To think people who want "safe routes to migration" into the UK are hopelessly naive

[ForestGoblin]

We could spend every penny of public money on bringing refugees to the UK in comfy and safe boats and planes. We could make it mandatory for every home to provide accommodation and food. We could ban healthcare for anyone except refugees.

And there would still be thousands and thousands of boat crossings every year and millions more people languishing in bad situations and trying to figure out how to get here or elsewhere in northern Europe.

It's a crap situation. Life is bad. I feel dreadful for them.

But "safe routes" is a load of glib nonsense that can't work.

It sounds like you are saying no to migration/asylum seekers and so I'm assuming that means you would let them die/make it someone else's problem?

Well eventually enough millions will move to Europe that Europe and the UK will have the problems of dying and starving people it can't provide for.
No harm in putting off the inevitable is there.

There may be another covid epidemic. A GP friend said they felt it likely the next epidemic would be TB due to large number of unvaccinated in the country.

Wagner army is moving into African countries to 'support' military takeovers. War will possibly reduce the population but also increase movement abroad. Who knows what else might happen. Events dear boy, events.

It sounds like you are saying no to migration/asylum seekers

On this point though you’re not reading it correctly

Yes, if the world becomes more resource-constrained, or if the habitable areas of the world shift for climate reasons, I expect there to be more conflict and dying as different groups of people struggle for those resources.

The UK's position "at the top of the world" in global terms is weaker than it has been in the past and we are entering an age of shifting geopolitical power dynamics. Sometimes it feels like people feel "we did it, we won, we are at the end of history and now we can generously/guiltily share out the spoils to make sure we all get a piece of paradise <3". It doesn't work like that.

The UK's position "at the top of the world" in global terms is weaker than it has been in the past

Indeed. I wonder why that is.

Jesus christ! You support the death penalty... thank fuck your vote is only one of millions and isn't mainstream political thinking.

But seriously, how is that going to help Afghans fleeing the Taliban? or Yezidi rape victims? or the many victims of injustice in our country who would now be dead due to the lunatics taking over.

As for "political filter" i'd be equally scathing of a Labour Govt if they'd been in power for the last 13 years and were acting in similar way.

Do you read much on global issues?

Look up accelerating countries and BRIC

That's why I'm not going to engage with these threads any more.

Some old tired arguments and the 'safe routes' mantra being trotted out at every opportunity.

It seems anyone who doesn't agree is a xenophobe, a racist and a fascist !

Yawn.

Well, Russia has seen its economy collapse, Brazils GPD has dropped $1 trillion in the last 13 years, China has huge economic issues with its policy of less freedom in return for eco growth.
South Africa is very unstable, huge inequality (i used to live there)

BRIC.

Well they need everyone who disagrees to be a bigot because the alternative is that we have pertinent questions that they know they cannot answer without tarnishing their halos with realism.

I haven’t seen a single one of these posters answer about what the upper number of migrants should be and how they should be housed (here and now because we don’t have time for their unachievable dream of en masse, net zero, high quality social housing that doesn’t compound our issues with flooding, destroyed eco systems, food production and the fact we have no money to pay for it).

We’re doing well then comparatively. Go the West. Good point 👍

Tg for self assured posters on mn, who needs expert views with people living somewhere to boot.

‘Members of the BRICS group, Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, are expected to outpace the US-led G7 in terms of their contribution to the world’s economic growth, from this year, Bloomberg reported on Monday.

According to the outlet’s calculations, based on the latest IMF data, the BRICS countries will contribute 32.1% of the world’s growth, compared to the G7’s 29.9%.’

https://www.businesstoday.com.my/2023/04/21/brics-set-to-overtake-g7-in-global-economic-growth/

Again just read more it’ll help expand your views.

@Jamtartforme Whoops sorry, I missed out the word 'bigot' and while I'm about it I might as well throw 'Islamophobic into the mix.

I wonder if that's my bingo card completed? 🙄

😴

It’s all they have.

They are losing ground though and will continue to do so. Unless they believe in denying climate and mass movement.

The other odd part is whilst they’re being so vocal on the allowing migration as a good Putin provokes it for instability in the EU.

He may well thank the good people on mn for their service.

they need everyone who disagrees to be a bigot because the alternative is that we have pertinent questions that they know they cannot answer without tarnishing their halos with realism

Indeed - and very noticeable that so many of those pertinent (though doubtless inconvenient) questions still remain unanswered

lol condescending.... expand my views! after reading what you write, i think you d be better off following that advice yourself... All questions, No ideas.

So how much is that G7 growth worth in $ terms? compared to BRIC... You really think BRIC are going to launch a new currency to rival the $ & Euro and you take the world of Lavrov on this?

Anyone who thinks Russia is going to see positive growth anytime soon is an idiot, they are more likely to descend into civil war and anarchy than see real terms eco growth.... seen the value of the rouble and a 4pt increase in interest rates yesterday?

China is in the midst of a real estate crisis, growth forecasts have been slashed on the back of this....

You make me laugh.

Ah yes those pesky questions.

How can you possibly answer them? It’s very hard isn’t it.

I’ve said in many posts what I would do. Learn from successful countries.

Laugh away. Fine by me. I’m sure all the authors of the link I posted are upset by it as I am. Oh hang on..

Love it when people get riled though. It’ll get worse for you, unless you are a climate denier then maybe you’ll be ok ignoring it all

Good luck 👍

Here are some numbers for you

1.2 million people migrated into the UK and 557,000 people emigrated from it, leaving a net migration figure of 606,000 as of the end of June 2022.

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06077/#:~:text=What%20are%20the%20UK%27s%20latest,the%20end%20of%20June%202022.

And actually in my opinion people who stick their fingers in their ears and make the whole argument ‘either you let them in or you want them dead’ are actually giving themselves away as people who enjoy the look of being left wing and benevolent, but aren’t really. Because if they were they would know why letting an unquantified number of people into an already struggling and skint country is a bad idea. It won’t do anything for race relations, foreign aid (‘why should we pay anything, we’ve taken all these people in’), the environment (we’ve said why), the food chain, the economy (yay more cheap workers we can take advantage of and use to undercut everyone else)…

I’m actually open to persuasion, if there were solutions for all of the above that would be the ideal scenario. But there isn’t.

Did someone ask for net migration numbers?

What are the relevance of those numbers to this exact issue?

What’s your point?

The UK has always been open to migration, and still needs relatively open doors to meet shortfalls in labour in a number of areas- The NHS is a good example. I draw though a big distinction between the migration of skilled resources which is self supporting and contributing tax revenues to just turning up on a cross channel dingy. To reiterate, we should take a reasonable proportion of genuine refugees but we should have a clear and agreed cap and we should screen strongly who we accept with a real bias to women and children. Notably Afghan women who are enduring some appalling conditions. Just have a look at the BBC website today.

I think that whole post sounds totally batshit tbh. Have you come from the David Icke forums or something

The evasion speaks louder than words

You can fire out "how many should come?" but are unwilling to answer yourself.

I have no problems answering. I think a maximum of 20,000 women and children. And that’s basically 20,000 more than we can comfortably accommodate, but I feel with a concerted effort we can just about look after.

So we know withclimate change populated areas are going to become uninhabitable (including London through sea level rise, incidentally)

And your answer is to hope "they" die in a war or from a pandemic before they get here. Nice.