International News Immigration

Wandering Yellow said:
The immigration debate seems so toxic in the USA and the UK in a way it doesn't seem to be in many countries around the world. It makes the Israel-Palestine debate seem cordial at times.
Click to expand...

Just to put some numbers on it - the UK had 29,437 people cross the Channel in small boats in 2023. It was about 6,000 people through the first quarter of this year so on course for a similar number.

The US had 2.5 million illegal immigrant apprehensions at its Southwestern border last year. That's how many people were caught/turned themselves in to the Border Patrol. Estimates suggest maybe 6-700k or so entered the country undetected (the US-Mexico border is 1,954 miles long.....or more than three times the distance from Lands End to John O Groats, so it's not the easiest thing to police!).

So 100x the number of illegal immigrants into a country with about 5x the population.

This is partly why I have so little patience for this small boats wailing and gnashing of teeth.
The US has a genuine problem.
The UK has a situation that ought to be easily manageable by an even semi-competent and properly resourced immigration service; but rather than provide that, the government would rather turn it into a hot button issue because it might win them a few votes from idiots.
 
tonyw said:
Just to put some numbers on it - the UK had 29,437 people cross the Channel in small boats in 2023. It was about 6,000 people through the first quarter of this year so on course for a similar number.

The US had 2.5 million illegal immigrant apprehensions at its Southwestern border last year. That's how many people were caught/turned themselves in to the Border Patrol. Estimates suggest maybe 6-700k or so entered the country undetected (the US-Mexico border is 1,954 miles long.....or more than three times the distance from Lands End to John O Groats, so it's not the easiest thing to police!).

So 100x the number of illegal immigrants into a country with about 5x the population.

This is partly why I have so little patience for this small boats wailing and gnashing of teeth.
The US has a genuine problem.
The UK has a situation that ought to be easily manageable by an even semi-competent and properly resourced immigration service; but rather than provide that, the government would rather turn it into a hot button issue because it might win them a few votes from idiots.
Click to expand...
Not checked but isn’t the land mass of the USA almost 40 times larger than the UK ?
There are also in excess of 10 states bigger than the whole of the UK.
Agree though that there should be a legal route and application system .
 
LowerSouth said:
Not checked but isn’t the land mass of the USA almost 40 times larger than the UK ?
There are also in excess of 10 states bigger than the whole of the UK.
Click to expand...
Whilst this is undoubtedly somewhere near true, empty land mass doesn't generate money and infrastructure on its own, you need population to do that. The argument of space has always been flawed, the comparison to population, or GDP, is a better one (in my opinion)
 
LowerSouth said:
Not checked but isn’t the land mass of the USA almost 40 times larger than the UK ?
There are also in excess of 10 states bigger than the whole of the UK.
Agree though that there should be a legal route and application system .
Click to expand...

I knew someone would make this point!

It is - but have you ever driven across the US? Or indeed traveled around anywhere West of the Mississippi?

If not, you should because it is an extraordinarily beautiful and awe-inspiring part of the world.

But you also realize that great swathes of the middle of the country are given over to agriculture on a scale that is almost unfathomable to anyone in Europe; and most of the west of the country is just wilderness. For example, both Nevada and Wyoming are bigger than the UK. The vast majority of both states is entirely uninhabited. And that's not even bringing in Alaska, which is a level of wild all to itself.

Just because there is physical space, doesn't mean someone can actually live there!

Which is why immigrant/population is a much more useful statistic than immigrant/square mile.

(but even if you use immigrant/square mile......that still means that the US has 2.5x as many illegals as Britain!)
 
SteMerritt said:
Whilst this is undoubtedly somewhere near true, empty land mass doesn't generate money and infrastructure on its own, you need population to do that. The argument of space has always been flawed, the comparison to population, or GDP, is a better one (in my opinion)
Click to expand...

UK - 720 people per sq mile. 67 million folk. GDP 2.274 Trillion £

USofA - 91 people per sq mile. 333 million folk. GDP 27.36 Trillion $

This little rock will fill up quickly but nobody talks about population control because capitalism says you can`t...........
 
Essexyellows said:
UK - 720 people per sq mile. 67 million folk. GDP 2.274 Trillion £

USofA - 91 people per sq mile. 333 million folk. GDP 27.36 Trillion $

This little rock will fill up quickly but nobody talks about population control because capitalism says you can`t...........
Click to expand...
Rwanda -1,217 ppl per sq m
GDP - $42,346 billion

Kind of destroys your point doesn't it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom