• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

Baleforce said:
The attitudes of some in this country are hugely disappointing.

So little empathy now.

I’m also kind of disgusted by Mamoud’s statements on immigration today, buying into the false right wing narrative that “it’s tearing the country apart”.

We don’t have an immigration problem in this country, we have a humanity problem.
Click to expand...

We need immigration, I don’t think anyone would argue that we don’t. The question is how many do we allow to stay. We can’t take every single immigrant that tries to come over here. The fact that some of them are put up in hotels is just farcical and shows we haven’t got a handle on the problem at all, and that goes for both parties (Labour and Tories).
 
Jurgen the German said:
We need immigration, I don’t think anyone would argue that we don’t. The question is how many do we allow to stay. We can’t take every single immigrant that tries to come over here. The fact that some of them are put up in hotels is just farcical and shows we haven’t got a handle on the problem at all, and that goes for both parties (Labour and Tories).
Click to expand...
The bolded bit is a big part of the problem - as in the perception such statements give. In reality asylum seekers are not being put up in “hotels”. Rather hotels are being commandeered as accommodation for asylum seekers, such that they are no longer “hotels” but more like accommodation blocks.
I think everyone agrees that’s not an optimal solution but until the whole system of assessing claims is speeded up it’s what we are left with.
 
Jurgen the German said:
We need immigration, I don’t think anyone would argue that we don’t. The question is how many do we allow to stay. We can’t take every single immigrant that tries to come over here. The fact that some of them are put up in hotels is just farcical and shows we haven’t got a handle on the problem at all, and that goes for both parties (Labour and Tories).
Click to expand...

We should take some.

And the number we take should be strongly correlated to our involvement in the reason they have become refugees in the first place.

We should also have an actual legal route for asylum.

Lastly, the hotels used to house these people are brickholes, it’s not a Ritz Carlton. They are not being put up in booking.com availability, they are buildings which have been taken over by for profit companies for this specific purpose.

Now, some are better than others, but mostly they offer the same comfort and amenities as an open prison, but with worse food and no entertainment or opportunity for education.

What was is that Mandela, Dostoevsky, Gandhi, and even Churchill, said about the true measure of society?
 
Baleforce said:
We should take some.

And the number we take should be strongly correlated to our involvement in the reason they have become refugees in the first place.

We should also have an actual legal route for asylum.

Lastly, the hotels used to house these people are brickholes, it’s not a Ritz Carlton. They are not being put up in booking.com availability, they are buildings which have been taken over by for profit companies for this specific purpose.

Now, some are better than others, but mostly they offer the same comfort and amenities as an open prison, but with worse food and no entertainment or opportunity for education.

What was is that Mandela, Dostoevsky, Gandhi, and even Churchill, said about the true measure of society?
Click to expand...
That's not really relevant. Housing them at all is a cost, a cost that taxpayers are needlessly paying for.

The sum total spent on housing people who have arrived here illegally should be £0.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
The bolded bit is a big part of the problem - as in the perception such statements give. In reality asylum seekers are not being put up in “hotels”. Rather hotels are being commandeered as accommodation for asylum seekers, such that they are no longer “hotels” but more like accommodation blocks.
I think everyone agrees that’s not an optimal solution but until the whole system of assessing claims is speeded up it’s what we are left with.
Click to expand...
And here lies the issue, they put them in Army Barracks and people moan and protest that also.
 
scaramanga said:
That's not really relevant. Housing them at all is a cost, a cost that taxpayers are needlessly paying for.

The sum total spent on housing people who have arrived here illegally should be £0.
Click to expand...

A. I disagree. This is a global issue, we need to accept the shared burden, the idea that our responsibility ends at our borders is ridiculous, and morally reprehensible.

B. People have to arrive illegally, because we are too fudging backwards and cruel to make a legal route.

The world has changed, we are all in this together now, history will judge us.
 
Baleforce said:
A. I disagree. This is a global issue, we need to accept the shared burden, the idea that our responsibility ends at our borders is ridiculous, and morally reprehensible.

B. People have to arrive illegally, because we are too fudging backwards and cruel to make a legal route.

The world has changed, we are all in this together now, history will judge us.
Click to expand...
There are many disadvantages to being an island. Having a protectable border is one of the few advantages.

It is a global problem, just as economics is a global contest. Let them be someone else's cost. Our public services are fudged, our tax burden is the highest since WWII, altruism is not a luxury we can afford. Once we can afford to fund our public services and keep tax at a sensible minimum, we can do our bit.
 
scaramanga said:
There are many disadvantages to being an island. Having a protectable border is one of the few advantages.

It is a global problem, just as economics is a global contest. Let them be someone else's cost. Our public services are fudged, our tax burden is the highest since WWII, altruism is not a luxury we can afford. Once we can afford to fund our public services and keep tax at a sensible minimum, we can do our bit.
Click to expand...

It’s not a luxury, it’s an investment.

One day it might be us seeking refuge.

It’s moral leadership.
 
Last edited:
Baleforce said:
It’s not a luxury, it’s an investment.

One day it might be us seeking refuge.

It’s moral leadership.
Click to expand...
We'll all be trekking off to Siberia and Canada when the climate crisis tipping point happens in the next few decades, as they will be the only habitable parts of the globe
 
Glenda's Legs said:
The bolded bit is a big part of the problem - as in the perception such statements give. In reality asylum seekers are not being put up in “hotels”. Rather hotels are being commandeered as accommodation for asylum seekers, such that they are no longer “hotels” but more like accommodation blocks.
I think everyone agrees that’s not an optimal solution but until the whole system of assessing claims is speeded up it’s what we are left with.
Click to expand...

Well the fact that we have nowhere else to put them is farcical.

And your final point is the crucial one. How do we deal with so many claims when so many people are coming over here? Well always being playing catch up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back