Vote!

[Cousin Jack]

The ECHR and the refugee protocols were developed in response to WW2. Many millions had been displaced, often moved as slave labour. Infrastructure to help was broken, boundaries had been redrawn some states no longer existed.

They are now being (mis)used in a totally different world. There is a perception that many European countries dislike asylum seekers, and that England is an Eldorado. Both are untrue. English is however probably the language asylum seekers can at least speak a little, they WANT to come here but at the present rate of immigration, legal and illegal, the bloody island will sink soon.

Send them to Scotland/Wales/Cornwall say some, there is plenty of space there. True, there IS a lot more space, but bog all housing, or employment, or infrastructure like hospitals.

Sorry, but the time has come to get hard hearted. We cannot accommodate all of them, so set a limit and make it stick. By whatever means are necessary, draconian if need be.

[Mr. Dazzle]

That's the issue, deport them to where?

What's needed is an agreement where you can deport them back to the first safe country they travelled through.

Exactly - to where?

Why would any other country sign up to accept people 'back' that have already left to seek asylum in the UK? Flip it the other way around, if people were coming to the UK with the intent of boarding a boat to France would you all be suggesting that the UK sign up to an agreement to accept people back from France?

I don't see any workable solutions here other either stopping at source or accepting people and making it possible for them to integrate into society (i.e. not get left in Asylum Limbo). I admit neither of those things is popular or easy.

[Greenman]

I'm not keen on a lot of the hypocrisy as well to be honest.

I've frequently pointed out the horrendous death rates in places like Africa, but it's been really clear that no one actually cares.....until some of them land on a UK beach somewhere and then all of a sudden there is a lot of concern for these poor victims - they didn't seem bothered at all when they're dying in their own country and a cynic might suggest that they're only interested now that there are political points to be scored

Well I did suggest that addressing some of these problems 'at source' might be a good idea some time ago but didn't get much support for such a radical idea.

We reap what we have sown.

Many NGO's and other charitable organisations been doing this for decades. Been making political and military elites wealthy, shame about the poor eh? Anyone who thinks the majority of aid goes to the poor is living in la-la land, but we are morally bound to try of course.

I have a friend that designs the writes the payment software for some charities, i won't name them but let's just say you are not wrong with your assumptions.

[Greenman]

Countries that seem manage immigration very well don't have two of the disadvantages that the UK has.

1. They don't seem troubled by guilt.
2. Most importantly they don't use immigration as a political sword to slash away with.

Without those two things it means that sensible, non-emotional decisions can be made.

One of the things that annoys me is the lack of care some people show towards the victims of this situation, they only care about scoring political points. No one is banging their fist on the table about child mortality in Africa, but show them an African child standing on a beach in the UK and they're suddenly evangelical about the injustices committed by the UK government that they don't favour.

And i agree with you again, i like the new Iccy 2.0

Alluding back to my posts yesterday, this is all to do with greed. If some of the wealth in the world was released to help the countries that are in complete disarray then the issue of people wanting to leave to find asylum in countries like the UK would be minimal, you would hope.

Maybe not so much in the war torn countries as that situation is a bit more complicated, but certainly in the countries where poverty is to blame for the majority of people wanting to leave!

[Rockburner]

Countries that seem manage immigration very well don't have two of the disadvantages that the UK has.

1. They don't seem troubled by guilt.
2. Most importantly they don't use immigration as a political sword to slash away with.

Without those two things it means that sensible, non-emotional decisions can be made.

One of the things that annoys me is the lack of care some people show towards the victims of this situation, they only care about scoring political points. No one is banging their fist on the table about child mortality in Africa, but show them an African child standing on a beach in the UK and they're suddenly evangelical about the injustices committed by the UK government that they don't favour.

And i agree with you again, i like the new Iccy 2.0

Alluding back to my posts yesterday, this is all to do with greed. If some of the wealth in the world was released to help the countries that are in complete disarray then the issue of people wanting to leave to find asylum in countries like the UK would be minimal, you would hope.

Maybe not so much in the war torn countries as that situation is a bit more complicated, but certainly in the countries where poverty is to blame for the majority of people wanting to leave!

I think it may well be the case that poverty is also the cause of a lot of the wars.

[demographic]

Just imagine if we had a way we could deport the people who were assessed and found not to be true asylum seekers?

Oh, we had that a while ago didnt we, who fucked that up?

[Cousin Jack]

Countries that seem manage immigration very well don't have two of the disadvantages that the UK has.

1. They don't seem troubled by guilt.
2. Most importantly they don't use immigration as a political sword to slash away with.

Without those two things it means that sensible, non-emotional decisions can be made.

One of the things that annoys me is the lack of care some people show towards the victims of this situation, they only care about scoring political points. No one is banging their fist on the table about child mortality in Africa, but show them an African child standing on a beach in the UK and they're suddenly evangelical about the injustices committed by the UK government that they don't favour.

And i agree with you again, i like the new Iccy 2.0

Alluding back to my posts yesterday, this is all to do with greed. If some of the wealth in the world was released to help the countries that are in complete disarray then the issue of people wanting to leave to find asylum in countries like the UK would be minimal, you would hope.

Maybe not so much in the war torn countries as that situation is a bit more complicated, but certainly in the countries where poverty is to blame for the majority of people wanting to leave!

I think it may well be the case that poverty is also the cause of a lot of the wars.

Or vice versa. Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

[Cousin Jack]

'Ti's the start of the collapse of Western democracy.

Many immigrants don't subscribe to our values, are not even trying to integrate, they are importing their own culture.

If it carries on within 100 years we will be as corrupt as Nigeria, with gaps between rich and poor communities on the scale of India, and probably have 'tribal areas' where Sharia law applies.

[Greenman]

Countries that seem manage immigration very well don't have two of the disadvantages that the UK has.

1. They don't seem troubled by guilt.
2. Most importantly they don't use immigration as a political sword to slash away with.

Without those two things it means that sensible, non-emotional decisions can be made.

One of the things that annoys me is the lack of care some people show towards the victims of this situation, they only care about scoring political points. No one is banging their fist on the table about child mortality in Africa, but show them an African child standing on a beach in the UK and they're suddenly evangelical about the injustices committed by the UK government that they don't favour.

And i agree with you again, i like the new Iccy 2.0

Alluding back to my posts yesterday, this is all to do with greed. If some of the wealth in the world was released to help the countries that are in complete disarray then the issue of people wanting to leave to find asylum in countries like the UK would be minimal, you would hope.

Maybe not so much in the war torn countries as that situation is a bit more complicated, but certainly in the countries where poverty is to blame for the majority of people wanting to leave!

I think it may well be the case that poverty is also the cause of a lot of the wars.

Well then if we tackle the poverty it will be like killing 2 birds with one stone.

[irie]

'Ti's the start of the collapse of Western democracy.

Many immigrants don't subscribe to our values, are not even trying to integrate, they are importing their own culture.

If it carries on within 100 years we will be as corrupt as Nigeria, with gaps between rich and poor communities on the scale of India, and probably have 'tribal areas' where Sharia law applies.

This report is over 2 years old, but will if anything be an underestimate for 2023.

https://pollingreport.uk/articles/40-of ... g%20Report

There was a new ICM poll of British Muslims in the Sunday Telegraph. The finding in the poll that got the most coverage was a question that suggested that 40% of British Muslims supported "there being areas in Britain which are pre-dominately Muslim and in which sharia law is introduced".

So the UK should be divided on religious lines ... and

13% said it was right "to exercise violence against those who are deemed by religious leaders to have insulted them"

[Dodgy69]

I've heard many time's we need foreign workers to fill the vacancies mainly in our most undesirable jobs like care and hospitality but amongst others, Legal, illegal, who cares.

So when a country like England with its broken infrastructure and a high population density, still needs foreign workers something has gone seriously wrong. On one hand we're full, on the other we ain't.

Has our economy outgrown its country.

[Yambo]

Just a note...don't confuse normal Sharia law that is used as part of a law system in a civilised society, with the crazy interpretation of it used by lunatic extremists. I've lived (and raised my family) under a sharia system for many years and found it to be a very agreeable situation.

Are you telling us the rulers of Saudi Arabia are lunatic extremists?

[MyLittleStudPony]

Labour will be in power soon and the country will be able to welcome these people in.

Funded by a tax on the elderly aka 'The Toxic Tax'.

[mangocrazy]

Just as long as they don't start taxing the rich, eh?

[Mr. Dazzle]

Labour propose cutting VAT exemption / charity status on elitism factories* to be fair.

*aka private schools.

[Mr. Dazzle]

So being nice to the top 10% of earners in the UK might be prudent, unless you want the house of cards to fall in on you.

Top 10% is anyone over about 60k before tax, is it not?

Given that every man and his dog on this forum is an overpaid IT wanker, we're keeping the country afloat. Well done us.

[Pirahna]

If the current top 10% of earners left tomorrow they'd be replaced. The reality is they wouldn't leave, they're committed to the UK, family, property etc.

[Mr. Dazzle]

Now we've done Atlas Shrugged shall we move on to Of Mice and Men?

[mangocrazy]

All I'm interested in seeing is all levels of wealth paying their due amount. For anyone on PAYE there's precious little scope to escape HMRC's dragnet, but that's not the case for higher earners (and I'm talking £500k plus here) who can structure their tax affairs using offshore trust funds and the like. I'm also looking at you Amazon, Google, Apple and any company that funnels UK earnings into a holding company in Lichtenstein, Turks & Caicos etc. and thereby avoids paying UK taxes. If everyone actually paid the taxes they should be paying the UK Treasury would have an embarassment of riches.

[Pirahna]

If the current top 10% of earners left tomorrow they'd be replaced. The reality is they wouldn't leave, they're committed to the UK, family, property etc.

My daughter and her husband are undoubtedly in the top 10% and they have sworn never to live in the UK again, she's not burdened by an emotional attachment to it having grown up for a fair time elsewhere, so it's a decision based purely on where they think it's better to live.

So they've already left? If they're corporate they're easily replaced, if they're running their own business someone will step into the space they've left. Trust me, their tax money will be replaced by someone else, they won't be missed.

My only tie to the UK is my pension and investments, as long that is safe I don't care too much what goes on there.