FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Immigration.

Immigration.

By (user no longer on site) OP over a year ago

What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

For me, it seems that we need to pause it, because we already have serious issues with the homeless, housing, jobs, poverty levels, deprived areas of the country etc etc etc, and we seem to just be risking compounding the problems further.

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *oo hotCouple over a year ago

North West

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts? "

Which asylum seekers, refugees, migrants (delete as appropriate) do you think should be given any sort of priority?

Let’s start with Afghans who helped and supported the British Military?

What say you???

Fuck them?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *nonymousSwingerMan over a year ago

cambridge

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts? "

Regardless of if you think we should stop taking refugees or not (and personally I think we should regardless, as the numbers aren't actually any higher, it's just more visible coming across the channel), we have to keep receiving the way that we are so that they get into the system and we document them. This way they get fingerprinted, and we have a proper number of how many people have come over. Otherwise, we basiscally have no idea for the future, and they'll still come over.

If we're having a conversation with France or any other nation, we need to be able to say "We've taken 30,000, you've taken xx thousand (or actually xxx, xxxx thousand) and we need to work it out on that basis" rather than "X nation has taken Y, we have no idea how many the UK have".

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *mateur100Man over a year ago

nr faversham

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

"We have to keep receiving the way that we are"... really? So if someone tries to access the UK via legal routes but is refused, it's ok for them to just come over illegally?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Dear OP, my thoughts come in the form of a prediction. In the responses you will probably get on this thread, you will be called a racist and/or inhuman. You will be told that we have plenty of room, and that everyone else takes more than we do. You will also be told that they are only fleeing a country that "we" attacked, bombed and otherwise did bad stuff to.

Best of luck.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *ohnnyTwoNotesMan over a year ago

golden fields

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts? "

My thoughts are that "issues with the homeless, housing, jobs, poverty levels, deprived areas of the country etc etc etc" are completely unrelated to immigration.

The government has no interest in tackling any of this with or without immigration.

That's not taking into account the net positive effect immigration has on the economy. So without it, we would have less tax to pay for all these things.

And you could also pick, say, trident. Scrap 1/3 of it, and you'd have £60 billion over the next 10 years to spend on other stuff.

Immigration as an issue is 100% a distraction tactic. It's a non issue made up by the government and media.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *ohnnyTwoNotesMan over a year ago

golden fields

"Dear OP, my thoughts come in the form of a prediction. In the responses you will probably get on this thread, you will be called a racist and/or inhuman. You will be told that we have plenty of room, and that everyone else takes more than we do. You will also be told that they are only fleeing a country that "we" attacked, bombed and otherwise did bad stuff to.

Best of luck.

Don't worry, this forum is packed to the rafters with people who are full of hate for foreigners.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *nonymousSwingerMan over a year ago

cambridge

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

My thoughts are that "issues with the homeless, housing, jobs, poverty levels, deprived areas of the country etc etc etc" are completely unrelated to immigration.

The government has no interest in tackling any of this with or without immigration.

That's not taking into account the net positive effect immigration has on the economy. So without it, we would have less tax to pay for all these things.

And you could also pick, say, trident. Scrap 1/3 of it, and you'd have £60 billion over the next 10 years to spend on other stuff.

Immigration as an issue is 100% a distraction tactic. It's a non issue made up by the government and media. "

Exactly this!

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Best of luck.

Don't worry, this forum is packed to the rafters with people who are full of hate for foreigners."

Indeed. But concern does not always equal hatred. Education can be key.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *nonymousSwingerMan over a year ago

cambridge

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

"We have to keep receiving the way that we are"... really? So if someone tries to access the UK via legal routes but is refused, it's ok for them to just come over illegally? "

You've missed the point I was making. Regardless of your view on if we should take more people or not, there are two scenarios.

1) We take them, fingerprint them and get an accurate set of numbers. We can then refuse access to the UK and deport.

2) We don't bring them into the system. They will come over anyway, the UK will never get them into the system, and we have no opportunity to deport them, or get the taxes from income/work.

Which do you prefer?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By (user no longer on site) OP over a year ago

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

Which asylum seekers, refugees, migrants (delete as appropriate) do you think should be given any sort of priority?

Let’s start with Afghans who helped and supported the British Military?

What say you???

Fuck them?"

They should never have been left in Afghanistan in the first place. Anyone who assists our military should be looked after in whichever way they need.

Now, I said my position on it, whether that is a valid position or not will be determined with my own education on it as I move forward in life... I didn't ask to be questioned over it, I asked for peoples thoughts? Do you have any?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By (user no longer on site) OP over a year ago

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

My thoughts are that "issues with the homeless, housing, jobs, poverty levels, deprived areas of the country etc etc etc" are completely unrelated to immigration.

The government has no interest in tackling any of this with or without immigration.

That's not taking into account the net positive effect immigration has on the economy. So without it, we would have less tax to pay for all these things.

And you could also pick, say, trident. Scrap 1/3 of it, and you'd have £60 billion over the next 10 years to spend on other stuff.

Immigration as an issue is 100% a distraction tactic. It's a non issue made up by the government and media. "

I think that that's a huge cop out and the reason I say that is that even politicians who do not support our government, such as Jeremy corbyn (although he was careful how he phrased it to not risk losing voters) and George Galloway have both said that we need a better approach to immigration. Both don't hold back when talking about our government, so it seems that if even they are saying it, then maybe it's not just a case of it being distraction?

Id agree maybe it is overblown, but something else strikes me as strange. This pandemic has threatened to overwhelm our hospitals, maybe, we need to at the very least have a system that keeps the number the same until our systems are up to the task of covering everyone's needs far more adequately?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *ohnnyTwoNotesMan over a year ago

golden fields

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

My thoughts are that "issues with the homeless, housing, jobs, poverty levels, deprived areas of the country etc etc etc" are completely unrelated to immigration.

The government has no interest in tackling any of this with or without immigration.

That's not taking into account the net positive effect immigration has on the economy. So without it, we would have less tax to pay for all these things.

And you could also pick, say, trident. Scrap 1/3 of it, and you'd have £60 billion over the next 10 years to spend on other stuff.

Immigration as an issue is 100% a distraction tactic. It's a non issue made up by the government and media.

Not sure I understand your first point.

Our population increases more from new born humans than it does from immigration.

Immigrants put more into the system than they take out. So stopping it, would not mean we have more cash for the NHS.

Plus, I firmly believe that the government does not have the will to solve these issues in society.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By (user no longer on site) OP over a year ago

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

My thoughts are that "issues with the homeless, housing, jobs, poverty levels, deprived areas of the country etc etc etc" are completely unrelated to immigration.

The government has no interest in tackling any of this with or without immigration.

That's not taking into account the net positive effect immigration has on the economy. So without it, we would have less tax to pay for all these things.

And you could also pick, say, trident. Scrap 1/3 of it, and you'd have £60 billion over the next 10 years to spend on other stuff.

Immigration as an issue is 100% a distraction tactic. It's a non issue made up by the government and media.

Not sure I understand your first point.

Our population increases more from new born humans than it does from immigration.

Immigrants put more into the system than they take out. So stopping it, would not mean we have more cash for the NHS.

Plus, I firmly believe that the government does not have the will to solve these issues in society. "

I'm not on about cash, money is printed and artificially valued, it means nothing really. But I do mean resources, houses, physical hospital beds, gp allocations, spaces in homeless shelters, our overstretched services, from ambulance to police, mental health services, that sort of thing. And I'm not saying they are overstretched by people coming to the country, they are overstretched due to cuts in numbers and funding, but overstretched they definitely are. I'm not putting blame on people coming here, I'm saying that if the issues we have arent addressed then they will end up in exactly the same boat as everyone else with ever shittier services and standards of living.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *mateur100Man over a year ago

nr faversham

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

"We have to keep receiving the way that we are"... really? So if someone tries to access the UK via legal routes but is refused, it's ok for them to just come over illegally?

You've missed the point I was making. Regardless of your view on if we should take more people or not, there are two scenarios.

1) We take them, fingerprint them and get an accurate set of numbers. We can then refuse access to the UK and deport.

2) We don't bring them into the system. They will come over anyway, the UK will never get them into the system, and we have no opportunity to deport them, or get the taxes from income/work.

Which do you prefer? "

I'm very happy with option one BUT you assume that people will go quietly and I doubt that very much otherwise the illegal route wouldn't be taken by those who have failed in the legal route

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *nonymousSwingerMan over a year ago

cambridge

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

My thoughts are that "issues with the homeless, housing, jobs, poverty levels, deprived areas of the country etc etc etc" are completely unrelated to immigration.

The government has no interest in tackling any of this with or without immigration.

That's not taking into account the net positive effect immigration has on the economy. So without it, we would have less tax to pay for all these things.

And you could also pick, say, trident. Scrap 1/3 of it, and you'd have £60 billion over the next 10 years to spend on other stuff.

Immigration as an issue is 100% a distraction tactic. It's a non issue made up by the government and media.

Not sure I understand your first point.

Our population increases more from new born humans than it does from immigration.

Immigrants put more into the system than they take out. So stopping it, would not mean we have more cash for the NHS.

Plus, I firmly believe that the government does not have the will to solve these issues in society.

Have you seen how much of the NHS is made up of people who weren't born here?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *ohnnyTwoNotesMan over a year ago

golden fields

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

My thoughts are that "issues with the homeless, housing, jobs, poverty levels, deprived areas of the country etc etc etc" are completely unrelated to immigration.

The government has no interest in tackling any of this with or without immigration.

That's not taking into account the net positive effect immigration has on the economy. So without it, we would have less tax to pay for all these things.

And you could also pick, say, trident. Scrap 1/3 of it, and you'd have £60 billion over the next 10 years to spend on other stuff.

Immigration as an issue is 100% a distraction tactic. It's a non issue made up by the government and media.

Not sure I understand your first point.

Our population increases more from new born humans than it does from immigration.

Immigrants put more into the system than they take out. So stopping it, would not mean we have more cash for the NHS.

Plus, I firmly believe that the government does not have the will to solve these issues in society.

All the issues you mentioned, are real. Just don't think they're related to immigration at all.

And money is only mentioned in relation to being needed to pay for houses, hospitals, nurses etc.

The government didn't have much interest in tackling these things before Brexit and the pandemic. We've got even less chance now.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *nonymousSwingerMan over a year ago

cambridge

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

"We have to keep receiving the way that we are"... really? So if someone tries to access the UK via legal routes but is refused, it's ok for them to just come over illegally?

You've missed the point I was making. Regardless of your view on if we should take more people or not, there are two scenarios.

1) We take them, fingerprint them and get an accurate set of numbers. We can then refuse access to the UK and deport.

2) We don't bring them into the system. They will come over anyway, the UK will never get them into the system, and we have no opportunity to deport them, or get the taxes from income/work.

Which do you prefer?

I'm very happy with option one BUT you assume that people will go quietly and I doubt that very much otherwise the illegal route wouldn't be taken by those who have failed in the legal route"

Its a valid point, but if they're in the system you can fix said system. If they're not, it doesn't matter. The channel is always going to be 21 miles wide, its only going to get easier for people to cross it, and enter illegally, and no wall can be put up on the busiest sea lane in the world. Better to take control of it.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By (user no longer on site) OP over a year ago

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

My thoughts are that "issues with the homeless, housing, jobs, poverty levels, deprived areas of the country etc etc etc" are completely unrelated to immigration.

The government has no interest in tackling any of this with or without immigration.

That's not taking into account the net positive effect immigration has on the economy. So without it, we would have less tax to pay for all these things.

And you could also pick, say, trident. Scrap 1/3 of it, and you'd have £60 billion over the next 10 years to spend on other stuff.

Immigration as an issue is 100% a distraction tactic. It's a non issue made up by the government and media.

Not sure I understand your first point.

Our population increases more from new born humans than it does from immigration.

Immigrants put more into the system than they take out. So stopping it, would not mean we have more cash for the NHS.

Plus, I firmly believe that the government does not have the will to solve these issues in society.

Have you seen how much of the NHS is made up of people who weren't born here? "

Okay, they already live and work here? So how are they what I'm talking about? If anything, THEY are the exact people being overstretched and overworked by increases in population.

I'm asking should we pause immigration or have an X amount out/ X amount in arrangement in the future to get the infrastructure of the country into a much more stable place? Dependent on an actual competent government investing in the infrastructure of the country properly...

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By (user no longer on site) OP over a year ago

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

My thoughts are that "issues with the homeless, housing, jobs, poverty levels, deprived areas of the country etc etc etc" are completely unrelated to immigration.

The government has no interest in tackling any of this with or without immigration.

That's not taking into account the net positive effect immigration has on the economy. So without it, we would have less tax to pay for all these things.

And you could also pick, say, trident. Scrap 1/3 of it, and you'd have £60 billion over the next 10 years to spend on other stuff.

Immigration as an issue is 100% a distraction tactic. It's a non issue made up by the government and media.

Not sure I understand your first point.

Our population increases more from new born humans than it does from immigration.

Immigrants put more into the system than they take out. So stopping it, would not mean we have more cash for the NHS.

Plus, I firmly believe that the government does not have the will to solve these issues in society.

All the issues you mentioned, are real. Just don't think they're related to immigration at all.

And money is only mentioned in relation to being needed to pay for houses, hospitals, nurses etc.

The government didn't have much interest in tackling these things before Brexit and the pandemic. We've got even less chance now.

Obviously my question is based on the existence of a truly competent government

not sure where we will find one of those though?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *nonymousSwingerMan over a year ago

cambridge

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

My thoughts are that "issues with the homeless, housing, jobs, poverty levels, deprived areas of the country etc etc etc" are completely unrelated to immigration.

The government has no interest in tackling any of this with or without immigration.

That's not taking into account the net positive effect immigration has on the economy. So without it, we would have less tax to pay for all these things.

And you could also pick, say, trident. Scrap 1/3 of it, and you'd have £60 billion over the next 10 years to spend on other stuff.

Immigration as an issue is 100% a distraction tactic. It's a non issue made up by the government and media.

Not sure I understand your first point.

Our population increases more from new born humans than it does from immigration.

Immigrants put more into the system than they take out. So stopping it, would not mean we have more cash for the NHS.

Plus, I firmly believe that the government does not have the will to solve these issues in society.

Have you seen how much of the NHS is made up of people who weren't born here?

Okay, they already live and work here? So how are they what I'm talking about? If anything, THEY are the exact people being overstretched and overworked by increases in population.

I was making the point (badly it seems) that the NHS is more full of migrants working for it than giving healthcare to them. We need more immigrants to continue this, be it immediately qualified doctors, or those that will get qualified in the years to come, which is somewhat unfortunate on the nations we're stealing doctors from. For example, for a long time South Africa deliberely made its medical exams not quite to the standard of the UK, in order to stop doctors emigrating here.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *nonymousSwingerMan over a year ago

cambridge

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

My thoughts are that "issues with the homeless, housing, jobs, poverty levels, deprived areas of the country etc etc etc" are completely unrelated to immigration.

The government has no interest in tackling any of this with or without immigration.

That's not taking into account the net positive effect immigration has on the economy. So without it, we would have less tax to pay for all these things.

And you could also pick, say, trident. Scrap 1/3 of it, and you'd have £60 billion over the next 10 years to spend on other stuff.

Immigration as an issue is 100% a distraction tactic. It's a non issue made up by the government and media.

Not sure I understand your first point.

Our population increases more from new born humans than it does from immigration.

Immigrants put more into the system than they take out. So stopping it, would not mean we have more cash for the NHS.

Plus, I firmly believe that the government does not have the will to solve these issues in society.

All the issues you mentioned, are real. Just don't think they're related to immigration at all.

And money is only mentioned in relation to being needed to pay for houses, hospitals, nurses etc.

The government didn't have much interest in tackling these things before Brexit and the pandemic. We've got even less chance now.

Obviously my question is based on the existence of a truly competent government

not sure where we will find one of those though? "

So true regarding our government...

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *ebjonnsonMan over a year ago

Maldon

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

My thoughts are that "issues with the homeless, housing, jobs, poverty levels, deprived areas of the country etc etc etc" are completely unrelated to immigration.

The government has no interest in tackling any of this with or without immigration.

That's not taking into account the net positive effect immigration has on the economy. So without it, we would have less tax to pay for all these things.

And you could also pick, say, trident. Scrap 1/3 of it, and you'd have £60 billion over the next 10 years to spend on other stuff.

Immigration as an issue is 100% a distraction tactic. It's a non issue made up by the government and media.

Not sure I understand your first point.

Our population increases more from new born humans than it does from immigration.

Immigrants put more into the system than they take out. So stopping it, would not mean we have more cash for the NHS.

Plus, I firmly believe that the government does not have the will to solve these issues in society.

Have you seen how much of the NHS is made up of people who weren't born here?

Okay, they already live and work here? So how are they what I'm talking about? If anything, THEY are the exact people being overstretched and overworked by increases in population.

Nobody is arguing against any immigration, it’s uncontrolled or illegal immigration that poses the problem. We have enough home grown shits of our own so let’s not attract more from around the world. Before the usual suspects on here attack me, I’m not saying everyone coming illegally is a shit. Look at the issues of uncontrolled immigration from Eastern Europe, one result was Brexit which has been and will be a disaster for decades to come. Many great people came here but so did a whole host of thugs, namely young men who had fucked up at home. We have as a nation benefited from controlled immigration and that continues and that’s good.

We can’t though open the floodgates again.

I’m fed up hearing that it’s our fault as we bombed them by the way. I’m also dubious as to how many Afghans helped us - 150,000 is the claim, how many troops did we have there?

You have growing and better educated populations in countries that simply do not offer opportunities that perhaps we take for granted.

Manufacturing has been wiped out in these countries by China. It always strikes me as a sad irony when you see the black guys in Mediterranean resorts selling cheap trainers and fake brands- all made in the Far East not Africa. Perhaps they should look at going to China instead of Europe .

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *ohnnyTwoNotesMan over a year ago

golden fields

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

My thoughts are that "issues with the homeless, housing, jobs, poverty levels, deprived areas of the country etc etc etc" are completely unrelated to immigration.

The government has no interest in tackling any of this with or without immigration.

That's not taking into account the net positive effect immigration has on the economy. So without it, we would have less tax to pay for all these things.

And you could also pick, say, trident. Scrap 1/3 of it, and you'd have £60 billion over the next 10 years to spend on other stuff.

Immigration as an issue is 100% a distraction tactic. It's a non issue made up by the government and media.

Not sure I understand your first point.

Our population increases more from new born humans than it does from immigration.

Immigrants put more into the system than they take out. So stopping it, would not mean we have more cash for the NHS.

Plus, I firmly believe that the government does not have the will to solve these issues in society.

Have you seen how much of the NHS is made up of people who weren't born here?

Okay, they already live and work here? So how are they what I'm talking about? If anything, THEY are the exact people being overstretched and overworked by increases in population.

We can’t though open the floodgates again.

I’m fed up hearing that it’s our fault as we bombed them by the way. I’m also dubious as to how many Afghans helped us - 150,000 is the claim, how many troops did we have there?

You have growing and better educated populations in countries that simply do not offer opportunities that perhaps we take for granted.

Which countries have "uncontrolled immigration"?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *ohnnyTwoNotesMan over a year ago

golden fields

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

My thoughts are that "issues with the homeless, housing, jobs, poverty levels, deprived areas of the country etc etc etc" are completely unrelated to immigration.

The government has no interest in tackling any of this with or without immigration.

That's not taking into account the net positive effect immigration has on the economy. So without it, we would have less tax to pay for all these things.

And you could also pick, say, trident. Scrap 1/3 of it, and you'd have £60 billion over the next 10 years to spend on other stuff.

Immigration as an issue is 100% a distraction tactic. It's a non issue made up by the government and media.

Not sure I understand your first point.

Our population increases more from new born humans than it does from immigration.

Immigrants put more into the system than they take out. So stopping it, would not mean we have more cash for the NHS.

Plus, I firmly believe that the government does not have the will to solve these issues in society.

All the issues you mentioned, are real. Just don't think they're related to immigration at all.

And money is only mentioned in relation to being needed to pay for houses, hospitals, nurses etc.

The government didn't have much interest in tackling these things before Brexit and the pandemic. We've got even less chance now.

Obviously my question is based on the existence of a truly competent government

not sure where we will find one of those though? "

Then the conclusion is, all these issues are not the fault of immigration, but are the fault of the incompetent government.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *otlovefun42Couple over a year ago

Costa Blanca Spain...

We can’t though open the floodgates again.

I’m fed up hearing that it’s our fault as we bombed them by the way. I’m also dubious as to how many Afghans helped us - 150,000 is the claim, how many troops did we have there?

You have growing and better educated populations in countries that simply do not offer opportunities that perhaps we take for granted.

Would agree with most of that although sending the "looky looky" men to China may cause a problem or two.

I've nothing against immigration per se. As you say Britain has benefitted from immigration over the years. Although not all.

Immigrants with the required skills should be welcomed and many are.

Genuine refugees should also be welcomed with numbers based on a fair share compared to other western countries and how they will be able to integrate into the UK community. It's very easy to look at the countryside and say there is plenty of room. But the reality is that most finish up in larger towns and cities where there isn't room.

As for low skilled (or in many cases unskilled) economic migrants who enter the country illegally with "lost" papers and tell lies about their country of origin. They should be deported immediately. No sloshing around in the legal system for years while drawing benefit and legal aid. Just gone and quickly.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *ebjonnsonMan over a year ago

Maldon

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

My thoughts are that "issues with the homeless, housing, jobs, poverty levels, deprived areas of the country etc etc etc" are completely unrelated to immigration.

The government has no interest in tackling any of this with or without immigration.

That's not taking into account the net positive effect immigration has on the economy. So without it, we would have less tax to pay for all these things.

And you could also pick, say, trident. Scrap 1/3 of it, and you'd have £60 billion over the next 10 years to spend on other stuff.

Immigration as an issue is 100% a distraction tactic. It's a non issue made up by the government and media.

Not sure I understand your first point.

Our population increases more from new born humans than it does from immigration.

Immigrants put more into the system than they take out. So stopping it, would not mean we have more cash for the NHS.

Plus, I firmly believe that the government does not have the will to solve these issues in society.

Have you seen how much of the NHS is made up of people who weren't born here?

Okay, they already live and work here? So how are they what I'm talking about? If anything, THEY are the exact people being overstretched and overworked by increases in population.

We can’t though open the floodgates again.

I’m fed up hearing that it’s our fault as we bombed them by the way. I’m also dubious as to how many Afghans helped us - 150,000 is the claim, how many troops did we have there?

You have growing and better educated populations in countries that simply do not offer opportunities that perhaps we take for granted.

Which countries have "uncontrolled immigration"?"

We did for many years. Also, if you don’t control your border then that’s ‘uncontrolled’.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *andy 1Couple over a year ago

northeast

[Removed by poster at 09/12/21 09:38:33]

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *ohnnyTwoNotesMan over a year ago

golden fields

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

My thoughts are that "issues with the homeless, housing, jobs, poverty levels, deprived areas of the country etc etc etc" are completely unrelated to immigration.

The government has no interest in tackling any of this with or without immigration.

That's not taking into account the net positive effect immigration has on the economy. So without it, we would have less tax to pay for all these things.

And you could also pick, say, trident. Scrap 1/3 of it, and you'd have £60 billion over the next 10 years to spend on other stuff.

Immigration as an issue is 100% a distraction tactic. It's a non issue made up by the government and media.

Not sure I understand your first point.

Our population increases more from new born humans than it does from immigration.

Immigrants put more into the system than they take out. So stopping it, would not mean we have more cash for the NHS.

Plus, I firmly believe that the government does not have the will to solve these issues in society.

Have you seen how much of the NHS is made up of people who weren't born here?

Okay, they already live and work here? So how are they what I'm talking about? If anything, THEY are the exact people being overstretched and overworked by increases in population.

We can’t though open the floodgates again.

I’m fed up hearing that it’s our fault as we bombed them by the way. I’m also dubious as to how many Afghans helped us - 150,000 is the claim, how many troops did we have there?

You have growing and better educated populations in countries that simply do not offer opportunities that perhaps we take for granted.

Which countries have "uncontrolled immigration"?

We did for many years. Also, if you don’t control your border then that’s ‘uncontrolled’."

Ah I see the root of your problem. Willful misunderstanding.

Crack on.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *andy 1Couple over a year ago

northeast

I would let all the afghans that helped us get them over hear if the afghans want aide send them some when they send us the ones that helped us

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

My thoughts are that "issues with the homeless, housing, jobs, poverty levels, deprived areas of the country etc etc etc" are completely unrelated to immigration.

The government has no interest in tackling any of this with or without immigration.

That's not taking into account the net positive effect immigration has on the economy. So without it, we would have less tax to pay for all these things.

And you could also pick, say, trident. Scrap 1/3 of it, and you'd have £60 billion over the next 10 years to spend on other stuff.

Immigration as an issue is 100% a distraction tactic. It's a non issue made up by the government and media.

Not sure I understand your first point.

Our population increases more from new born humans than it does from immigration.

Immigrants put more into the system than they take out. So stopping it, would not mean we have more cash for the NHS.

Plus, I firmly believe that the government does not have the will to solve these issues in society.

Have you seen how much of the NHS is made up of people who weren't born here?

Okay, they already live and work here? So how are they what I'm talking about? If anything, THEY are the exact people being overstretched and overworked by increases in population.

We can’t though open the floodgates again.

I’m fed up hearing that it’s our fault as we bombed them by the way. I’m also dubious as to how many Afghans helped us - 150,000 is the claim, how many troops did we have there?

You have growing and better educated populations in countries that simply do not offer opportunities that perhaps we take for granted.

Which countries have "uncontrolled immigration"?

We did for many years. Also, if you don’t control your border then that’s ‘uncontrolled’."

Clearly never sat in a queue of several hundred cars at Calais

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *ebjonnsonMan over a year ago

Maldon

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

My thoughts are that "issues with the homeless, housing, jobs, poverty levels, deprived areas of the country etc etc etc" are completely unrelated to immigration.

The government has no interest in tackling any of this with or without immigration.

That's not taking into account the net positive effect immigration has on the economy. So without it, we would have less tax to pay for all these things.

And you could also pick, say, trident. Scrap 1/3 of it, and you'd have £60 billion over the next 10 years to spend on other stuff.

Immigration as an issue is 100% a distraction tactic. It's a non issue made up by the government and media.

Not sure I understand your first point.

Our population increases more from new born humans than it does from immigration.

Immigrants put more into the system than they take out. So stopping it, would not mean we have more cash for the NHS.

Plus, I firmly believe that the government does not have the will to solve these issues in society.

Have you seen how much of the NHS is made up of people who weren't born here?

Okay, they already live and work here? So how are they what I'm talking about? If anything, THEY are the exact people being overstretched and overworked by increases in population.

We can’t though open the floodgates again.

I’m fed up hearing that it’s our fault as we bombed them by the way. I’m also dubious as to how many Afghans helped us - 150,000 is the claim, how many troops did we have there?

You have growing and better educated populations in countries that simply do not offer opportunities that perhaps we take for granted.

Which countries have "uncontrolled immigration"?

We did for many years. Also, if you don’t control your border then that’s ‘uncontrolled’.

Ah I see the root of your problem. Willful misunderstanding.

Crack on."

In your opinion. What problem ?

Crack on

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *ebjonnsonMan over a year ago

Maldon

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

My thoughts are that "issues with the homeless, housing, jobs, poverty levels, deprived areas of the country etc etc etc" are completely unrelated to immigration.

The government has no interest in tackling any of this with or without immigration.

That's not taking into account the net positive effect immigration has on the economy. So without it, we would have less tax to pay for all these things.

And you could also pick, say, trident. Scrap 1/3 of it, and you'd have £60 billion over the next 10 years to spend on other stuff.

Immigration as an issue is 100% a distraction tactic. It's a non issue made up by the government and media.

Not sure I understand your first point.

Our population increases more from new born humans than it does from immigration.

Immigrants put more into the system than they take out. So stopping it, would not mean we have more cash for the NHS.

Plus, I firmly believe that the government does not have the will to solve these issues in society.

Have you seen how much of the NHS is made up of people who weren't born here?

Okay, they already live and work here? So how are they what I'm talking about? If anything, THEY are the exact people being overstretched and overworked by increases in population.

We can’t though open the floodgates again.

I’m fed up hearing that it’s our fault as we bombed them by the way. I’m also dubious as to how many Afghans helped us - 150,000 is the claim, how many troops did we have there?

You have growing and better educated populations in countries that simply do not offer opportunities that perhaps we take for granted.

Which countries have "uncontrolled immigration"?

We did for many years. Also, if you don’t control your border then that’s ‘uncontrolled’.

Clearly never sat in a queue of several hundred cars at Calais

"
for decades I always got through Calais pretty quickly. Although I always timed it right.

Of course we do control our borders and Calais is a great example. I was referring more to the illegal crossings that have been going on also for decades with successive governments showing little or no interest in stopping it.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *oxychick35Couple over a year ago

thornaby

Best of luck.

"
I agree that’s exactly what normally happens

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *ohnnyTwoNotesMan over a year ago

golden fields

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

My thoughts are that "issues with the homeless, housing, jobs, poverty levels, deprived areas of the country etc etc etc" are completely unrelated to immigration.

The government has no interest in tackling any of this with or without immigration.

That's not taking into account the net positive effect immigration has on the economy. So without it, we would have less tax to pay for all these things.

And you could also pick, say, trident. Scrap 1/3 of it, and you'd have £60 billion over the next 10 years to spend on other stuff.

Immigration as an issue is 100% a distraction tactic. It's a non issue made up by the government and media.

Not sure I understand your first point.

Our population increases more from new born humans than it does from immigration.

Immigrants put more into the system than they take out. So stopping it, would not mean we have more cash for the NHS.

Plus, I firmly believe that the government does not have the will to solve these issues in society.

Have you seen how much of the NHS is made up of people who weren't born here?

Okay, they already live and work here? So how are they what I'm talking about? If anything, THEY are the exact people being overstretched and overworked by increases in population.

We can’t though open the floodgates again.

I’m fed up hearing that it’s our fault as we bombed them by the way. I’m also dubious as to how many Afghans helped us - 150,000 is the claim, how many troops did we have there?

You have growing and better educated populations in countries that simply do not offer opportunities that perhaps we take for granted.

Which countries have "uncontrolled immigration"?

We did for many years. Also, if you don’t control your border then that’s ‘uncontrolled’.

Clearly never sat in a queue of several hundred cars at Calais

for decades I always got through Calais pretty quickly. Although I always timed it right.

Ah. So not "uncontrolled immigration".

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *ebjonnsonMan over a year ago

Maldon

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

My thoughts are that "issues with the homeless, housing, jobs, poverty levels, deprived areas of the country etc etc etc" are completely unrelated to immigration.

The government has no interest in tackling any of this with or without immigration.

That's not taking into account the net positive effect immigration has on the economy. So without it, we would have less tax to pay for all these things.

And you could also pick, say, trident. Scrap 1/3 of it, and you'd have £60 billion over the next 10 years to spend on other stuff.

Immigration as an issue is 100% a distraction tactic. It's a non issue made up by the government and media.

Not sure I understand your first point.

Our population increases more from new born humans than it does from immigration.

Immigrants put more into the system than they take out. So stopping it, would not mean we have more cash for the NHS.

Plus, I firmly believe that the government does not have the will to solve these issues in society.

Have you seen how much of the NHS is made up of people who weren't born here?

Okay, they already live and work here? So how are they what I'm talking about? If anything, THEY are the exact people being overstretched and overworked by increases in population.

We can’t though open the floodgates again.

I’m fed up hearing that it’s our fault as we bombed them by the way. I’m also dubious as to how many Afghans helped us - 150,000 is the claim, how many troops did we have there?

You have growing and better educated populations in countries that simply do not offer opportunities that perhaps we take for granted.

Which countries have "uncontrolled immigration"?

We did for many years. Also, if you don’t control your border then that’s ‘uncontrolled’.

Clearly never sat in a queue of several hundred cars at Calais

for decades I always got through Calais pretty quickly. Although I always timed it right.

Ah. So not "uncontrolled immigration"."

For many years from East Europe it was.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *nonymousSwingerMan over a year ago

cambridge

I guess Boris can't really talk about population growth when he's reproduced 3 to 4 times more than the average. Do we actually know how many kids he's had now? 7 official isn't it, but at least one known extra that he's hushed up.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *uddy laneMan over a year ago

dudley

How about a go fund me, to buy an house in Mayfair for the refugees so they can mingle with the super rich.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

What type of immigration are we talking about ?

Refugees are legal migrants. Regardless of the route into the country.

Economic migrants have been given passes to work here. .

Illegal immigrants are those big here officially. Very hard to count. Very hard to get rid of (as you need to find them first).

It feels we have discussed all three... And of course gone through a brexit loop too.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Control of borders to know who's coming in

Afghans who helped us yes, others that are refuges, yes

Economic migrant no.

It's such a mess that all sorts are piling in and criminals making a fortune

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Control of borders to know who's coming in

Afghans who helped us yes, others that are refuges, yes

Economic migrant no.

It's such a mess that all sorts are piling in and criminals making a fortune "
isn't that how it's working now ?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Control of borders to know who's coming in

Afghans who helped us yes, others that are refuges, yes

Economic migrant no.

It's such a mess that all sorts are piling in and criminals making a fortune isn't that how it's working now ? "

A total fuck up? Yes

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *ired_upMan over a year ago

ashton

"Control of borders to know who's coming in

Afghans who helped us yes, others that are refuges, yes

Economic migrant no.

It's such a mess that all sorts are piling in and criminals making a fortune "

Don't we need economic migrants to actually do some jobs though?

This is the cause of the supply chain issues that have literally left us with food rotting in the fields, animals having to be culled in the farms, lack of stock in shops, and shortages in the NHS amounts other things.

No one has given a reason why they want this to happen as all the reasons they cite are bollox all to do with immigration.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Control of borders to know who's coming in

Afghans who helped us yes, others that are refuges, yes

Economic migrant no.

It's such a mess that all sorts are piling in and criminals making a fortune isn't that how it's working now ?

A total fuck up? Yes

"
which criminals are helping legal economic migrants over ?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Control of borders to know who's coming in

Afghans who helped us yes, others that are refuges, yes

Economic migrant no.

It's such a mess that all sorts are piling in and criminals making a fortune isn't that how it's working now ?

A total fuck up? Yes

which criminals are helping legal economic migrants over ?"

Ah gotcha now, well the government want British to get the priority for jobs to get them off welfare , but the lack of skills and experience is still in short supply, most likely because to some extent, employers don't like to invest in employees, in training or demanding x amount of years experience and not give people a chance.

There are plenty British lazey burgers too though who won't do the hard graft

If there arre skill shortages that cause a crisis eg like now for example the govt should grant visas, but if foreign workers don't want to Come here were fucked

Just my take on this topic, I'm open to sensible debate

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *mateur100Man over a year ago

nr faversham

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

"We have to keep receiving the way that we are"... really? So if someone tries to access the UK via legal routes but is refused, it's ok for them to just come over illegally?

You've missed the point I was making. Regardless of your view on if we should take more people or not, there are two scenarios.

1) We take them, fingerprint them and get an accurate set of numbers. We can then refuse access to the UK and deport.

2) We don't bring them into the system. They will come over anyway, the UK will never get them into the system, and we have no opportunity to deport them, or get the taxes from income/work.

Which do you prefer?

I'm very happy with option one BUT you assume that people will go quietly and I doubt that very much otherwise the illegal route wouldn't be taken by those who have failed in the legal route

I respectfully disagree. My point is that if you fail to gain legal access, you cannot expect to just gain access illegally and I don't understand what the issue is with that concept. Its not discriminatory, it's lawful.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

"We have to keep receiving the way that we are"... really? So if someone tries to access the UK via legal routes but is refused, it's ok for them to just come over illegally?

You've missed the point I was making. Regardless of your view on if we should take more people or not, there are two scenarios.

1) We take them, fingerprint them and get an accurate set of numbers. We can then refuse access to the UK and deport.

2) We don't bring them into the system. They will come over anyway, the UK will never get them into the system, and we have no opportunity to deport them, or get the taxes from income/work.

Which do you prefer?

I'm very happy with option one BUT you assume that people will go quietly and I doubt that very much otherwise the illegal route wouldn't be taken by those who have failed in the legal route

It's just not as easy to do.

The assumption with the channel is the crossers have failed once. I'm not sure that is the case.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *oxychick35Couple over a year ago

thornaby

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

"We have to keep receiving the way that we are"... really? So if someone tries to access the UK via legal routes but is refused, it's ok for them to just come over illegally?

You've missed the point I was making. Regardless of your view on if we should take more people or not, there are two scenarios.

1) We take them, fingerprint them and get an accurate set of numbers. We can then refuse access to the UK and deport.

2) We don't bring them into the system. They will come over anyway, the UK will never get them into the system, and we have no opportunity to deport them, or get the taxes from income/work.

Which do you prefer?

I'm very happy with option one BUT you assume that people will go quietly and I doubt that very much otherwise the illegal route wouldn't be taken by those who have failed in the legal route

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *L RogueMan over a year ago

London

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

My thoughts are that "issues with the homeless, housing, jobs, poverty levels, deprived areas of the country etc etc etc" are completely unrelated to immigration.

The government has no interest in tackling any of this with or without immigration.

That's not taking into account the net positive effect immigration has on the economy. So without it, we would have less tax to pay for all these things.

And you could also pick, say, trident. Scrap 1/3 of it, and you'd have £60 billion over the next 10 years to spend on other stuff.

Immigration as an issue is 100% a distraction tactic. It's a non issue made up by the government and media. "

This.

OP, this is the same government that were forced into a Uturn on feeding kids over lockdown by a footballer. Immigration is definitely not a factor.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

What any of us think doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

The government and powerful vested interests see every single immigrant as a potential tax payer and labourer for the country.

Immigration will never be stopped or controlled, because the places where they are put are not near where the people who are in charge actually live.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *ohnnyTwoNotesMan over a year ago

golden fields

"What any of us think doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things."

Completely agree with this.

The government and powerful vested interests see every single immigrant as a potential tax payer and labourer for the country.

Immigration is one of the biggest tools for distraction and propaganda in the government and media's arsenal. Just look at what they can achieve by blaming foreigners for everything, Brexit. The give zero shits about potential tax revenue and labour from immigration. Again see Brexit.

Immigration will never be stopped or controlled, because the places where they are put are not near where the people who are in charge actually live."

Why, what's wrong with living near to immigrants?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *eroy1000Man over a year ago

milton keynes

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts? "

I am not sure you can pause it. The immigrants both legal and illegal are not interested in how many we have taken and if the UK a has paused. Once here they need to be dealt with one way or another.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"What any of us think doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

Completely agree with this.

The government and powerful vested interests see every single immigrant as a potential tax payer and labourer for the country.

Immigration will never be stopped or controlled, because the places where they are put are not near where the people who are in charge actually live.

Why, what's wrong with living near to immigrants?"
do you live near any might help you understand some people point. yes like in life some are ok but alot aren't don't want to interact just bring there way over here im lucky we don't have any but travel afew miles down into Rotherham gee what a shit hole junk just chucked on front gardens kids not at school just aloud on streets all day my biggest gripe is the council have powers but won't use them.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *ohnnyTwoNotesMan over a year ago

golden fields

"What any of us think doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

Completely agree with this.

The government and powerful vested interests see every single immigrant as a potential tax payer and labourer for the country.

Immigration will never be stopped or controlled, because the places where they are put are not near where the people who are in charge actually live.

Why, what's wrong with living near to immigrants?do you live near any might help you understand some people point. yes like in life some are ok but alot aren't don't want to interact just bring there way over here im lucky we don't have any but travel afew miles down into Rotherham gee what a shit hole junk just chucked on front gardens kids not at school just aloud on streets all day my biggest gripe is the council have powers but won't use them."

I don't have a phobia of immigrants. I live and work with lots of them. Lovely people all.

Seems ridiculous to suggest that they're some how worse people simply because they're not British.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"What any of us think doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

Completely agree with this.

The government and powerful vested interests see every single immigrant as a potential tax payer and labourer for the country.

Immigration will never be stopped or controlled, because the places where they are put are not near where the people who are in charge actually live.

I don't have a phobia of immigrants. I live and work with lots of them. Lovely people all.

Seems ridiculous to suggest that they're some how worse people simply because they're not British."
that good for you we must just get the shit ones then lazy ones and sorry to disappoint I don't have a phobia I hate everyone that doesn't put the effort in be English or foreign I don't talk to some of my own lazy family so enjoy your new friends.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *ohnnyTwoNotesMan over a year ago

golden fields

"What any of us think doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

Completely agree with this.

The government and powerful vested interests see every single immigrant as a potential tax payer and labourer for the country.

Immigration will never be stopped or controlled, because the places where they are put are not near where the people who are in charge actually live.

I don't have a phobia of immigrants. I live and work with lots of them. Lovely people all.

Seems ridiculous to suggest that they're some how worse people simply because they're not British.that good for you we must just get the shit ones then lazy ones and sorry to disappoint I don't have a phobia I hate everyone that doesn't put the effort in be English or foreign I don't talk to some of my own lazy family so enjoy your new friends."

Amazing. Then why are you complaining about immigrants?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"What any of us think doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

Completely agree with this.

The government and powerful vested interests see every single immigrant as a potential tax payer and labourer for the country.

Immigration will never be stopped or controlled, because the places where they are put are not near where the people who are in charge actually live.

I don't have a phobia of immigrants. I live and work with lots of them. Lovely people all.

Amazing. Then why are you complaining about immigrants?

"
as said before if there not her to work and contribute to society then there not welcome. unfortunately we can't deport are own that are the same I really believe that give them 6 months if no job then deport and definitely no benefits for a few yrs until they have contributed no rent no child benefits no job seekers that for me would be a start.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *ohnnyTwoNotesMan over a year ago

golden fields

"What any of us think doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

Completely agree with this.

The government and powerful vested interests see every single immigrant as a potential tax payer and labourer for the country.

Immigration will never be stopped or controlled, because the places where they are put are not near where the people who are in charge actually live.

I don't have a phobia of immigrants. I live and work with lots of them. Lovely people all.

Amazing. Then why are you complaining about immigrants?

as said before if there not her to work and contribute to society then there not welcome. unfortunately we can't deport are own that are the same I really believe that give them 6 months if no job then deport and definitely no benefits for a few yrs until they have contributed no rent no child benefits no job seekers that for me would be a start."

This is what happens when you read too much far right propaganda.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"What any of us think doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

Completely agree with this.

The government and powerful vested interests see every single immigrant as a potential tax payer and labourer for the country.

Immigration will never be stopped or controlled, because the places where they are put are not near where the people who are in charge actually live.

I don't have a phobia of immigrants. I live and work with lots of them. Lovely people all.

Amazing. Then why are you complaining about immigrants?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"What any of us think doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

Completely agree with this.

The government and powerful vested interests see every single immigrant as a potential tax payer and labourer for the country.

Immigration will never be stopped or controlled, because the places where they are put are not near where the people who are in charge actually live.

I don't have a phobia of immigrants. I live and work with lots of them. Lovely people all.

Amazing. Then why are you complaining about immigrants?

Compulsory English lessons too, to a standard that exceeds your own. Shouldn’t cost too much.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"What any of us think doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

Completely agree with this.

The government and powerful vested interests see every single immigrant as a potential tax payer and labourer for the country.

Immigration will never be stopped or controlled, because the places where they are put are not near where the people who are in charge actually live.

I don't have a phobia of immigrants. I live and work with lots of them. Lovely people all.

Amazing. Then why are you complaining about immigrants?

This is what happens when you read too much far right propaganda.

"
no this is what happens when you live in the real world not the utopia you think we are in.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *or Fox SakeCouple over a year ago

Thornaby

"What any of us think doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

Completely agree with this.

The government and powerful vested interests see every single immigrant as a potential tax payer and labourer for the country.

Immigration will never be stopped or controlled, because the places where they are put are not near where the people who are in charge actually live.

I don't have a phobia of immigrants. I live and work with lots of them. Lovely people all.

Amazing. Then why are you complaining about immigrants?

What's achingly funny about that post is we could deport after 3 months

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *asyukMan over a year ago

West London

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts? "

Why, as a human being, would you actively want to refuse to help someone fleeing war or repression or starvation?

There may be circumstances that may reduce your ability to help, but why would you not wish to? Not even children.

If we create the situations that cause these outcomes through geopolitical and resource policies then the consequences arrive at our shores regardless.

The best way to reduce the cause of refugee migrant flows is increased foreign aid, which we have cut.

We don not "need" to lift a finger to help anyone, anywhere, ever. Why help those in difficulty in the UK? What's the distinction?

Do you really believe that the money spent on settling refugees is preventing us from solving our own problems?

We cannot educate people "because of refugees". We cannot house people "because of refugees". We cannot treat people "because of refugees". We cannot care for the elderly "because of refugees". We cannot fill potholes in roads "because of refugees".

You are actually saying that for us to be a better place we should not help anyone else, even though we are amongst the most fortunate on the planet.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *asyukMan over a year ago

West London

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

"We have to keep receiving the way that we are"... really? So if someone tries to access the UK via legal routes but is refused, it's ok for them to just come over illegally?

You've missed the point I was making. Regardless of your view on if we should take more people or not, there are two scenarios.

1) We take them, fingerprint them and get an accurate set of numbers. We can then refuse access to the UK and deport.

2) We don't bring them into the system. They will come over anyway, the UK will never get them into the system, and we have no opportunity to deport them, or get the taxes from income/work.

Which do you prefer?

I'm very happy with option one BUT you assume that people will go quietly and I doubt that very much otherwise the illegal route wouldn't be taken by those who have failed in the legal route

The options for legal access have been significantly reduced. The consequence of that is to force more desperate people to become "illegal". Far easier to demonise that way.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *uboCouple over a year ago

East kilbride

Not read the whole thread but my view is simple.

Have no issue with ones that have been airlifted straight into the UK that have escaped war torn countries etc.

It is those that have traveled though a number of safe countries to get here because we are seen as a soft touch. Some of those countries actively help them to get here as they don't want them.

The UK should make it harder to access the pots of gold at the end of the rainbow

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *ohnnyTwoNotesMan over a year ago

golden fields

"What any of us think doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

Completely agree with this.

The government and powerful vested interests see every single immigrant as a potential tax payer and labourer for the country.

Immigration will never be stopped or controlled, because the places where they are put are not near where the people who are in charge actually live.

I don't have a phobia of immigrants. I live and work with lots of them. Lovely people all.

Amazing. Then why are you complaining about immigrants?

This is what happens when you read too much far right propaganda.

no this is what happens when you live in the real world not the utopia you think we are in."

So utopia is people not hating immigrants?

Amazing!

Lol

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *oxychick35Couple over a year ago

thornaby

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

"We have to keep receiving the way that we are"... really? So if someone tries to access the UK via legal routes but is refused, it's ok for them to just come over illegally?

You've missed the point I was making. Regardless of your view on if we should take more people or not, there are two scenarios.

1) We take them, fingerprint them and get an accurate set of numbers. We can then refuse access to the UK and deport.

2) We don't bring them into the system. They will come over anyway, the UK will never get them into the system, and we have no opportunity to deport them, or get the taxes from income/work.

Which do you prefer?

I'm very happy with option one BUT you assume that people will go quietly and I doubt that very much otherwise the illegal route wouldn't be taken by those who have failed in the legal route

The options for legal access have been significantly reduced. The consequence of that is to force more desperate people to become "illegal". Far easier to demonise that way."
there needs to be a honest debate in immigration and illegal immigrants coming here and ask why they are so desperate to come here without people been called racist

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *asyukMan over a year ago

West London

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

"We have to keep receiving the way that we are"... really? So if someone tries to access the UK via legal routes but is refused, it's ok for them to just come over illegally?

You've missed the point I was making. Regardless of your view on if we should take more people or not, there are two scenarios.

1) We take them, fingerprint them and get an accurate set of numbers. We can then refuse access to the UK and deport.

2) We don't bring them into the system. They will come over anyway, the UK will never get them into the system, and we have no opportunity to deport them, or get the taxes from income/work.

Which do you prefer?

I'm very happy with option one BUT you assume that people will go quietly and I doubt that very much otherwise the illegal route wouldn't be taken by those who have failed in the legal route

The options for legal access have been significantly reduced. The consequence of that is to force more desperate people to become "illegal". Far easier to demonise that way.there needs to be a honest debate in immigration and illegal immigrants coming here and ask why they are so desperate to come here without people been called racist "

Why do people become refugees?

Not that hard to answer.

If forced to flee, why would they want to come somewhere where they speak the language or have family?

Again, not enormously difficult to comprehend.

Why are their more illegal immigrants? Perhaps because options for legal migration are being closed? By the same token large numbers of illegal immigrants are being allowed to stay indefinitely because the Courts accept their accounts, which is awkward for the Government which needs to demonise and blame them and use them as a distraction for their own failings.

You really believe that the UK is some sort of a 'soft touch' and people uproot their lives and suffer threat and danger on a whim?

Nobody has mentioned race, as much as you have claimed that as the main topic.

Try thinking about them as real people.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *obletonMan over a year ago

A Home Among The Woodland Creatures

"Not read the whole thread but my view is simple.

Have no issue with ones that have been airlifted straight into the UK that have escaped war torn countries etc.

It is those that have traveled though a number of safe countries to get here because we are seen as a soft touch. Some of those countries actively help them to get here as they don't want them.

The UK should make it harder to access the pots of gold at the end of the rainbow"

While it is an oft cited myth that refugee status must be claimed in the first safe country a refugee arrives in, there is no law - national or international - that states this.

This has even been tested in British courts.

The reasons why someone might pass through more than one safe country before they claim asylum are usually more pragmatic than coming to Britain to claim on a benefit system that is notoriously stingy in comparison to many of our continental neighbours, and compounded by much poorer housing opportunities.

Things like the ability to speak the language or having relatives in that country tend to play a much greater role.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *oxychick35Couple over a year ago

thornaby

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

"We have to keep receiving the way that we are"... really? So if someone tries to access the UK via legal routes but is refused, it's ok for them to just come over illegally?

You've missed the point I was making. Regardless of your view on if we should take more people or not, there are two scenarios.

1) We take them, fingerprint them and get an accurate set of numbers. We can then refuse access to the UK and deport.

2) We don't bring them into the system. They will come over anyway, the UK will never get them into the system, and we have no opportunity to deport them, or get the taxes from income/work.

Which do you prefer?

I'm very happy with option one BUT you assume that people will go quietly and I doubt that very much otherwise the illegal route wouldn't be taken by those who have failed in the legal route

Why do people become refugees?

Not that hard to answer.

If forced to flee, why would they want to come somewhere where they speak the language or have family?

Again, not enormously difficult to comprehend.

You really believe that the UK is some sort of a 'soft touch' and people uproot their lives and suffer threat and danger on a whim?

Nobody has mentioned race, as much as you have claimed that as the main topic.

Try thinking about them as real people."
there ya go back handed insult when have I not thought of them as real people ? You proved my point you just can’t talk about immigration it turns into a farce

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *kstallionMan over a year ago

milton keynes

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

"We have to keep receiving the way that we are"... really? So if someone tries to access the UK via legal routes but is refused, it's ok for them to just come over illegally?

You've missed the point I was making. Regardless of your view on if we should take more people or not, there are two scenarios.

1) We take them, fingerprint them and get an accurate set of numbers. We can then refuse access to the UK and deport.

2) We don't bring them into the system. They will come over anyway, the UK will never get them into the system, and we have no opportunity to deport them, or get the taxes from income/work.

Which do you prefer?

I'm very happy with option one BUT you assume that people will go quietly and I doubt that very much otherwise the illegal route wouldn't be taken by those who have failed in the legal route

There does need to be a more national debate about it with respect on all sides. Also some accurate figures like exactly how many are fleeing war or persucution. How many speak english. How many have family here. What support should they get ect ect

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *oxychick35Couple over a year ago

thornaby

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

"We have to keep receiving the way that we are"... really? So if someone tries to access the UK via legal routes but is refused, it's ok for them to just come over illegally?

You've missed the point I was making. Regardless of your view on if we should take more people or not, there are two scenarios.

1) We take them, fingerprint them and get an accurate set of numbers. We can then refuse access to the UK and deport.

2) We don't bring them into the system. They will come over anyway, the UK will never get them into the system, and we have no opportunity to deport them, or get the taxes from income/work.

Which do you prefer?

I'm very happy with option one BUT you assume that people will go quietly and I doubt that very much otherwise the illegal route wouldn't be taken by those who have failed in the legal route

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *asyukMan over a year ago

West London

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

"We have to keep receiving the way that we are"... really? So if someone tries to access the UK via legal routes but is refused, it's ok for them to just come over illegally?

You've missed the point I was making. Regardless of your view on if we should take more people or not, there are two scenarios.

1) We take them, fingerprint them and get an accurate set of numbers. We can then refuse access to the UK and deport.

2) We don't bring them into the system. They will come over anyway, the UK will never get them into the system, and we have no opportunity to deport them, or get the taxes from income/work.

Which do you prefer?

I'm very happy with option one BUT you assume that people will go quietly and I doubt that very much otherwise the illegal route wouldn't be taken by those who have failed in the legal route

Why do people become refugees?

Not that hard to answer.

If forced to flee, why would they want to come somewhere where they speak the language or have family?

Again, not enormously difficult to comprehend.

You really believe that the UK is some sort of a 'soft touch' and people uproot their lives and suffer threat and danger on a whim?

Nobody has mentioned race, as much as you have claimed that as the main topic.

Try thinking about them as real people.there ya go back handed insult when have I not thought of them as real people ? You proved my point you just can’t talk about immigration it turns into a farce "

..and there you are jumping straight to "feeling insulted" and slighted in some way rather than addressing a single one of the points raised. You have stated very clearly what your expectation was and have found a way to make it true.

It's always about "others" coming over here to take "our stuff". Be that jobs, houses or culture. As if this is the thing that is preventing us from solving the problems in our society. It is clearly a transparent distraction which many people grasp because, like so many things, they are an easy target of blame and stopping them from coming here sounds like a simple solution in a complex world.

Refugees are people with lives. Humanise them. Prove that you can do it because I'm yet to see it on any thread where the status of refugees is "debated".

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *asyukMan over a year ago

West London

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

"We have to keep receiving the way that we are"... really? So if someone tries to access the UK via legal routes but is refused, it's ok for them to just come over illegally?

You've missed the point I was making. Regardless of your view on if we should take more people or not, there are two scenarios.

1) We take them, fingerprint them and get an accurate set of numbers. We can then refuse access to the UK and deport.

2) We don't bring them into the system. They will come over anyway, the UK will never get them into the system, and we have no opportunity to deport them, or get the taxes from income/work.

Which do you prefer?

I'm very happy with option one BUT you assume that people will go quietly and I doubt that very much otherwise the illegal route wouldn't be taken by those who have failed in the legal route

Why don't you go and find some of this data then, to prove the point that we have a "refugee problem" rather than continue to claim, without any evidence, that you or anyone else is being called a racist?

Show us the data.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *asyukMan over a year ago

West London

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts? "

What is your evidence for any if this?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

My thoughts are that "issues with the homeless, housing, jobs, poverty levels, deprived areas of the country etc etc etc" are completely unrelated to immigration.

The government has no interest in tackling any of this with or without immigration.

That's not taking into account the net positive effect immigration has on the economy. So without it, we would have less tax to pay for all these things.

And you could also pick, say, trident. Scrap 1/3 of it, and you'd have £60 billion over the next 10 years to spend on other stuff.

Immigration as an issue is 100% a distraction tactic. It's a non issue made up by the government and media.

Not sure I understand your first point.

Our population increases more from new born humans than it does from immigration.

Immigrants put more into the system than they take out. So stopping it, would not mean we have more cash for the NHS.

Plus, I firmly believe that the government does not have the will to solve these issues in society. "

The facts are that is you analyse the spend on the NHS. There are two groups in society that account for a significantly disproportionate spend per capita. Neither group are predominantly made up of immigrants.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *kstallionMan over a year ago

milton keynes

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

"We have to keep receiving the way that we are"... really? So if someone tries to access the UK via legal routes but is refused, it's ok for them to just come over illegally?

You've missed the point I was making. Regardless of your view on if we should take more people or not, there are two scenarios.

1) We take them, fingerprint them and get an accurate set of numbers. We can then refuse access to the UK and deport.

2) We don't bring them into the system. They will come over anyway, the UK will never get them into the system, and we have no opportunity to deport them, or get the taxes from income/work.

Which do you prefer?

I'm very happy with option one BUT you assume that people will go quietly and I doubt that very much otherwise the illegal route wouldn't be taken by those who have failed in the legal route

Show us the data."

That's a rather aggressive post. I see it's not directed at me but please treat other posters with respect. Do you have the data in question?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

Which asylum seekers, refugees, migrants (delete as appropriate) do you think should be given any sort of priority?

Let’s start with Afghans who helped and supported the British Military?

What say you???

Fuck them?"

Guns blazing !

Best of luck OP

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *asyukMan over a year ago

West London

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

"We have to keep receiving the way that we are"... really? So if someone tries to access the UK via legal routes but is refused, it's ok for them to just come over illegally?

You've missed the point I was making. Regardless of your view on if we should take more people or not, there are two scenarios.

1) We take them, fingerprint them and get an accurate set of numbers. We can then refuse access to the UK and deport.

2) We don't bring them into the system. They will come over anyway, the UK will never get them into the system, and we have no opportunity to deport them, or get the taxes from income/work.

Which do you prefer?

I'm very happy with option one BUT you assume that people will go quietly and I doubt that very much otherwise the illegal route wouldn't be taken by those who have failed in the legal route

Show us the data.

That's a rather aggressive post. I see it's not directed at me but please treat other posters with respect. Do you have the data in question?"

"Aggressive"? Asking for information to prove a point is aggressive? Asking to treat refugees with some empathy is aggressive?

Time and again groups of people are "othered" and accused of all manner of things that are claimed to damage the UK.

It's come to the point where the people making these accusations talk about "honesty" whilst claiming that they are being victimised as racist when nothing of the sort is happening. Just a way to avoid providing any information to back up what is said

The OP and others claim that refugees cause significant problems to the UK and should be stopped and I have to provide evidence?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *asyukMan over a year ago

West London

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

"We have to keep receiving the way that we are"... really? So if someone tries to access the UK via legal routes but is refused, it's ok for them to just come over illegally?

You've missed the point I was making. Regardless of your view on if we should take more people or not, there are two scenarios.

1) We take them, fingerprint them and get an accurate set of numbers. We can then refuse access to the UK and deport.

2) We don't bring them into the system. They will come over anyway, the UK will never get them into the system, and we have no opportunity to deport them, or get the taxes from income/work.

Which do you prefer?

I'm very happy with option one BUT you assume that people will go quietly and I doubt that very much otherwise the illegal route wouldn't be taken by those who have failed in the legal route

Why don't you do it, rather than always asking others to?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *kstallionMan over a year ago

milton keynes

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

"We have to keep receiving the way that we are"... really? So if someone tries to access the UK via legal routes but is refused, it's ok for them to just come over illegally?

You've missed the point I was making. Regardless of your view on if we should take more people or not, there are two scenarios.

1) We take them, fingerprint them and get an accurate set of numbers. We can then refuse access to the UK and deport.

2) We don't bring them into the system. They will come over anyway, the UK will never get them into the system, and we have no opportunity to deport them, or get the taxes from income/work.

Which do you prefer?

I'm very happy with option one BUT you assume that people will go quietly and I doubt that very much otherwise the illegal route wouldn't be taken by those who have failed in the legal route

Why don't you do it, rather than always asking others to?"

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

"We have to keep receiving the way that we are"... really? So if someone tries to access the UK via legal routes but is refused, it's ok for them to just come over illegally?

You've missed the point I was making. Regardless of your view on if we should take more people or not, there are two scenarios.

1) We take them, fingerprint them and get an accurate set of numbers. We can then refuse access to the UK and deport.

2) We don't bring them into the system. They will come over anyway, the UK will never get them into the system, and we have no opportunity to deport them, or get the taxes from income/work.

Which do you prefer?

I'm very happy with option one BUT you assume that people will go quietly and I doubt that very much otherwise the illegal route wouldn't be taken by those who have failed in the legal route

Why don't you do it, rather than always asking others to?

I'm not asking you or anyone else on here to go and find the figures. If you happened to have the official figures to hand then great please share but it was not a request for you to go searching. I said there should be a national debate about it with accurate figures. From this I mean supplied by the relevant departments at the time of the national debate. Things like how many speak English, have family in the UK,what support they require, maybe if they have family in the UK how have they settled in. I think it would aid the debate to have the relevant data"
u agree it would be interesting to understand why people seek refugee status here especially where they are risking their lives. Maybe it's my own bias but i struggle to believe that the main driver for risking one's life is because the UK has such a generous benefits system. I'd imagine it's family in many instances.

I'd also want a national discussion on the differences between illegal immigrants and those seeking asylum and whether how you enter the country makes a difference to these definitions. My understanding is channel crossers aren't illegal just be cause they entered via a dinghy.

I'd also want to know abilute numbers and see how this rallies versus other areas of population growth, eg births, economic migration, etc. My sense is that the numbers are not significant enough to cause infrastructure strain, and that other policies etc are causing the creaking.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *asyukMan over a year ago

West London

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

"We have to keep receiving the way that we are"... really? So if someone tries to access the UK via legal routes but is refused, it's ok for them to just come over illegally?

You've missed the point I was making. Regardless of your view on if we should take more people or not, there are two scenarios.

1) We take them, fingerprint them and get an accurate set of numbers. We can then refuse access to the UK and deport.

2) We don't bring them into the system. They will come over anyway, the UK will never get them into the system, and we have no opportunity to deport them, or get the taxes from income/work.

Which do you prefer?

I'm very happy with option one BUT you assume that people will go quietly and I doubt that very much otherwise the illegal route wouldn't be taken by those who have failed in the legal route

Why don't you do it, rather than always asking others to?

The data is available, but not part of any national debate because the facts make it less of a "crisis" than is politically useful.

I'm bored of posting the links because the information is ignored using the pretext of complaining about being accused of racism.

Wanting a "debate" or "conversation" but then avoiding it.

The discussion always follows the lines that the OP has with there being an assumption that there is a major problem that needs solving and that it is having terrible consequences on the UK.

All that overlayed with dehumanising the people that are involved because they are treated as statistics and problems.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *kstallionMan over a year ago

milton keynes

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

"We have to keep receiving the way that we are"... really? So if someone tries to access the UK via legal routes but is refused, it's ok for them to just come over illegally?

You've missed the point I was making. Regardless of your view on if we should take more people or not, there are two scenarios.

1) We take them, fingerprint them and get an accurate set of numbers. We can then refuse access to the UK and deport.

2) We don't bring them into the system. They will come over anyway, the UK will never get them into the system, and we have no opportunity to deport them, or get the taxes from income/work.

Which do you prefer?

I'm very happy with option one BUT you assume that people will go quietly and I doubt that very much otherwise the illegal route wouldn't be taken by those who have failed in the legal route

Why don't you do it, rather than always asking others to?

I'm not asking you or anyone else on here to go and find the figures. If you happened to have the official figures to hand then great please share but it was not a request for you to go searching. I said there should be a national debate about it with accurate figures. From this I mean supplied by the relevant departments at the time of the national debate. Things like how many speak English, have family in the UK,what support they require, maybe if they have family in the UK how have they settled in. I think it would aid the debate to have the relevant datau agree it would be interesting to understand why people seek refugee status here especially where they are risking their lives. Maybe it's my own bias but i struggle to believe that the main driver for risking one's life is because the UK has such a generous benefits system. I'd imagine it's family in many instances.

Well if we were to have a national discussion with the figures then we could see how many have family here and can speak English. How well have the families already here settled in. Are they working and contributing or still out of work. That way it does not matter what anyone's bias is as we would have cold hard facts.I agree with the other information you mention being part of the discussions. Clearing up what is legal and illegal would help as would the effects of taking in people on public services. How it affects people already citizens, if at all should be part of it. If we could have such a national debate with accurate figures and where people can voice their opinions without insults on all sides then I feel it will help overcome people's fears

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *irldnCouple over a year ago

Brighton

Best of luck.

Apart from the point on being called a racist and/or inhuman(e), which of the other points you raised are incorrect?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *asyukMan over a year ago

West London

"What are your thoughts on immigration and the taking on of refugees?

Do we need to take more?

Or are we better off pausing it for an period to be able to do better in the future?

It seems that for us to be a better place to come to and able to help refugees and migrants we need to fix those issues.

What are your thoughts?

"We have to keep receiving the way that we are"... really? So if someone tries to access the UK via legal routes but is refused, it's ok for them to just come over illegally?

You've missed the point I was making. Regardless of your view on if we should take more people or not, there are two scenarios.

1) We take them, fingerprint them and get an accurate set of numbers. We can then refuse access to the UK and deport.

2) We don't bring them into the system. They will come over anyway, the UK will never get them into the system, and we have no opportunity to deport them, or get the taxes from income/work.

Which do you prefer?

I'm very happy with option one BUT you assume that people will go quietly and I doubt that very much otherwise the illegal route wouldn't be taken by those who have failed in the legal route

Why don't you do it, rather than always asking others to?

I'm not asking you or anyone else on here to go and find the figures. If you happened to have the official figures to hand then great please share but it was not a request for you to go searching. I said there should be a national debate about it with accurate figures. From this I mean supplied by the relevant departments at the time of the national debate. Things like how many speak English, have family in the UK,what support they require, maybe if they have family in the UK how have they settled in. I think it would aid the debate to have the relevant datau agree it would be interesting to understand why people seek refugee status here especially where they are risking their lives. Maybe it's my own bias but i struggle to believe that the main driver for risking one's life is because the UK has such a generous benefits system. I'd imagine it's family in many instances.

I do not disagree, but the information has been available for years.

It is not in the interests of this Government or the press to have an informed discussion.

Fear is a far more useful tool in getting votes.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *irldnCouple over a year ago

Brighton

Here’s an analogy about refugees.

Imagine you live on a street with (let’s say 15 houses). 14 of those houses are terraced but the one you live in at the top of the street is detached, call it number 1.

Some time in the past you owned number 15 and the people living their were your tenants but you sold them the house a few years back (although it belonged to their grandparents originally and you just took it).

At the bottom of the street the neighbours fall out. You decide to side with number 14 against number 15 and give them matches and petrol which number 14 uses to burn out number 15.

The house at number 15 is no longer habitable or is too dangerous to still live in. Plus the people in number 14 are still antagonistic and spoiling for another fight.

The people at number 15 need somewhere to live. They can’t move into 14 so where do they go?

Who has a moral duty to those people? Should Numbers 2-13 be forced to take them in? Or does number 1 (your house) have any moral obligation to help those people?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Here’s an analogy about refugees.

Imagine you live on a street with (let’s say 15 houses). 14 of those houses are terraced but the one you live in at the top of the street is detached, call it number 1.

At the bottom of the street the neighbours fall out. You decide to side with number 14 against number 15 and give them matches and petrol which number 14 uses to burn out number 15.

The house at number 15 is no longer habitable or is too dangerous to still live in. Plus the people in number 14 are still antagonistic and spoiling for another fight.

The people at number 15 need somewhere to live. They can’t move into 14 so where do they go?

Who has a moral duty to those people? Should Numbers 2-13 be forced to take them in? Or does number 1 (your house) have any moral obligation to help those people?"
that's where you go wrong you bring morals into it im afraid morals want save no 15.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *irldnCouple over a year ago

Brighton

Well we can always hope for human decency!

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *irldnCouple over a year ago

Brighton

To add...of course there is poverty and homelessness in the UK which is disgusting when you consider this is supposed to be the 5/6th richest country in the world!

What I find odd is that it is often (not always) the same people who talked up UK’s economic muscle and standing on the world stage as the reason we would do so well leaving the EU/Brexit who also then go on to say there isn’t enough money to help refugees! Are we rich and powerful or aren’t we? Which is it?

Why can’t we do both? Why can’t we eradicate poverty in the UK and also help refugees?

That’s rhetorical by the way, we all know the answer.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *oxychick35Couple over a year ago

thornaby

"Here’s an analogy about refugees.

Imagine you live on a street with (let’s say 15 houses). 14 of those houses are terraced but the one you live in at the top of the street is detached, call it number 1.

At the bottom of the street the neighbours fall out. You decide to side with number 14 against number 15 and give them matches and petrol which number 14 uses to burn out number 15.

The house at number 15 is no longer habitable or is too dangerous to still live in. Plus the people in number 14 are still antagonistic and spoiling for another fight.

The people at number 15 need somewhere to live. They can’t move into 14 so where do they go?

Who has a moral duty to those people? Should Numbers 2-13 be forced to take them in? Or does number 1 (your house) have any moral obligation to help those people?"
lost me lol

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *irldnCouple over a year ago

Brighton

"Here’s an analogy about refugees.

Imagine you live on a street with (let’s say 15 houses). 14 of those houses are terraced but the one you live in at the top of the street is detached, call it number 1.

At the bottom of the street the neighbours fall out. You decide to side with number 14 against number 15 and give them matches and petrol which number 14 uses to burn out number 15.

The house at number 15 is no longer habitable or is too dangerous to still live in. Plus the people in number 14 are still antagonistic and spoiling for another fight.

The people at number 15 need somewhere to live. They can’t move into 14 so where do they go?

Who has a moral duty to those people? Should Numbers 2-13 be forced to take them in? Or does number 1 (your house) have any moral obligation to help those people?lost me lol"

Really isn’t that hard to follow! I thought it was a bit Janet & John!

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *oxychick35Couple over a year ago

thornaby

"Here’s an analogy about refugees.

Imagine you live on a street with (let’s say 15 houses). 14 of those houses are terraced but the one you live in at the top of the street is detached, call it number 1.

At the bottom of the street the neighbours fall out. You decide to side with number 14 against number 15 and give them matches and petrol which number 14 uses to burn out number 15.

The house at number 15 is no longer habitable or is too dangerous to still live in. Plus the people in number 14 are still antagonistic and spoiling for another fight.

The people at number 15 need somewhere to live. They can’t move into 14 so where do they go?

Who has a moral duty to those people? Should Numbers 2-13 be forced to take them in? Or does number 1 (your house) have any moral obligation to help those people?lost me lol

Really isn’t that hard to follow! I thought it was a bit Janet & John!"
more Peter and Jane should of just said it’s the uks fault lol

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *irldnCouple over a year ago

Brighton

"Here’s an analogy about refugees.

Imagine you live on a street with (let’s say 15 houses). 14 of those houses are terraced but the one you live in at the top of the street is detached, call it number 1.

At the bottom of the street the neighbours fall out. You decide to side with number 14 against number 15 and give them matches and petrol which number 14 uses to burn out number 15.

The house at number 15 is no longer habitable or is too dangerous to still live in. Plus the people in number 14 are still antagonistic and spoiling for another fight.

The people at number 15 need somewhere to live. They can’t move into 14 so where do they go?

Who has a moral duty to those people? Should Numbers 2-13 be forced to take them in? Or does number 1 (your house) have any moral obligation to help those people?lost me lol

Really isn’t that hard to follow! I thought it was a bit Janet & John! more Peter and Jane should of just said it’s the uks fault lol"

The problem is that while not everything is the UK’s fault, some things are.

My analogy stands. Tell me which house has the moral obligation to help rehouse the people from the burned out house?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *oxychick35Couple over a year ago

thornaby

"Here’s an analogy about refugees.

Imagine you live on a street with (let’s say 15 houses). 14 of those houses are terraced but the one you live in at the top of the street is detached, call it number 1.

At the bottom of the street the neighbours fall out. You decide to side with number 14 against number 15 and give them matches and petrol which number 14 uses to burn out number 15.

The house at number 15 is no longer habitable or is too dangerous to still live in. Plus the people in number 14 are still antagonistic and spoiling for another fight.

The people at number 15 need somewhere to live. They can’t move into 14 so where do they go?

Who has a moral duty to those people? Should Numbers 2-13 be forced to take them in? Or does number 1 (your house) have any moral obligation to help those people?lost me lol

Really isn’t that hard to follow! I thought it was a bit Janet & John! more Peter and Jane should of just said it’s the uks fault lol

The problem is that while not everything is the UK’s fault, some things are.

My analogy stands. Tell me which house has the moral obligation to help rehouse the people from the burned out house?"
have you opened up your own house or are you just another Bob geldof ?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *irldnCouple over a year ago

Brighton

"Here’s an analogy about refugees.

Imagine you live on a street with (let’s say 15 houses). 14 of those houses are terraced but the one you live in at the top of the street is detached, call it number 1.

At the bottom of the street the neighbours fall out. You decide to side with number 14 against number 15 and give them matches and petrol which number 14 uses to burn out number 15.

The house at number 15 is no longer habitable or is too dangerous to still live in. Plus the people in number 14 are still antagonistic and spoiling for another fight.

The people at number 15 need somewhere to live. They can’t move into 14 so where do they go?

Who has a moral duty to those people? Should Numbers 2-13 be forced to take them in? Or does number 1 (your house) have any moral obligation to help those people?lost me lol

Really isn’t that hard to follow! I thought it was a bit Janet & John! more Peter and Jane should of just said it’s the uks fault lol

The problem is that while not everything is the UK’s fault, some things are.

My analogy stands. Tell me which house has the moral obligation to help rehouse the people from the burned out house?have you opened up your own house or are you just another Bob geldof ?"

So you cannot answer a straightforward question!

You realise of course that the houses are analogous for countries though right? Of course you do!

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *oxychick35Couple over a year ago

thornaby

"Here’s an analogy about refugees.

Imagine you live on a street with (let’s say 15 houses). 14 of those houses are terraced but the one you live in at the top of the street is detached, call it number 1.

At the bottom of the street the neighbours fall out. You decide to side with number 14 against number 15 and give them matches and petrol which number 14 uses to burn out number 15.

The house at number 15 is no longer habitable or is too dangerous to still live in. Plus the people in number 14 are still antagonistic and spoiling for another fight.

The people at number 15 need somewhere to live. They can’t move into 14 so where do they go?

Who has a moral duty to those people? Should Numbers 2-13 be forced to take them in? Or does number 1 (your house) have any moral obligation to help those people?lost me lol

Really isn’t that hard to follow! I thought it was a bit Janet & John! more Peter and Jane should of just said it’s the uks fault lol

The problem is that while not everything is the UK’s fault, some things are.

My analogy stands. Tell me which house has the moral obligation to help rehouse the people from the burned out house?have you opened up your own house or are you just another Bob geldof ?

So you cannot answer a straightforward question!

You realise of course that the houses are analogous for countries though right? Of course you do!"
yes we do have a moral duty you do realise the U.K. takes them in aswell don’t you ? Of course you do

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

By *irtylittletramp100TV/TS over a year ago

Notts

uk 280 people per sq km france 122 per sq km sweden 25 per sq km, Hmmmm looks like uk is pretty full then? compared to other nations? I wonder if thats why the swedes are often voted happiest nation?However.....

Being west midlands has housed twice as many refugees as wales and only 32 Scottish councils signed up to the refugee resettlement programe its clear england is punching way above its weight class, hurray for england and boo everyone else who says the right thing but dont actually do it