black lives matter

[Roachmill]

Truth is that asylum should be claimed at the first "safe" country a seeker(?) gets to.

I suspect that a large number of our "asylum seekers" are nothing more that "economic migants" intent on living in the land of "milk and honey".

 

We put a roof over their heads whilst they are being "processed" and give them some "pocket money" to spend in the meantime.

I don't understand where their sense of "entitlement" is coming from.

 

A single person in this situation can get by on £37 pw if they have to. Large bag of tatties is under £4 at Testco. A tin of beans is about 35p. You can even get a steak there for less than £3.

 

It's not what you earn, it's how you spend it....

Eh... a grasp of reality would offer a good footing first and foremost, Colin. I doubt those fleeing whatever horrors they have encountered have much in the way of a sense of entitlement you wrap some vacant and meaningless air quotes around. Really!

[Watter]

BLM co founder admits they are both trained marxists . 

[NullVoid]

It is a fact that landlords and many corporations can profit from the migrants, refugee or otherwise simply because the taxpayer will foot the bill in full.

 

Housing market has been a Ponzi scheme and guaranteed import of tenants coupled with a welfare system that adjusts to whatever the landlord wants to charge are adding fuel to the fire since only people who work or looking to move for it are impacted by the rising costs.

And before somebody says “They are doing the jobs locals don’t want Ⓡ™©”

Factor in the many who have lost their jobs and now face eviction.

 

You will not get help with housing from any council unless your situation is viewed as absolutely dire,

Whats the affect of existing homeless being repeatedly being pushed to the back of the line by newcomers?

 

SHOULD the taxpayer be forced to pay for anybody who shows up in a dingy especially with the current situation of the government shutting down large swaths of the economy and destroying the livelihoods of millions?
 

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/young-adults-see-mental-health-and-job-prospects-plummet-during-pandemic/ar-BB19NNUW

 

Over half of those aged 18-24 and 65+ who were employed before the pandemic have since stopped working – either by being furloughed or by losing their jobs altogether – compared to fewer than a third of those aged 30-50

These would be the ages when you would either be being nudged towards the outside of the door or trying to get inside the door for a stable career.

 

The ratio of people who are net taxpayers and who are net tax recipients is being tilted in a worrying direction.

 

Methods to produce money out of thin air reduce the value of the existing supply,

Who cares if you have £100’000 in savings when the money has become so worthless you cant even buy a chocolate bar with that as was seen in Weimar Germany or Zimbabwe.

 

It is clear Lockdown will continue at least until Patrick Vallance is able to cash in his 43,111 shares of GlaxoSmithKline and it could be several months until he can do that!

One method of reducing the number of unemployed during Lockdown and creating new jobs would be to legalize Dignitas and let them open a chain of stores in the crappiest parts of the UK,

Furthermore the strain on housing and supply of healthy kidneys and livers will be alleviated.

Some say "Eat the rich" but I am suggesting we eat the suicidal first since they would be the most likely to consent.

 

in all seriousness though the days of abundance are numbered in many parts of the UK and in many others they ended years ago.

The attitude of the recently homeless and unemployed  towards the migrants being housed in luxury hotels is going to be very ugly.

Edited October 8, 2020 by NullVoid

[Colin]

"Eh... a grasp of reality would offer a good footing first and foremost, Colin. I doubt those fleeing whatever horrors they have encountered have much in the way of a sense of entitlement you wrap some vacant and meaningless air quotes around. Really!"

 

Reality ?  Would you recognise it if it jumped up and hit you in the mouth ? 

A lot of so called asylum seekers have PAID for their passage from their homeland(s) via several "safe" countries in order to reach the UK.  Lining the pockets of criminal(?) traffickers along the way.

They might have encountered "horrors", who knows but them.  That DOES NOT give them the right to choose the country in which they wish to claim asylum as the "rule" is that it should be claimed in the first safe country they arrive at.

OK, if they fly in direct from wherever I would understand it but, passing through Italy(safe), Greece(safe), France(safe), Germany(safe) et al in order to float a fairly expensive dingy across the channel (escorted in some instances by the French Navy) does not, imho, qualify them as "asylum seekers".  They have passed that stage and are now migrants..

 

Additionally, we house them in fairly decent hotels (with some pocket money) whilst the authorities process them, then we house them elsewhere (with benefits) if they are accepted.  Meanwhile, we have our own people living rough on the streets who cannot get a roof "for love nor money".

 

I am not unsympathetic towards genuine asylum seekers and suspect that there may be many, but you need to be able to differentiate and not swallow some of the "media hype".

[Evil Inky]

"What's the alternative - let them sleep on the streets and starve?"

 

That comment is "dumb" and only proves that you did not properly read my post.

 

I'll try it from another angle.

 

One a person passes through the first "safe" country in which they can claim asylum, they become "migrants".  Simple really!!

The fact that we put them in accommodation and give them some pocket money makes your comment look ridiculous.

Apologies for not being as clever as you, but I still don't understand what you are proposing to do with asylum seekers, apart from re-branding them as migrants. If you aren't going to provide them with accommodation and food, and they aren't going to sleep on the streets and starve, what are you suggesting we do with them?

[George.]

One a person passes through the first "safe" country in which they can claim asylum, they become "migrants".  Simple really!!

The fact that we put them in accommodation and give them some pocket money makes your comment look ridiculous.

 

They do not become migrants immediately after turning up in the U.K. They will gain permision to stay as a refugee, permission to stay for humanitarion reasons or they will be given permission to stay for other reasons - or they will be chucked out.

 

After Westminster has spent six months, or an awful lot longer, thinking about it they may become migrants, or they may not.

 

Claim asylum in the UK

Edited October 8, 2020 by George.

[Roachmill]

Reality ?  Would you recognise it if it jumped up and hit you in the mouth ? 

Oh FFS, Colin. Bravo.

[Colin]

Apologies for not being as clever as you, but I still don't understand what you are proposing to do with asylum seekers, apart from re-branding them as migrants. If you aren't going to provide them with accommodation and food, and they aren't going to sleep on the streets and starve, what are you suggesting we do with them?

 

 

Apology accepted. 

 

We ARE providing them with accommodation and food and, if they are "accepted" into the country, they are also provided with somewhere to live and some benfits to get by with.

 

Just don't cry "crocodile tears" when they are refused permission to stay and sent back home.

 

.

[Roachmill]

Thirteen charged in militia plot to kidnap Michigan governor
 
Their plots apparently included targeting and killing police officers, assaulting the Michigan State Capitol, using Molotov cocktails against the police, shooting up the governor’s vacation home and conspiring to kidnap the US state’s [black] Democratic governor, Gretchen Whitmer. I'm sure some of them were "very fine people", were on "stand by" and only wanted to "LIBERATE MICHIGAN".

[Watter]

Problems in Sweden ? https://sputniknews.com/europe/202009111080426292-crystal-clear-swedish-prime-minister-links-immigration-to-crime-in-a-turning-point/

[Wheelsup]

So far we have managed to assimilate immigrants quite successfully. Even the Scotties. People are really all the same everywhere. You find some eejits in every society. Sometimes you have to learn to give a little.

[Colin]

Is "assimilate" the right word to use though?  I would have said "accommodate" would have been a better choice.

[George.]

You find some eejits in every society.

 

Westminster comes to mind, and so does royalty. But they certainly know how to look after themselves.

 

Westminster: MPs set to receive £3500 pay rise in 2021

Edited October 10, 2020 by George.

[Watter]

In the article about Sweden it points out that native Swedes will become a minority in 30 years time . This appears to be the deliberate  policy of the Swedish government for this to happen but i cant figure out why they would want this .Why would they want to turn their famously Feminist and Christian country into an Islamic one ? The Swedes themselves appear to want this as they vote for open border political parties at every election even though they must be aware of the Islamic view of the role of women in society .One thing is sure Sweden is going to be a very different place in 30-40 years time .

Edited October 10, 2020 by Watter

[Colin]

As is the rest of the "western" world.

In fairness, Sweden seems to have recognised is and is now (too little, too late imho) trying to tighten it's immigation rules.

 

I have nothing against immigration, It's just that I wish that the immigrants would integrate properly.  I couldn't care less about religion in any of it's guises, but I sure as hell do not wish to live under the "dark ages" version of sharia law that is creeping into some areas.

 

It should be written in stone that GB is a predominantly white, Anglo Saxon, Christian country and that nothing should be allowed to change that.  Ouur country, our rules.