Refugees Channel crossing

The place for more serious off topic questions, light hearted banter and friendly chat.
HaydenM
Posts: 2655
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2016 09:03 am

Re: Refugees Channel crossing

Postby HaydenM » Fri Sep 13, 2019 08:19 am

Chris Bass wrote:
verylonglegs wrote:Supporting refugees is a small price to pay for the good fortune of being born in a country with a modern economy, liberal values (for now) and decent healthcare. You, and I, got lucky...very lucky..nothing more. If they really upset you that much then maybe you need to ask yourself a few questions and read a little more.


That's sort of what I was trying to say - just in a less weird way!!


It's the other side of the coin from my slightly tongue in cheek comment about making Britain worse so they don't want to come here. There are very sensible discussions to be had about sharing refugees out among like minded countries they which they may have traveled through, and making their home countries less dreadful but letting desperate people die in the sea as a deterrent is unforgivable.

While the issues in their home countries persist I'd take the view that the sooner us or other countries can get them into a system and evaluate their asylum claims the fewer humanitarian issues there will be across Europe.

If you're taking a hard line on this I'd recommend taking another look at that drowned kid in the Med from a few years ago and reconsider these people's motivation.

User avatar
Chris Bass
Posts: 4874
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 09:19 am

Re: Refugees Channel crossing

Postby Chris Bass » Fri Sep 13, 2019 08:37 am

as an intersting aside - if there was free movement of people across the whole world, how long do you think it would take before all countries became roughly equal? there would be chaos for a very long time but eventually all countries should become pretty similar, in theory at least.

initially there would be a rush of people to the "best" countries - these would then become saturated and people would leave to go to the new "best" countries, until these became saturated and so on until the difference between the best and worst would gradually narrow until all countries became very similar in terms of quality of life. Or maybe it would continue to be chaos until we all killed each other?
www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes

User avatar
Rick Chasey
Lives Here
Posts: 44047
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 15:34 pm

Re: Refugees Channel crossing

Postby Rick Chasey » Fri Sep 13, 2019 08:38 am

Chris Bass wrote:as an intersting aside - if there was free movement of people across the whole world, how long do you think it would take before all countries became roughly equal? ?


Would never happen.

There's free movement within the EU, and there's plainly no equality there.

There's free movement within the states, the UK, and again, there's obvious inequality.

Labour is sticky for the most part.

User avatar
lettingthedaysgoby
Posts: 1256
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2016 06:49 am

Re: Refugees Channel crossing

Postby lettingthedaysgoby » Fri Sep 13, 2019 08:42 am

The idea we’re “full” is bullshit.
The idea we “can’t afford to help” is bullshit.
The idea that they’re “someone else’s problem” is bullshit.
The idea that refugees/immigration is a “problem” is bullshit.

If your reaction to seeing people who are so desperate for a better life that they’re prepared to risk both their own and their children’s lives is anything other than “we need to help them in any way we can”, please, do the world a favour and jump of a cliff.

User avatar
bradsbeard
Posts: 292
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 12:46 pm

Re: Refugees Channel crossing

Postby bradsbeard » Fri Sep 13, 2019 08:50 am

Chris Bass wrote:as an intersting aside - if there was free movement of people across the whole world, how long do you think it would take before all countries became roughly equal? there would be chaos for a very long time but eventually all countries should become pretty similar, in theory at least.

initially there would be a rush of people to the "best" countries - these would then become saturated and people would leave to go to the new "best" countries, until these became saturated and so on until the difference between the best and worst would gradually narrow until all countries became very similar in terms of quality of life. Or maybe it would continue to be chaos until we all killed each other?


Chaos would ensue.

Problem to only get worse as climate change really bites.

Surely a line has to be drawn sometime?

User avatar
Dabber
Posts: 1514
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 17:45 pm

Re: Refugees Channel crossing

Postby Dabber » Fri Sep 13, 2019 08:53 am

In the context of "Refugees Channel crossing" the word refugees is no longer applicable. Having come from France they are now immigrants.
“You may think that; I couldn’t possibly comment!”

Wilier Cento Uno SR/Wilier Mortirolo/Giant Defy 3/Specialized Roubaix Pro/Calibre Bossnut

HaydenM
Posts: 2655
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2016 09:03 am

Re: Refugees Channel crossing

Postby HaydenM » Fri Sep 13, 2019 08:59 am

Dabber wrote:In the context of "Refugees Channel crossing" the word refugees is no longer applicable. Having come from France they are now immigrants.


Rather depends how you look at it. They are refugees if they are seeking refuge, until us or anyone else gives them a hearing

User avatar
Dabber
Posts: 1514
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 17:45 pm

Re: Refugees Channel crossing

Postby Dabber » Fri Sep 13, 2019 09:02 am

HaydenM wrote:
Dabber wrote:In the context of "Refugees Channel crossing" the word refugees is no longer applicable. Having come from France they are now immigrants.


Rather depends how you look at it. They are refugees if they are seeking refuge, until us or anyone else gives them a hearing


In my view they found safe refuge in France but it's not somewhere they want to live. So now they want to come to the UK because that's somewhere they would prefer to live. In my book that's immigration.
“You may think that; I couldn’t possibly comment!”

Wilier Cento Uno SR/Wilier Mortirolo/Giant Defy 3/Specialized Roubaix Pro/Calibre Bossnut

User avatar
Rick Chasey
Lives Here
Posts: 44047
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 15:34 pm

Re: Refugees Channel crossing

Postby Rick Chasey » Fri Sep 13, 2019 09:11 am

Dabber wrote:
HaydenM wrote:
Dabber wrote:In the context of "Refugees Channel crossing" the word refugees is no longer applicable. Having come from France they are now immigrants.


Rather depends how you look at it. They are refugees if they are seeking refuge, until us or anyone else gives them a hearing


In my view they found safe refuge in France but it's not somewhere they want to live. So now they want to come to the UK because that's somewhere they would prefer to live. In my book that's immigration.


Are you familiar with the rate of refugees being refused entry in France and sent back to where they have fled from, compared to the UK?

If not, I don't really know if you are in a position to make any claim like that.

The level of NIMBYism in debates like this is breathtaking.

Then again I grew up good friends with a guy who was a baby when his parents fled Rwanda from the village, so perhaps that has coloured my view.

HaydenM
Posts: 2655
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2016 09:03 am

Re: Refugees Channel crossing

Postby HaydenM » Fri Sep 13, 2019 09:19 am

If they come here and they aren't granted refuge then they are sent back, I don't see what the problem is with making sure they don't die in the sea

john80
Posts: 612
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:44 am

Re: Refugees Channel crossing

Postby john80 » Fri Sep 13, 2019 09:20 am

lettingthedaysgoby wrote:The idea we’re “full” is bullshit.
The idea we “can’t afford to help” is bullshit.
The idea that they’re “someone else’s problem” is bullshit.
The idea that refugees/immigration is a “problem” is bullshit.

If your reaction to seeing people who are so desperate for a better life that they’re prepared to risk both their own and their children’s lives is anything other than “we need to help them in any way we can”, please, do the world a favour and jump of a cliff.


Given we cannot build adequate housing and social care for our current population I am not entirely sure how you plan to roll this out.

User avatar
Rick Chasey
Lives Here
Posts: 44047
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 15:34 pm

Re: Refugees Channel crossing

Postby Rick Chasey » Fri Sep 13, 2019 09:21 am

john80 wrote:
lettingthedaysgoby wrote:The idea we’re “full” is bullshit.
The idea we “can’t afford to help” is bullshit.
The idea that they’re “someone else’s problem” is bullshit.
The idea that refugees/immigration is a “problem” is bullshit.

If your reaction to seeing people who are so desperate for a better life that they’re prepared to risk both their own and their children’s lives is anything other than “we need to help them in any way we can”, please, do the world a favour and jump of a cliff.


Given we cannot build adequate housing and social care for our current population I am not entirely sure how you plan to roll this out.


That's 'cos the UK voted Tory and they don't *want* to build adequate housing or pay for social care. They are political decisions, not issues of population.

You re-visit any vox pops clips from 2017, 2015 or 2010 and all they bang on about is benefit scroungers and too many hand outs.

You go to any public consultation meeting where someone or some firm wants to build a sh!tload of houses and watch every person nearby object because it impacts their house price.
Last edited by Rick Chasey on Fri Sep 13, 2019 09:23 am, edited 1 time in total.

Tangled Metal
Posts: 3930
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 08:54 am

Re: Refugees Channel crossing

Postby Tangled Metal » Fri Sep 13, 2019 09:22 am

You need to separate international norms for claiming asylum from the individual fleeing persecution. Just because safe politicians and diplomats decided international etiquette is to claim asylum at the first safe country doesn't mean any person ignoring that to get to where they feel safer or is a better place for them to claim asylum isn't still a refugee.

The agreed norms weren't agreed by people fleeing from persecution. The refugee status really only applies to those fleeing persecution. Where they claim it doesn't change that status. It's just imposed formalities. Personally I question whether those formalities are even just.

User avatar
Rick Chasey
Lives Here
Posts: 44047
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 15:34 pm

Re: Refugees Channel crossing

Postby Rick Chasey » Fri Sep 13, 2019 09:26 am

Rick Chasey wrote:
john80 wrote:
lettingthedaysgoby wrote:The idea we’re “full” is bullshit.
The idea we “can’t afford to help” is bullshit.
The idea that they’re “someone else’s problem” is bullshit.
The idea that refugees/immigration is a “problem” is bullshit.

If your reaction to seeing people who are so desperate for a better life that they’re prepared to risk both their own and their children’s lives is anything other than “we need to help them in any way we can”, please, do the world a favour and jump of a cliff.


Given we cannot build adequate housing and social care for our current population I am not entirely sure how you plan to roll this out.


That's 'cos the UK voted Tory and they don't *want* to build adequate housing or pay for social care. They are political decisions, not issues of population.

You re-visit any vox pops clips from 2017, 2015 or 2010 and all they bang on about is benefit scroungers and too many hand outs.

You go to any public consultation meeting where someone or some firm wants to build a sh!tload of houses and watch every person nearby object because it impacts their house price.


The summary of your post is; UK votes for a decade of austerity, John blames immigrants.

Tangled Metal
Posts: 3930
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 08:54 am

Re: Refugees Channel crossing

Postby Tangled Metal » Fri Sep 13, 2019 09:29 am

Rick Chasey wrote:
john80 wrote:
lettingthedaysgoby wrote:The idea we’re “full” is bullshit.
The idea we “can’t afford to help” is bullshit.
The idea that they’re “someone else’s problem” is bullshit.
The idea that refugees/immigration is a “problem” is bullshit.

If your reaction to seeing people who are so desperate for a better life that they’re prepared to risk both their own and their children’s lives is anything other than “we need to help them in any way we can”, please, do the world a favour and jump of a cliff.


Given we cannot build adequate housing and social care for our current population I am not entirely sure how you plan to roll this out.


That's 'cos the UK voted Tory and they don't *want* to build adequate housing or pay for social care. They are political decisions, not issues of population.

Have we ever had adequate housing under any government? Serious question.

AIUI Wii aftermath saw rapid house building. Not all was adequate. 60s concrete blocks which developed cancer and got blocker knocked down. 80s Tory council house sell off never got replaced. Indeed even labour party governments never solved housing issues afaics.

User avatar
Pross
Posts: 21028
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 10:32 am

Re: Refugees Channel crossing

Postby Pross » Fri Sep 13, 2019 09:30 am

Dabber wrote:
HaydenM wrote:
Dabber wrote:In the context of "Refugees Channel crossing" the word refugees is no longer applicable. Having come from France they are now immigrants.


Rather depends how you look at it. They are refugees if they are seeking refuge, until us or anyone else gives them a hearing


In my view they found safe refuge in France but it's not somewhere they want to live. So now they want to come to the UK because that's somewhere they would prefer to live. In my book that's immigration.


So effectively you are saying the UK wouldn't take any refugees as our location in comparison to countries people are leaving would mean there is zero chance that anyone would come here directly. Contrary to popular myth it is not a requirement that a refugee has to seek asylum in the first safe country they reach. Also, have they found safe refuge if they are leaving in a camp outside Calais that can be bulldozed at any moment and where crime and violence is often rife?

hopkinb
Posts: 4969
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 18:48 pm

Re: Refugees Channel crossing

Postby hopkinb » Fri Sep 13, 2019 09:32 am

Rick Chasey wrote:
That's 'cos the UK voted Tory and they don't *want* to build adequate housing or pay for social care. They are political decisions, not issues of population.


^^^
This. Stick a few pence on income tax, reassess public spending priorities and there would be adequate housing, health care and other social care.

Everything is stretched to breaking point because of years of underinvestment, not because of in increase in population.

No votes in tax increases and a change in spending priorities though.

User avatar
lettingthedaysgoby
Posts: 1256
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2016 06:49 am

Re: Refugees Channel crossing

Postby lettingthedaysgoby » Fri Sep 13, 2019 09:32 am

john80 wrote:Given we cannot build adequate housing and social care for our current population I am not entirely sure how you plan to roll this out.

Maybe ask yourself why that is, given that we are seemingly able to spend billions on arms, subsidies to the banks, brexit bullshit and all the rest.

Magic money tree indeed.

john80
Posts: 612
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:44 am

Re: Refugees Channel crossing

Postby john80 » Fri Sep 13, 2019 09:38 am

Rick Chasey wrote:
john80 wrote:
lettingthedaysgoby wrote:The idea we’re “full” is bullshit.
The idea we “can’t afford to help” is bullshit.
The idea that they’re “someone else’s problem” is bullshit.
The idea that refugees/immigration is a “problem” is bullshit.

If your reaction to seeing people who are so desperate for a better life that they’re prepared to risk both their own and their children’s lives is anything other than “we need to help them in any way we can”, please, do the world a favour and jump of a cliff.


Given we cannot build adequate housing and social care for our current population I am not entirely sure how you plan to roll this out.


That's 'cos the UK voted Tory and they don't *want* to build adequate housing or pay for social care. They are political decisions, not issues of population.

You re-visit any vox pops clips from 2017, 2015 or 2010 and all they bang on about is benefit scroungers and too many hand outs.

You go to any public consultation meeting where someone or some firm wants to build a sh!tload of houses and watch every person nearby object because it impacts their house price.


Take a step back and have a look at how many houses were built under the last Labour government and maybe take your tribal/tin foil hat off for a second.

https://fullfact.org/economy/house-building-england/

The dip in 2008 could have been something to do with the financial crisis which I am guessing in your mind was a Tory thing as well or have the Tories been in power since 1996 in your world?

So whilst social care has reduced by around 6% since the financial crash I am not sure what any government of the day would have been able to do given the circumstances of this time unless you make the assumption that taking less in tax than what you spend is a superb long term strategy for a country.

https://fullfact.org/health/where-does- ... cial-care/

Big Theresa tried to get home owners to give up some of their equity to pay for their care and it got branded a dementia tax by Labour when on the face of it, it could have been a perfectly sensible Labour policy and been generally beneficial to their members. That was the last bit of sensible policy I saw in the UK political sphere but hey ho.

john80
Posts: 612
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:44 am

Re: Refugees Channel crossing

Postby john80 » Fri Sep 13, 2019 09:41 am

hopkinb wrote:
Rick Chasey wrote:
That's 'cos the UK voted Tory and they don't *want* to build adequate housing or pay for social care. They are political decisions, not issues of population.


^^^
This. Stick a few pence on income tax, reassess public spending priorities and there would be adequate housing, health care and other social care.

Everything is stretched to breaking point because of years of underinvestment, not because of in increase in population.

No votes in tax increases and a change in spending priorities though.


You might need to rip up current planning laws on top of some notional tax rise to achieve anything productive. You happy with that?


Return to “The Cake Stop”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ballysmate, orraloon, PBlakeney and 18 guests