To ask where I can send my 57p?

[drspouse]

According to the Mirror if all the asylum seekers currently in Calais came into the UK and (highly unlikely) never paid any tax, it would cost each of us 57p.
To save a group of people from some of the most unimaginable horrors in their home countries, I'm more than happy to pay that.
So, where do I sign to pay up (and make it clear I'm happy for them to officially seek asylum and have their claims verified)?

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/not-migrant-hordes--people-6165167

oh and don;t worry I've been called worse !

I'm off to pack now

I seem to spend more and more time on MN arguing that people are human and all Muslims aren't terrorist these days - it's getting both depressing and dull

I would rather give lots of people that 57p than the queen. - can we swap it and not pay the queen but pay for people to live not in fear?

I'd agree with both those comments. People are human and not all Muslims are terrorists. Both statements are self-evidently true. I'd just rather donate my 57p to people who are prepared to apply by the legal routes and who aren't showing contempt for our laws before they even get here.

I have noticed a tendency on MN occasionally for posters who have particular posting styles/opinions to be redirected to sites where they would be happier posting, and get more positive responses, rather than being flamed by MNers who do not share their views.

May I respectfully suggest that some of the poster on this thread may feel more accepted on this site?: www.stormfront.org/forum

I'm still not clear on why France (and any other countries they have travelled through) to get to Calais isn't a safe enough place? And 'because they just want to come here' doesn't really cut it as an answer.

We are so overstretched, surely you can't expect our tiny country to support every person who wants to come here? (And then the families that will follow them?)

ItsAllGoingToBeFine - if you're not ashamed of yourself, you should be.

BooChunky, anyone who isn't drinking the KoolAid has just been redirected.

I've never known a place like MN for people who can't handle differences of opinion.

Lady so you think your benefits will be able to stay at the same level if we let everyone in that wants to come? All you are asking of them is that they demonstrate they tried hard enough and we should just roll over and let them in as a reward for tenacity?

Fair enough if they are valid asylum seekers but even if they are not but they arrive with children in tow we will be obliged to support them via benefits as well, while they lodge appeal after appeal using legal aid which can take years, by which time the children are applying to uni and everyone has the right to a cosy family life. And if they don't arrive with children they'll be sleeping rough and ducking and diving until they can speak the language and find proper work, or they'll need to be put in a holding centre and lots of lawyers will be employed to argue to and fro about what to do with them, so there will always be a substantial cost to the state somewhere along the line.

Where do you think the extra money for this is magicked up from? Where shall we start? Cuts to your out of work benefits? Cuts to MH services? Class sizes of forty and above? Filthy, short staffed third world standard hospitals? I guess you don't much mind where just so long as it doesn't affect you - but you see it will affect you. Because cuts in public services always affect the poor, the ill and the vulnerable the most, because they are the people least able to manage without them. But never mind, let these people in and let the 'state' take care of it, like the state is some magical bottomless pit of money that just replenishes itself out of thin air.

It reminds of something my mum always tells me about when I was little. I'd ask for some toy or treat or other and she'd say 'Sorry darling I have no money this week' and I'd say 'So just write a cheque then.'

Some of the people on this thread have about as much understanding of economics as I did!

Boo BECAUSE MAYBE THEY SPEAK ENGLISH OR ALREADY HAVE FRIENDS OR FAMILY HERE.

Sorry for shouting but I've said it about four times,

I'd give 57p x 10. I wish more people were concerned about these humans than they are about a certain lion who I shall not name .

I think you'll end up paying more than £5.70 in the end.

Swallowed - so people are further risking their lives clinging to lorries so they don't have to learn a new language??

That's pretty weak, no?

Do you actually think that every person who wants to come here should be allowed to do so, with no thoughts to the consequences? Because that may help a few people at Calais in the short term, but it will certainly not help everyone already living here and future generations.

Ok. I've asked this before and not been answered (not on this thread) - all you 57p'ers and those calling the sceptical amongst us all manner of hateful bastards - when will enough be enough? At what point will you sit up and say we're full. We can't cope. We don't have the infrastructure. We're FULL. Will there ever be such a point for you? Or should we really take this 1500, the next 1500, and the next and the next and so on ad infinitum - until what? Where do you see this ending?

Boo,
Swallowed loves immigrants so much that she has emigrated.

I've looked at the above discussion, and am quite frankly amazed.

Where do you think the money will come from, to support the people at Calais etc

But Swallowed, you said yourself a little earlier that you left the UK to get a job and live in another country even though your family and friends lived here. Presumably that meant learning another language.

So where's the problem in wondering why an asylum seeker would not want to live in the first safe country they get to?

Calais has been like this for ages as was the previous camp. If I were a refugee or asylum seeker I would think (and you're right I have not been in the position so I don't know) that I would just want to be safe. Once you're settled it's easier to ask for family to join you wherever in Europe you are. Germany, France, Italy etc are all competent English speakers so being there and learning a new language is not impossible.

If you went to another country to earn more money why do you think the only reasons the people in Calais are trying to get to the UK is because they have family or friends, speak the language etc? It didn't keep you in the UK so why would it be a factor if you are so desperate to find a safe haven?

As I said in my previous post, I have no objection to asylum seekers getting a home in the UK. But if all 5000 are let in we open the gates to one and all. Whether we can afford it, house them or feed them is irrelevant to a certain degree. We have an asylum system and people need to use it. It needs to be easier for them to access it and Blair's government was at fault for closing the asylum office in Calais in 2002. Cameron's government need to change that and fast. Deal with the people who legally belong in the UK, send the others back. Send the message that you will be dealt with fairly if you want to come here to escape persecution. If you have been spun a lie that you will get 'free' money or housing and have no other reason for being here you are sorely mistaken and you will not get in. If that means all 5000 get in, fine. But I believe you will find it will be less than that. And that should be fine too.

In 2013, we accepted 23,000 asylum seekers (excluding dependents). My question is when do we stop? The answer is to make life at home better, through international trade barriers being removed.

Esmum I don't see what you don't see.

I already spoke the language, hence why I picked that country. And I went there because there were jobs there. So if others come here because there are jobs here, and they get those jobs, and perform those jobs, and pay those taxes..... what's the issue?

You pick the country you pick because you speak the language, you think you'll get on ok there, you might know someone there or have family there (not always, as in my case) but for one reason or another you choose X country and someone else might choose Y country.

No one is saying everyone should choose X country are they? If X country has a border with (for example) Syria then it's unfair that every single migrant entering X country should stay there. As an EU member the UK has an obligation to help out by taking on Z amount of migrants a year, which they do.

I'm not sure how you have worked out that everyone is Germany, France or Italy is a competent English speaker but I can assure you that you are incorrect on that point.

Have you realised that rather than asking their family to join them afterwards, maybe their family is already is the UK? Hence why they would be trying to get to the UK? Just thought it might be worth mentioning,

I'm really a bit puzzled as to what is causing the confusion on this point.

I've never heard of that stormfront website somebody posted up thread. I made the mistake of clicking on the link.

I genuinely feel sick to my stomach.

Because Swallowed, in the 1930s and 40s many people fled the Nazis. Many families split up, some went to the UK, other parts of Europe, USA etc.

My friend fled Uganda during the Idi Amin terror. She, her mum and gran came to the UK, her older brother to the USA, her two sisters went to Germany. Her dad was murdered in front of her by the Amin government - he was a police officer. The brother who stayed behind because he didn't believe he was in danger had an 'accident'.

The point is that they fled, they went where they could get asylum. They had to split up. Her grandmother had nightmares every night until the day she died about the things she had seen. All the family have made their homes in the countries they fled to. That is what happens when you flee for your lives.

You go where you are safe. Family being in that country is a consideration but being safe, seeing your family (if they travel with you) safe was certainly my friend's priority. Just for the record, she had one uncle. He was in the USA. But the UK offered asylum and she jumped at it.

And, to your final point, if an asylum seeker's family is already settled in the UK, maybe the family should be asking for the person seeking asylum to join them. Just thought it might be worth mentioning...

Yes carol. I asked that too. Answer came there none.
That doesn't surprise me really because if they had to think and answer they'd realise just how soppy and lacking in joined up thought they really are.

I genuinely feel sick to my stomach

Yup. Some of the posters on these threads should definitely be over there...

So they may speak a little English or know one or two people here. How does that make England safer than France exactly? How is their life more at risk in France? It seems to me their life is more at risk attempting to get into England in the first place.

IAGTBF reminds me of those pre-Election internet trolls who thought everyone who wasn't voting Labour was a fascist.

That went well.

Lets get a bit of perspective on our full up country. The UK currently has 6.8% of it’s land mass covered by buildings. England has 10%, Wales 4.1%, Northern Ireland 3.9% and Scotland 1.9%.

You do know we have to do stuff like grow food, right? And it would be nice for some wild habitats to be preserved because we're not the only living things on the planet. So, realistically, how much room is there for more people and houses?

Yes Esmum, and why did lots of people from Uganda choose the UK to flee to when they escaped Amin? Because Uganda was a British Protectorate up until independence, because the people who were being thrown out were originally labourers from British India. Because they would have likely spoken some English and/or had links with the UK.

Which is exactly what I'm saying - the majority of people coming to the UK will be coming here for similar reasons. Because they have previous links with the UK, come from countries with previous links to the UK, speak some English etc.

Why didn't your friend go to France, or Spain, or Germany? Well, for the same reasons that those in Calais don't want to go to France, or Spain, or Germany.

I'm amazed that this is even a point of debate to be honest. I thought it was obvious.