English Channel migrant crossing crisis #3

[Blueblue123]

The gov are properly investors as are their mates .I couldn’t foresee that changing .

So you acknowledge that it's an unfair problem which best serves the elite.

Can't wait for @NeverEnough to storm at you with raised blood pressure to dispute what you've said.

 

[monga]

So you acknowledge that it's an unfair problem which best serves the elite.

Can't wait for @NeverEnough to storm at you with raised blood pressure to dispute what you've said.

it’s always been an ill divided world ,not rocket science
---

Yep that's a huge part of the problem. But it can change as it has already changed in the past.

Nope ,can’t see that happening in our lifetime they’ll just squeeze the poorest in society even more.

 

[Merpedy]

Nope ,can’t see that happening in our lifetime they’ll just squeeze the poorest in society even more.

If we all responded with a variation of this the threat would lack any discussion

It's like when people suggest that the government could introduce safe routes - chances of it are happening are very low and we all probably know there would probably be major issues with how it functions because the government seems to be hopeless at having functioning systems. Yet, it's still discussed as an option that could happen

 

[Onetwofour]

Nope ,can’t see that happening in our lifetime they’ll just squeeze the poorest in society even more.

Of course with this kind of mindset nothing will change.

 

[monga]

If we all responded with a variation of this the threat would lack any discussion

It's like when people suggest that the government could introduce safe routes - chances of it are happening are very low and we all probably know there would probably be major issues with how it functions because the government seems to be hopeless at having functioning systems. Yet, it's still discussed as an option that could happen

I don’t see people making any great strides to change this ? Talk the Talk…

 

[Moth]

... It actually appears that you are assuming, in what you think ‘I am assuming’ if I haven’t said it please don’t assume.
Of course not all immigrants in my grandparents era were law abiding, I did mention this in my original post, that the country has its own issues which would include people that are now British citizens but not necessarily born in this country, however the generation of my grandparents majority came to work hard from the geko, they got jobs almost immediately (& not glamorous jobs either). & didn’t expect the government to hand them a living.
I also didn’t say immigration should be solely points tested, but we should be at least filtering out criminals and minimising our risk with checks etc. Some of these people have seen the most horrific things growing up, they are completely desensitised and we just put them in hotels and expect them to know how to behave automatically in a western society. That’s just ludacris.
like I said I probably won’t reply as I don’thave time to get stuck into a mass debate. I will just share my opinion as and when. Please feel free to move on past the post if you don’t like it.

So when you double down on how the 'majority' of your grandparents generation came to work hard and didn't expect the government to hand them a living what point are you making if is isn't to suggest that the 'majority' of asylum seekers are not the same?

 

[Merpedy]

I don’t see people making any great strides to change this ? Talk the Talk…

It has been recommended to the government many times at this point, as well as charities campaigning for it. You could also probably argue that this talk of Rwanda and a lack of safe routes is also doing a similar thing

The problem is people like yourself are not interested in solving the issue and the government are able to use that as an easy vote winner

 

[monga]

It has been recommended to the government many times at this point, as well as charities campaigning for it. You could also probably argue that this talk of Rwanda and a lack of safe routes is also doing a similar thing

The problem is people like yourself are not interested in solving the issue and the government are able to use that as an easy vote winner

We don’t get to vote in Westminster elections , the gov will never go against their own interests, that includes the red Tory ,Starmer !
---

Of course with this kind of mindset nothing will change.

It hasn’t changed the whole time I’ve been on earth, the rich will always have the upper hand.
---

So when you double down on how the 'majority' of your grandparents generation came to work hard and didn't expect the government to hand them a living what point are you making if is isn't to suggest that the 'majority' of asylum seekers are not the same?

How many are working and supporting themselves without gov assistance? They can work after one year of their asylum claims being forwarded.

 

[Moth]

You’re the one hurling insults when people don’t agree with your biased views, including to a poster that had to disclose her ethnicity when you labelled her racist because she felt threatened when an asylum seeker approached her and her baby…Disgusting!

Could you point out the post in which I 'labelled' the poster (or indeed any specific poster) a racist? I'm betting that you can't.

Then making out she should be ashamed for pointing it out because her grandparents likely faced the same racism…What type of person are you that holds views like that
I guess most of us know exactly the type you are.

Unsurprisingly you completely misunderstood or more likely chose to misrepresent my question.

 

[Lollyy]

So when you double down on how the 'majority' of your grandparents generation came to work hard and didn't expect the government to hand them a living what point are you making if is isn't to suggest that the 'majority' of asylum seekers are not the same?

Actually not what I said. The majority in one instance doesn’t insinuate the majority in another.
I don’t know the actual percentage of people coming into the country that don’t want to work, hence why I didn’t use a percentage or a minority/majority word. However, I know there are jobs which aren’t being filled but immigrants. For whatever reason, be it govt, red tape, or the immigrants themselves and it’s an issue. I’m not blaming the immigrants per se . There is a much wider picture of govt corruption etc. and further on i mentioned the atrocities these people have indured and how they are desensitised, and we expect them to what get office jobs etc. there is a flaw in the immigration system. You literally undermine all my concerns, opinion and just make bold assumptions on what you think I am saying. I don’t want a debate but I want to still feel free to share my opinion on this thread, so please allow me that grace.

 

[monga]

Could you point out the post in which I 'labelled' the poster (or indeed any specific poster) a racist? I'm betting that you can't.



Unsurprisingly you completely misunderstood or more likely chose to misrepresent my question.

This clearly implies racism ..But avoid my other question on how many are working to support themselves as you’ve clearly said they’re not getting taxpayer support.

 

[Moth]

Actually not what I said. The majority in one instance doesn’t insinuate the majority in another.
I don’t know the actual percentage of people coming into the country that don’t want to work, hence why I didn’t use a percentage or a minority/majority word. However, I know there are jobs which aren’t being filled but immigrants. For whatever reason, be it govt, red tape, or the immigrants themselves and it’s an issue. I’m not blaming the immigrants per se . There is a much wider picture of govt corruption etc. and further on i mentioned the atrocities these people have indured and how they are desensitised, and we expect them to what get office jobs etc. there is a flaw in the immigration system. You literally undermine all my concerns, opinion and just make bold assumptions on what you think I am saying. I don’t want a debate but I want to still feel free to share my opinion on this thread, so please allow me that grace.

You are of course free to share your opinion but clearly don't like being asked to explain it (your latest 'answer' to my question is extremely confusing) or be challenged on it. I thought that the purpose of this board was to allow discussion not as a public noticeboard for opinions but perhaps I am wrong. In any case I accept that is how you want to use it and will not respond to you any further.

 

[monga]

You are of course free to share your opinion but clearly don't like being asked to explain it (your latest 'answer' to my question is extremely confusing) or be challenged on it. I thought that the purpose of this board was to allow discussion not as a public noticeboard for opinions but perhaps I am wrong. In any case I accept that is how you want to use it and will not respond to you any further.

You’ve just described yourself there

 

[Moth]

This clearly implies racism ..But avoid my other question on how many are working to support themselves as you’ve clearly said they’re not getting taxpayer support.View attachment 2313819

"I don't know if you are racist or not" = you are a racist? Okay if you say so.

You also seem to have raked up another issue that I thought was over. To be honest I can't really remember what it was about and I'm not going to go back and look but if you are talking about immigrants arriving in the UK on visas, most are not able to claim most benefits. They are under NRPF (no recourse to public funds) conditions. However it does not apply to all benefits. They can (and do) claim things like Job Seekers Allowance, Employment & Support Allowance, Maternity Allowance, Bereavement Support Payment, SMP, SSP etc. and depending on circumstances are entitled to receive a range of other benefits including free-school meals, financial and housing support from the local authority, the Energy Bills Support Scheme. And as I think I said there is nothing to prevent them accessing support from voluntary and community organisations, food banks, furniture recycling stores etc. I hope that helps.
---

You’ve just described yourself there

I'll explain or expand on any opinion or comment that I have posted if you are able to explain what it is that you want to know in an intelligible fashion. Ask away.

 

[Merpedy]

we expect them to what get office jobs

There are plenty of other jobs available and they don't necessarily require amazing language skills - my mum who works within the agriculture sector has said multiple times that there are plenty of Ukrainians working where she is that don't speak English at all and they have to find a translator for the training. Cleaning jobs seem to be another one

Perhaps these jobs aren't as well advertised or people are anxious about applying for jobs if they lack language skills, so it would be interesting to see if efforts to make this sort of stuff more accessible would be effective

 

[NeverEnough]

The problem is not about foreigners buying property. The problem is when those properties sit empty as they are used as assets. Foreigners are not the sole responsible for this. Opposing unhealthy level of property's speculation doesn't seem to be excessive to me. It's not about seizing private assets but demanding that those assets are either rented to people willing to live here either sold.

So you won't seize it, but you would "demand" that the assets are used in a way you dictate. Presumably with a very stringent enforcement apparatus in place to ensure compliance with the demand?

And if the owners refuse?
---

Those literally weren't my words. Debates are best had between individuals who can read and comprehend what's being said, not those who rely on strawman arguments.

If you want to challenge what I've said then focus on the actual words I use, not an irrelevant point you've dragged in because you think it'll help you 'win' the argument.

And money laundering through UK property is an open secret, not something I have specific insight or knowledge of so it's up to the UK authorities to make sure this doesn't happen unchecked.

Funny how your retort is to always "do it yourself" yet, you do nothing about the things you complain about here. You're very inactive, passive and inefficient about finding solutions to the very problems you raise.

So no contact with the SFO from you then? Being an open secret doesn't gather the intelligence or evidence required to raise a successful prosecution, they need information which you can surely provide yes?

I'm not quite sure you understand how change works. I'm a supporter of the principle of private property and I broadly support the government policy on small boats. Why therefore would I seek to change what I support? You on the other hand are the one advocating for a change in the policy and redistribution of property to the needy. You're not going to get that with the current mob. You ain't getting it with Labour either. So in effect what you have is a shopping list and absolutely zero plan as to how you implement it for which I can understand your frustration. Which can't be healthy.

There is going to be an election next year. Stand. Get your message out using the democratic process. Now surely you can't be afraid of losing can you?

 

[Onetwofour]

So you won't seize it, but you would "demand" that the assets are used in a way you dictate. Presumably with a very stringent enforcement apparatus in place to ensure compliance with the demand?

And if the owners refuse?

It might be a shocker for you but in the current legal system ownership doesn't give unlimited rights on the property. People have to apply to build and follow regulations. One cannot start an illegal business on the ground that it is their land and the police can come and investigate if there is a sustained suspicion of breaking the law whatsoever is the matter. Are you also against this? Or do you get that those limitations are put in place for the common good?

I don't want to dictate anything - I am just suggesting that if the majority of people think housing speculation have more disadvantages than benefits they might want to change that following a democratic process. Feel free to disagree but I do know I am not the only one to think the surge of prices for properties and rents is not sustainable on the long term and participate to the degradation of the average living conditions.

 

[Blueblue123]

So no contact with the SFO from you then? Being an open secret doesn't gather the intelligence or evidence required to raise a successful prosecution, they need information which you can surely provide yes?

I'm not quite sure you understand how change works. I'm a supporter of the principle of private property and I broadly support the government policy on small boats. Why therefore would I seek to change what I support? You on the other hand are the one advocating for a change in the policy and redistribution of property to the needy. You're not going to get that with the current mob. You ain't getting it with Labour either. So in effect what you have is a shopping list and absolutely zero plan as to how you implement it for which I can understand your frustration. Which can't be healthy.

There is going to be an election next year. Stand. Get your message out using the democratic process. Now surely you can't be afraid of losing can you?

This exchange would be much more fruitful without the hyperbolic, playground-level suggestions that attempt to shut down anything that's said with 'do it yourself'. It's quite dangerous territory to suggest that people can only engage in political discourse if they either conform to the policies of the ruling party or are part of the inner circle.

And Tory voters aren't particularly happy with the way things are going either, hence the 'stop the boats' policy. If things were running smoothly and as everyone wanted, the party wouldn't be hinging the next election on this 'promise'. If things were running how everyone wanted, this thread wouldn't exist.

We've all made suggestions as to what can be changed, yourself included, so I'd urge you to take your own advice.

I broadly support the government policy on small boats

Broadly, not wholly. Why don't you become Home Secretary and write the policy you'd like to see?

 

[Lollyy]

There are plenty of other jobs available and they don't necessarily require amazing language skills - my mum who works within the agriculture sector has said multiple times that there are plenty of Ukrainians working where she is that don't speak English at all and they have to find a translator for the training. Cleaning jobs seem to be another one

Perhaps these jobs aren't as well advertised or people are anxious about applying for jobs if they lack language skills, so it would be interesting to see if efforts to make this sort of stuff more accessible would be effective

My comment wasnt regarding how well they spoke English, it was regarding the atrocities they have witnessed and indured. And become desensitised to. Some of these countries these people have witness and maybe even done some horrific things. Then you have simpler things like completely different ways of life. Therefore we can’t expect them to just get jobs, and fit straight in with western culture. they could have PTSD and other issues. Again I’m not saying all/majority/minority . But this problem does exist.

 

[Merpedy]

Therefore we can’t expect them to just get jobs, and fit straight in with western culture. they could have PTSD and other issues.

I think people would be surprised to find out how many asylum seekers are interested in working but are limited by the rules. I can’t imagine that interest/want to work changes if they’re granted refugee status. There’s definitely some sort of need to address these issues given by studies discussed here

I’m not sure what’s going on with the first part of your reply - I quoted a specific bit for a reason but now it seems relevant to another reply you gave too