A good answer to "how many asylum seekers do you have living with you?"

[SomersetBrie]

I see this quite a lot in a fairly supportive group I belong to.
Lots of people dispelling the myth that asylum seekers are raking it in, taking jobs and benefits, etc.
A positive space and then someone comes in saying "if you are so supportive of asylum seekers, how many fighting age men do you have living with you?"
It really annoys me! It's possible to be supportive of a cause without actually taking people in.
All I can think of is really rude responses, I'd like something measured and decent and not allow them to get away with shutting people down with that.

(and I know I'll get negative responses to this post, but I will be super grateful to anyone who can come up with something I can use)

We are a country of 70 million people ish.

There are 8 billion people in the world.

If we conservatively estimate that 2 billion of these people live in poor unsafe/opressed conditions we can see that our "legal safe route" of application for example online will be limited only by people's access to the Internet and the amount of traffic our servers can handle.

2000,000,000 - 2 billion oppressed/ unsafe/destitute people divided by 70,000,000 British

We would have to take in 28.5 people for every current British citizen in order to rescue all 2 billion people.

The idea that Britain can afford to rescue the world and his dog is a nonsense

The OP has asked if we care about veterans, the homeless, donkeys etc
I think this provides a good analogy.
With limited funds most of us do not decide which charities to donate to regularly by which chuggers aporoach us in the street/ phone us or knock on our door first. Generally we select one or two causes close to our hearts and give to those. We know we can't help everybody and it shouldn't be a first come first served situation.

Britain should choose it's asylum priorities and not allow fit men to push to the front of the queue by catching a dinghy.

Sorry not sure why that went BOLD!

The most vulnerable people in the world aren't getting anywhere near Calais.

It just isn't true that immigrant men don't offend at higher rates.

The Government won't collate or publish statistics about sexual violence or rape as far as I know because they don't want people to know-this- it doesn't suit them.

If you actually care about the truth of what high levels of immigration csn do to a country of this just Google "Sweden crime by ethnicity" or "Sweden sexual offences by ethnicity" because Sweden recorded this data and used to publish it. They don't seem to publish it now though and academics who study/publish about it get heat from the government.

Sweden now has the second highest gun crime in Europe and explosives have been used "hundreds of times". What has happened in Sweden is so sad - this country was famous for it's educated population and good quality of life.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/11/sweden-freedom-of-information-laws-deadly-bombings

Some information about sexual offences in Sweden. It talks about 2017 but it seems like after that perhaps the government don't want to have this information and academics seem to have been pursued for publishing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Sweden

It's a complex issue that people try to condense into stupid soundbites and it's not worth trying to play their stupid games.

"None, how many homeless veterans do you have in yours?"

The question is designed to test your commitment to the immigrant cause. It is asked by people who do not want their taxes used to support immigrants when our own people are in need. It does not have to taken literally. “I do voluntary work for an immigration charity”, “I’m happy to pay more taxes if that’s what’s needed” “I’ve invested in a fund that provides accommodation for immigrants” “I’d happily work till I’m 75 if it means we can take in more immigrants” All theses answers would be acceptable and would inspire admiration in those who ask the question.

Vulnerable to the regimes they are escaping, obviously. That doesn’t necessarily mean vulnerable in a safe country.

All of which explains why there needs to be an international response. Most of them don’t even want to come here. The vast majority stay in neighbouring countries.

Which is why I said we need an international response and to make it possible to apply without coming here.

British figures, when not misrepresented by Farage (who has been caught out lying about them before) don’t back this up.
This is pointless though. We aren’t going to agree. Have a good evening.

They really wouldn’t. T(e people asking that question only want one thing. Incidentally ‘our own people’ are supported. Asylum seekers are supported from the Overseas Aid Budget. We’ve been through this earlier in the thread.

Check out Ireland 10 year old girl raped by asylum seeker. Yeah let's keep them coming, as if we haven't got enough problems with our own violent men, let's just import more and be kind, mustn't be racist, or offensive, or bigoted, or far right......

These are British figures?

I don't understand why OP can't answer truthfully.

As in Yes, I have currently 17 asylum seekers stay with me.

Or No, I don't have any stay with me because my moral support for the cause is all they need.

My brother i

They are, but they don’t tell us much do they? They are for all arrests, not just crime against women and with no indication of which progressed to prosecution. They don’t indicate who is an immigrant and who is British. Crime rates haven’t increased with increased immigration. That’s the bottom line.

Quote
"Crime rates haven’t increased with increased immigration. That’s the bottom line."

https://www.statista.com/statistics/315500/sexual-offences-england-wales/

Show the rest of the graph

That’s absolute numbers. Is there a % rate one? Because that’s what I said. I said it because I’ve read it somewhere, so if there’s evidence otherwise I’ll accept it.

% of what? The graph shows the number of police recorded sexual offences going from 50 odd thousand in 2002 to over 200,000 in 2024. Our populations hasn't x 4 has it?

During the same time the population has increased from 60 odd million to 69million.

Click on the picture you can see the graph. Click on the link you can see the page it came from.

So you think none of our own people are in need, and the aid budget is a totally separate fund unrelated to our taxes. This country is billions of pounds in debt. We can no longer afford to be generous.

Ok, that’s not at all what I said. It’s as bad faith as the stupid question that promoted the thread. I’m out.