|
Post by MrBenn on Sept 13, 2024 10:27:31 GMT
I’m confusing nothing and the use of things like the bibby Stockholm were condemned,why is that when similar has been used to house British military personnel,as is the case with now redundant military property. Nobody is lying to me and don’t presume I'm an idiot unable to see beyond what is posted on social media I don’t need patronising. The fact remains that many are not fleeing repression other than poverty and are nothing other than economic migrants,the fact is also that for a society to survive it can only accept a limited number. The executive lack the will to act in any meaningful way. It is worth remembering that a large majority entering this country tend to be legally permitted to enter. And this is often due to an insufficiency of skilled locals able to do the jobs they are coming in to do. And this latter needs to be addressed before the former can be reduced. Which means more investment in vocational training and lower tuition fees for the courses we most need people to study at university.
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Sept 13, 2024 10:39:34 GMT
I’m confusing nothing and the use of things like the bibby Stockholm were condemned,why is that when similar has been used to house British military personnel,as is the case with now redundant military property. Nobody is lying to me and don’t presume I'm an idiot unable to see beyond what is posted on social media I don’t need patronising. The fact remains that many are not fleeing repression other than poverty and are nothing other than economic migrants,the fact is also that for a society to survive it can only accept a limited number. The executive lack the will to act in any meaningful way. It is worth remembering that a large majority entering this country tend to be legally permitted to enter. And this is often due to an insufficiency of skilled locals able to do the jobs they are coming in to do. And this latter needs to be addressed before the former can be reduced. Which means more investment in vocational training and lower tuition fees for the courses we most need people to study at university. I have no problem with people coming here on work visas and if they prove of worth by their work and obeying the law settling,what I think should happen though there are many Brit nationals refusing work in jobs they feel beneath them,that’s ok they can do so but their benefits should be cut to a bare minimum. We shouldn’t be importing people into jobs that are not particularly skilled that those who are called the economically inactive could fill.
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Sept 13, 2024 10:58:45 GMT
I don’t care how the media see the bibby Stockholm or dormant military facilities,anyone genuinely fleeing would welcome somewhere safe to stay and accept privations if they wanted to make a new life here as has happened to others in the past. And again you patronise with this If you look at the first post on page two and my comments re AI and social media Im taken in by no one and have no loyalty to any politician. Has it occurred to you your facts are due to your loyalty to a political position? Oh no Wapentake. Facts are facts. They don’t vary depending on what your or my political views would like them to be. They remain facts - sometimes inconvenient facts but facts nonetheless. We are all of course free to hold and debate whatever opinions we wish to. However those telling lies in pursuit of power in the media press and social media, lies that with respect you repeat with seeming impunity, would wish it to be different, facts remain facts So for example on this thread, you claimed that large swathes of asylum seekers are criminals. Yet the fact as I understand it is that crime rates for asylum seekers are not higher than the general population. A fact inconvenient to your argument but a fact nonetheless. Unless of course I am mistaken but you have shown no evidence that the fact I have stated is wrong. While on the subject of crime, I explained that it is a fact that any significant crimes committed here count against the asylum seeker when his claim is assessed - indeed May disqualify it altogether. You suggested this is not the case and then provided a link that proved I was right and you were factually wrong And then of course you continue to claim that a large number of asylum claimants are not fleeing repression and are simply economic migrants, yet it is a fact that when cases are assessed rigorously , it is found that in 70-80% of cases the claimant is indeed fleeing repression. You are factually wrong there too. You have claimed that I have called you racist or far right or an idiot or that I think of posters on other forums “undesirable”. That’s factually untrue too. Facts are facts. Inconvenient or not, they are facts.
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Sept 13, 2024 11:17:15 GMT
I don’t care how the media see the bibby Stockholm or dormant military facilities,anyone genuinely fleeing would welcome somewhere safe to stay and accept privations if they wanted to make a new life here as has happened to others in the past. And again you patronise with this If you look at the first post on page two and my comments re AI and social media Im taken in by no one and have no loyalty to any politician. Has it occurred to you your facts are due to your loyalty to a political position? Oh no Wapentake. Facts are facts. They don’t vary depending on what your or my political views would like them to be. They remain facts - sometimes inconvenient facts but facts nonetheless. We are all of course free to hold and debate whatever opinions we wish to. However those telling lies in pursuit of power in the media press and social media, lies that with respect you repeat with seeming impunity, would wish it to be different, facts remain facts So for example on this thread, you claimed that large swathes of asylum seekers are criminals. Yet the fact as I understand it is that crime rates for asylum seekers are not higher than the general population. A fact inconvenient to your argument but a fact nonetheless. Unless of course I am mistaken but you have shown no evidence that the fact I have stated is wrong. While on the subject of crime, I explained that it is a fact that any significant crimes committed here count against the asylum seeker when his claim is assessed - indeed May disqualify it altogether. You suggested this is not the case and then provided a link that proved I was right and you were factually wrong And then of course you continue to claim that a large number of asylum claimants are not fleeing repression and are simply economic migrants, yet it is a fact that when cases are assessed rigorously , it is found that in 70-80% of cases the claimant is indeed fleeing repression. You are factually wrong there too. You have claimed that I have called you racist or far right or an idiot or that I think of posters on other forums “undesirable”. That’s factually untrue too. Facts are facts. Inconvenient or not, they are facts. No they’re not facts even the executive provide so called facts which are nothing of the kind. Then you say this No I said you were taking me for an idiot and I didn’t say you specifically called me racist but you were falling into the trap of labelling people who are neither far right nor racist. Anyway you produce your facts in the meantime this is becoming more about you and me and not the topic.
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Sept 13, 2024 11:23:45 GMT
It is worth remembering that a large majority entering this country tend to be legally permitted to enter. And this is often due to an insufficiency of skilled locals able to do the jobs they are coming in to do. And this latter needs to be addressed before the former can be reduced. Which means more investment in vocational training and lower tuition fees for the courses we most need people to study at university. I have no problem with people coming here on work visas and if they prove of worth by their work and obeying the law settling,what I think should happen though there are many Brit nationals refusing work in jobs they feel beneath them,that’s ok they can do so but their benefits should be cut to a bare minimum. We shouldn’t be importing people into jobs that are not particularly skilled that those who are called the economically inactive could fill. The definition of what jobs are or are not skilled is blurred. Most would agree that we need more doctors. Most would agree therefore that we should train more doctors. That thought will take years to deliver and even then if trends continue as at present many of those we do train will leave for places like Australia where salaries working conditions and lifestyles are considered better. Until we solve those problems, we have little choice but to bring in immigrant doctors. The number of people over pension age is projected to increase by almost 50% over the next 20 years. Not only does that present truly daunting financial problems for the country but it also presumably means the demand for social care will also increase massively. Some may consider social care work as unskilled but it remains a vital function in providing a decent quality of life to our elderly people in need. So either we find a way to attract people currently here to want to do those jobs and want to do those jobs well or we again have to bring in people from abroad to do that work. And those principles extend right across our economy. As an aside of course, now that we have made it harder for European people to fill these needs, such that it is much easier for them to take jobs in Germany or France instead, we have to source the labour we need from farther afield.
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Sept 13, 2024 11:28:58 GMT
Oh no Wapentake. Facts are facts. They don’t vary depending on what your or my political views would like them to be. They remain facts - sometimes inconvenient facts but facts nonetheless. We are all of course free to hold and debate whatever opinions we wish to. However those telling lies in pursuit of power in the media press and social media, lies that with respect you repeat with seeming impunity, would wish it to be different, facts remain facts So for example on this thread, you claimed that large swathes of asylum seekers are criminals. Yet the fact as I understand it is that crime rates for asylum seekers are not higher than the general population. A fact inconvenient to your argument but a fact nonetheless. Unless of course I am mistaken but you have shown no evidence that the fact I have stated is wrong. While on the subject of crime, I explained that it is a fact that any significant crimes committed here count against the asylum seeker when his claim is assessed - indeed May disqualify it altogether. You suggested this is not the case and then provided a link that proved I was right and you were factually wrong And then of course you continue to claim that a large number of asylum claimants are not fleeing repression and are simply economic migrants, yet it is a fact that when cases are assessed rigorously , it is found that in 70-80% of cases the claimant is indeed fleeing repression. You are factually wrong there too. You have claimed that I have called you racist or far right or an idiot or that I think of posters on other forums “undesirable”. That’s factually untrue too. Facts are facts. Inconvenient or not, they are facts. No they’re not facts even the executive provide so called facts which are nothing of the kind. Then you say this No I said you were taking me for an idiot and I didn’t say you specifically called me racist but you were falling into the trap of labelling people who are neither far right nor racist. Anyway you produce your facts in the meantime this is becoming more about you and me and not the topic. Not sure there is much difference between “labelling” and “calling” to be honest but actually you were right and I was wrong on one point. I mistakenly thought you had suggested I had called you an idiot. To be fair you didn’t say that. I was wrong. You now seem to be claiming however that inconvenient facts are not facts. Sorry that isn’t true.
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Sept 13, 2024 11:30:35 GMT
Sorry I thought this thread was about immigration, not asylum seekers. I withdraw my posts.
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Sept 13, 2024 11:30:38 GMT
I have no problem with people coming here on work visas and if they prove of worth by their work and obeying the law settling,what I think should happen though there are many Brit nationals refusing work in jobs they feel beneath them,that’s ok they can do so but their benefits should be cut to a bare minimum. We shouldn’t be importing people into jobs that are not particularly skilled that those who are called the economically inactive could fill. The definition of what jobs are or are not skilled is blurred. Most would agree that we need more doctors. Most would agree therefore that we should train more doctors. That thought will take years to deliver and even then if trends continue as at present many of those we do train will leave for places like Australia where salaries working conditions and lifestyles are considered better. Until we solve those problems, we have little choice but to bring in immigrant doctors.The number of people over pension age is projected to increase by almost 50% over the next 20 years. Not only does that present truly daunting financial problems for the country but it also presumably means the demand for social care will also increase massively. Some may consider social care work as unskilled but it remains a vital function in providing a decent quality of life to our elderly people in need. So either we find a way to attract people currently here to want to do those jobs and want to do those jobs well or we again have to bring in people from abroad to do that work. And those principles extend right across our economy. As an aside of course, now that we have made it harder for European people to fill these needs, such that it is much easier for them to take jobs in Germany or France instead, we have to source the labour we need from farther afield. That has absolutely nothing to do with the point about unskilled jobs,Doctors take many years to train and there are no instances where that skill could be blurred
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Sept 13, 2024 11:31:59 GMT
Sorry I thought this thread was about immigration, not asylum seekers. I withdraw my posts. It is about immigration it has been turned in to asylum seekers by another.
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Sept 13, 2024 11:36:43 GMT
Sorry I thought this thread was about immigration, not asylum seekers. I withdraw my posts. It is about immigration it has been turned in to asylum seekers by another. I believe this is where it veers off I am not aware of any legal migrants being housed in hotels at government expense.
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Sept 13, 2024 11:39:25 GMT
It is about immigration it has been turned in to asylum seekers by another. I believe this is where it veers off I am not aware of any legal migrants being housed in hotels at government expense. Economic migrants are and they are not at the govts expense but the taxpayers
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Sept 13, 2024 11:43:51 GMT
I believe this is where it veers off I am not aware of any legal migrants being housed in hotels at government expense. Economic migrants are and they are not at the govts expense but the taxpayers and btw please point out where I called them asylum seekers
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Sept 13, 2024 15:38:32 GMT
Economic migrants are and they are not at the govts expense but the taxpayers and btw please point out where I called them asylum seekers But they are not the same as legal migrants in so many ways.
|
|
|
Post by montegriffo on Sept 13, 2024 20:18:20 GMT
It is worth remembering that a large majority entering this country tend to be legally permitted to enter. And this is often due to an insufficiency of skilled locals able to do the jobs they are coming in to do. And this latter needs to be addressed before the former can be reduced. Which means more investment in vocational training and lower tuition fees for the courses we most need people to study at university. I have no problem with people coming here on work visas and if they prove of worth by their work and obeying the law settling,what I think should happen though there are many Brit nationals refusing work in jobs they feel beneath them,that’s ok they can do so but their benefits should be cut to a bare minimum. We shouldn’t be importing people into jobs that are not particularly skilled that those who are called the economically inactive could fill. Benefits are already a bare minimum. Works out at about £12 a day or about half of what Red Rackham spends on whiskey.
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Sept 13, 2024 20:22:31 GMT
I have no problem with people coming here on work visas and if they prove of worth by their work and obeying the law settling,what I think should happen though there are many Brit nationals refusing work in jobs they feel beneath them,that’s ok they can do so but their benefits should be cut to a bare minimum. We shouldn’t be importing people into jobs that are not particularly skilled that those who are called the economically inactive could fill. Benefits are already a bare minimum. Works out at about £12 a day or about half of what Red Rackham spends on whiskey. That £12 per day does it include rent and council tax paid,?
|
|