... BECAUSE WE HAVE UN-CONTROLED IMMIGRATION...
No we don't. There are issues around the question of migration, but we do not have "uncontrolled immigration". But let's not allow facts to get in the way of a good rant, eh?
The reason that I made a flippant – actually, it was sarcastic – comment in response to your previous post was because it was stupid. We need immigration – did you know (almost certainly not) – that if it wasn't for ethnic workers, from top to bottom of the NHS, around 300 hospitals would have to close? I suggest you learn something about economics before coming out with such bunkum in future. It'll save you embarrassing yourself.
Oh. And non Romanians do nasty things too. Heaven forfend, but white English people do nasty things – including rape and murder. Perhaps we should stop any white English being born so as to avoid that happening in future, eh? Perhaps we should stop famillies living together at all – after all, the overwhelming majority of child abuse occurs in homes, so if we get rid of homes, we'll cut child abuse.
Easy, isn't it, when you've got nice soundbite answers.
As to capitalism – wow, some people make charitable donations. Good for them. So the poor should rely on charity?
Are we really saying that we can't think of a better way to run the world than via an economic system that relies on gambling (FFS, just look at the world economy at present and the fears over shares etc – it's nothing other than a casino write extremely large) and greed? In the UK, we have the food market so dominated by a small number of supermarkets that they can act as a cartel and set the price of milk paid to the farmers – they've effectively driven many farmers to the wall simply because the multi-million pound profits that they're already making aren't enough and they want more. That is nothing other than greed and it is directly related to a system that thrives on greed, that is (at least in any incarnation we've seen) extremely short-termist and doesn't give a toss how many people it throws on the scrapheap.
I lived through both recessions in the UK in the 1980s – I happen to know what it's like to be thrown out of work and to lose a home because, as one government minister said at the time: "unemployment is a price worth paying". You can bet that fat bastard wasn't unemployed. All those in pit villages and steel towns whose entire communities were decimated by deliberate government policy know that Thatcherism/Reaganomics did not decrease the gap between rich and poor – it widened it. So-called "
'trickledown economics' never managed any trickle down. The 'system' that currently exists pits ordinary worker and against ordinary worker; it takes jobs from one group of people and goes somewhere where it can give jobs to people who will work for less.
Government economic policies on both sides of the Atlantic, based on the theories of Milton Friedman, did nothing but increase wealth for a very small percentage of people at the expense of others. It was about greed and about individualism, not community, not community responsibility or society. The current UK government is little better, with the gap between rich and poor widening still further.
The market does not solve everything in society. All it means is that when your child needs health care, that health care will ultimately be decided on the basis of the profit demands of health company shareholders – profit before people. Where is the morality of that?
The prison system here is going the same way – profit before people, before justice.
Welcome
to BookAndReader! 
you sound like claybugg.
