David Craig, on August 26th, 2015Our rulers – Jackbooted Mrs Merkel and her poodle Hollande – have demanded that all European countries take their “fair share” of the (mainly M*sl*m) migrant hordes over-running Europe’s apparently unguarded borders.
But how do you decide what a “fair share” is? Merkel and her lapdog will probably try to link the number of migrants to each country’s GDP as that will ensure Britain gets landed with most of the flood of human excrement pouring into Europe.
But I’ve got a better idea. Why not link the number of refugees each country takes to its population density?
Not only that, but I’ve even worked out the numbers for Merkel and her balding, French arselicker-in-chief.
Here’s how I’ve done it. I’ve started with Europe’s most densely populated country – England. England’s population density is 413 people per square kilometre (413 ppl/km2). Then I’ve worked out how many refugees the main European countries could take for them to reach the same population density as Europe’s most densely populated country – England (see table below)
This shows that to reach the same population density as England (413 ppl/km2), Germany could take 67 million migrants, France could accommodate a whopping 160 million and Spain and even larger 161 million. And our close neighbours in Scotland have room for over 25 million! That should please socialist Sturgeon.
In all, just �the thirteen European countries (on my table above) could accommodate more than 680 million migrants before reaching the same population density as England.
Well. That seems to solve the problem of deciding how countries should take their “fair share”� of the migrant swarm. So, using my calculations, there’s no need for Europe’s most densely populated country – England – to take any migrants at all and our friends in these thirteen countries can comfortably absorb over 680 million migrants.
That seems to me to be giving each country the “fair share” that Merkel and her skid mark Hollande demand!
It’s pity that *sl*mo-Dave has neither the brains to think up such a solution nor the balls to protect our national interests by standing up to Merkel and her used wet-wipe Hollande.
England is �full! Let the migrant deluge go somewhere else!
(If you haven’t read yesterday’s blog, please do. It’s short and it’s probably one of the most important I’ve ever written)
Category: 
this is the best and most logical solution i have read. Cameron has no regard for the interests of our Country and the biggest financial backers of the Conservative party are land developers who put out propaganda showing we have plenty of land to build on. As for the Labor Party and the Greens they are motivated by hatred of England. They want it concreted over . As the countryside is the spirit of England.
Population?
53million seems a tad optimistic http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/comment/city-eye-facts-on-a-plate-our-population-is-at-least-77-million-395428.html
Great post! Logical, factual, unemotional.
A perfect solution and the so logical too.It’s obvious that the bigger countries should take more especially when they’re talking about us taking ever more people.
Not the most factual, random populations and a random selection of european countries (no wales or northern ireland). But good concept.
Got nowt to do with numbers and more to do with a plan – The Coudenhove-Kalergi plan � The genocide of the Peoples of Europe (google it) we are an endangered species – the Greens should be out there saving us but no they have bought in on it aswell
Sounds fair BUT once these people are allocated to a Country they will still have the ‘right’ to move about within the EU. Guess where they will want to come in vast numbers , as long as our ridiculous Benefits System is open to all and sundry we will not be any better off.
This is the perfect solution, but wait for it, the other countries will suddenly say they “aren’t equipped” to take such a large number, but still expect England to take ever more
“England is full! Let the migrant deluge go somewhere else!”
We are talking human beings seeking refuge, you insensitive piece of crap. How dare you use these pages in such a vile way?
You make me ashamed to be British.
Belgium has 11.2 million people
Love the descriptions of minimus hollande!
Dear David
I lecture on the future of transfusion services in the UK. I have lived in England for 20 years. May I remind you that Scotland voted NO in its recent referendum. Scotland remains in the UK and the UK in the EU. It is typical of nationalists like yourself to negate your neighbors, ignore the commonwelath and in this instance impose on a scientist who would improve healthcare for your brothers.
And for the time it took for you to write this kidology, you need a new pastime in palastine.
Regards
James
All issues need to have truthful reports and accurate stats,something rarely seen now,especially when coupled with common sense
we do not need any more here we are full.
Why have you only chosen England, we live in the UK, is is because if you only pick England, it makes your figures work, and if you do the same as the UK they dont work.
I have chosen England, rather than the UK, because (as I’m sure you well know) over 90% of all immigrants coming to Britain will settle in England, not Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland. Therefore the relevant population density figure is that of England, not the UK!!!!!!