,was made in reply to someone else who ,in turn had replied to the original post.Try not to be so transparent,if you need to confuse issues,why not just say you havent been here to post for a month or something,it would be in character.

I can't decipher the point of this garbled mess so unless you can make it clearer you'll have to whistle for an answer to it.

As usual Tom tries to introduce side issues into the mix to try and hide the fact that he has no answer.

As usual, Tom makes excellent points supported by data and you talk absolute rubbish.

You really are a strange trio.,you have nothing to say,yet take all day to say it

Oh you've demoted us to a trio now? Oh dear. Poor Ally will feel excluded. Some of us work all day to pay taxes so we aren't here 24/7.

.With the benefit of hindsight,Im begginning to understand now, why not very many people can be bothered to dicuss things with you three.

How long have you been here? How many posts have you made? What qualifies you to make such pronouncements?

I only do it because Im testing out the theory "If you stick 100 monkeys in a room with a grand piano each, and leave them there long enough,sooner or later one monkey ,by pure chance will play the William Tell overture" or in your cases say something sensible.It seems that theory will have to be discarded,the experiment was a failure.

Maybe but I think the monkeys would have a better grasp of grammar and punctuation (and maths) than you do.

[glyn]

Absolutely nothing Jen.

I know at least ten Sikhs - they are all British and none of them rides a motorcycle.

So what has the seat belt law for cabbies got to do with immigration? I thought Id beat Birds 2 to the question.


Really ? my my my,10 Sikhs?Well that leaves 365,990 that either do ,or might.Hmmm. How fascinating!I can beat that! I know a pole who doesnt send child benefits cash back to Poland.So there!

[glyn]

Ah right so if one person is ignorant you feel obliged to continue the ignorance? Oh fine. You fail yet again to distinguish what 'them' refers to, because Sikhism is not a race, it is a religion. It therefore has nothing to do with immigration.



I can outrun you any day, however I like to challenge ignorance wherever it appears.



I can't decipher the point of this garbled mess so unless you can make it clearer you'll have to whistle for an answer to it.



As usual, Tom makes excellent points supported by data and you talk absolute rubbish.



Oh you've demoted us to a trio now? Oh dear. Poor Ally will feel excluded. Some of us work all day to pay taxes so we aren't here 24/7.



How long have you been here? How many posts have you made? What qualifies you to make such pronouncements?



Maybe but I think the monkeys would have a better grasp of grammar and punctuation (and maths) than you do.

Classic tactics..usual method..the maxim is "when youve lost the argument and have bugger all else to say-criticise punctuation,capitilisation,spelling etc ".....can you not think of anything original?

[Robert]

Hi Babybird

According to the Sikh bloke, UK law recognizes Sikhs as a race. Now I don't know for sure if that's true, but it seems borne out by the ONS comments which make it clear that their absence from the ethnic section is for reasons of space. I think if you read the last two or three paragraphs, then that's apparent.

"Deputy census director Peter Benton: "Given the constraints in the questionnaire size and layout we can't put more than one tick box in for a particular ethnic or racial group.

"We have chosen to put it in the religion question as that gives the best quality data." "

In other words, they could have put it in the ethnic section but chose instead to put it in the religious section.

Of course you can argue that UK law is wrong to recognize Sikhs as a race, because you think they're not a race. I guess that's something you'd have to take up with the Government and with the Sikh bloke.

[glyn]

Hi Babybird

According to the Sikh bloke, UK law recognizes Sikhs as a race. Now I don't know for sure if that's true, but it seems borne out by the ONS comments which make it clear that their absence from the ethnic section is for reasons of space. I think if you read the last two or three paragraphs, then that's apparent.

"Deputy census director Peter Benton: "Given the constraints in the questionnaire size and layout we can't put more than one tick box in for a particular ethnic or racial group.

"We have chosen to put it in the religion question as that gives the best quality data." "

In other words, they could have put it in the ethnic section but chose instead to put it in the religious section.

Of course you can argue that UK law is wrong to recognize Sikhs as a race, because you think they're not a race. I guess that's something you'd have to take up with the Government and with the Sikh bloke.

You are wasting your time Robert with that half wit.

[babybird67]

hi Robert

thanks for your reply.

I don't think Sikhs can be described as a race. You can be an Asian Sikh, a British Sikh, etc. Race is a matter of where you are born. Religion is a matter of belief. Presumably you or I could elect to convert to Sikhism if we so wished. It would have nothing to do with our country of origin.

I can see a motive for the 'Sikh bloke in campaigning to get it recognised as a race...(then being able to perhaps appeal to laws based on racial equality). It doesn't make it true.

Also, the space would have been the same whether the ONS chose to classify as a religion or a race, so space isn't the issue as such.

[HelenaWojtczak]

Race is a matter of where you are born

Sorry Baby that's not the case. An example - all the children of the eastern European Jews that were born in the UK in the late 1800s were still of the Jewish race even though they were born in the East End.

Helena

[babybird67]

Glyn

You are wasting your time Robert with that half wit.

Admin recently posted a note to ask contributors to read the Major Rules and consequences. Stated within them is this:

The Report Post button is a white triangle with a red border and an exclamation mark inside and is located in the top right hand corner of each post. When you report the post, please reference the specific Rule that the poster has violated. We ask that you do this because we often get Report Posts that say "this post was rude". Rude is not necessarily against the rules of the forums. However, some rude posts are also off-topic. It is the off-topic part that is of interest to us. If a post contains nothing but rude insults to a specific poster, that is off-topic and against the rules.

You might find yourself on the wrong side of the rules again there.