DP called me a middle class racist

[Whoswhoof]

Just now. Discussing the upcoming election. Both always voted labour. I said I’m voting Tory in the upcoming GE for a multitude of reasons, some of which come under the bracket of gender identity, kids sex ed, general tightening of illegal immigration, not taxing private schools. I explained you kind of just have to vote for the party that most aligns with your beliefs as you’re never going to agree with all of them (I don’t agree with a lot of Tory policies, but the ones that are important to me are relevant)

DP then jokes “So you’re a middle class racist now!” Then says only joking. DP will be voting labour.

Aibu to think this is quite out of order?

edited for typo!

I know someone who's a widow with no siblings. Her only child and his family live in Australia. She desperately wants to move to Australia, to be close to their adult DC and grandchildren but she can't. There are ways to move there at her age but only for people with a lot of money. In theory there's also Aged Parent visas but it's pretty cruel as it's mostly false hope. I understand the wait times for processing these visas is many years and a lot of people who apply die before getting one. Added cruelty is, as I understand it so I could be wrong, they have to pay upfront to apply (for a visa they're unlikely to get).

Technonan
If people coming here to claim asylum knew their claims would be assessed within three months, there would be very little incentive for people without a valid claim to come here

How many people with valid claims are there? If we process claims quickly, provide housing and benefits, will that encourage thousands more to come?

I remember reading that in Germany only around 50% of asylum seekers had found work within five years of arrival as they didn't have the skills required.

That’s interesting, thank you.
Zero hours contracts are definitely an issue, also the cost of childcare.
I’ve lived in Europe before, childcare was a fraction of what it costs here. I’d say that definitely makes it much easier for women to return to work after they have had kids.

If there are people with valid claims, then they will be escaping persecution, and many will be willing and able to work, andcshoukd be allowed to. One of the draws for people smugglers to the UK is that their business model depends on the backlog continuing. They will demand huge sums of money from the asylum seekers family, smuggle them into the UK, and use them as illegal workers/slaves in drug smuggling/production or prostitution. They know that the system is so underreesourced, that they can have people stuck in the system for years waiting for their asylum clam to be processed, or simply disappear them into the Black economy. If the applications were rapidly processed and people were swiftly deported, the business model would be broken. The successful applicants would then be able to work.

Asylum claims are for people who believe they will die if they stay where they are. It’s not about whether it’ll ’encourage more to come’ if we let them in. There are discussions to have about why the wars or famines or governments they’re fleeing from have happened and how much responsibility the global west should take for those, but given we’re at the ‘ship them to Rwanda’ phase that’s probably pointless here.

Economic migration, where people who just have a shit life and no prospects of a better one, hear X country is better and try to get there, is a different thing and a different conversation.

Because the tories have a) mixed the two on purpose to scare people and b) failed to fund services that could adequately manage processing the two groups, we are we are in terms of public perception.

Economic migration won’t get better while we keep enriching the rich at the expense of the poor globally. I’m not sure whether Labour will do better at managing it but they certainly can’t do worse and from what I’ve read they’ll be more willing to have sensible adult conversations both internally and with the public about it instead of screaming hysterically about ‘small boats’ and coming up with ways to enrich private business from it that won’t actually help the wider issue.

Traffickers target by ease

They sell location on that basis and demand is very high

Glipsy
Asylum claims are for people who believe they will die if they stay where they are.

There are all sorts of valid claims for asylum not involving immediate danger to life.

Glipsy
I’m not sure whether Labour will do better at managing it but they certainly can’t do worse

How do you explain my earlier links? The 450,000 unprocessed claims in 2006 and Labour's immigration minister having to resign in 2004?

Do you mean Labour managing irregular migration?

Elite border security as the proposal can do worse.

Interesting, I notice whenever someone is accused of racism (whether true or not) they eventually drip feed they are "mixed race ", "have a partner who's a different race" , "once said hi to the minority neighbour" .

Anyway even if you are mixed race that doesn't exempt you from racism and as you well know, mixed raced people can be some of the most vile racists AND YES I am speaking from experience.

I doubt very much you have a relation (that you actually like and care about that is!) From the Windrush generation and still voting Tory😂I see why your husband had a good laugh at this

And I say that as someone voting Tory for the reasons you mentioned although I am not a minority so I have no "guilt" for wanting what's best for me, others like me and family.

Although if another party has better policies on immigration, Ukraine, crime etc then that's what I will be voting.

I’m not sure what you mean about elite border security - can you expand?

I meant that I personally think economic/irregular migration is likely to become more of a problem rather than less and that the way the Tories seem to be dealing with it is not to my liking so I’m up for giving someone else a go.

You’re right it will become more of a problem

Labour recently made a statement on how they would deal with it which is elite border security. It’s linked up thread and had a fair bit of coverage if you’re up for reading more. ‘Smash the gangs’ is often used

Imo it’s not a feasible proposal as we can’t actually do that from the U.K., nor is any other country suggesting to do it as the main way to tackle irregular migration

I don’t think any other electorate would say ok

Wellll we’re going to be here a long time if I get into how I’m raging that Labour seem to be approaching things from a ‘Tory Lite’ messaging perspective to win votes. But I do think that they could be diverting funds away from the current project to try to make it more difficult for people smugglers to make money off other peoples misery - they’ll have to work with other nations on this but that’s been done before and could be done again, and I think it could actually help.

however instead of any of this I would prefer that we were leading a global conversation about real solutions, and to my mind none of those involve ‘make it really hard to get in or really unpleasant once you do’. I don’t have a lot of hope that’ll happen, but under labour I have a glimmer. The tories have been clear they are more interested in copying America / Australias approaches and using the issue to stoke fear in the public.

You can make it nicer and easier for sure but you’ll have the corresponding higher level alongside that

It’s probably easier to ask people how many they feel comfortable taking and devise a system to get that near it.

If you are thinking you’re ok with it being higher generally you can go with that, others may disagree

We do already work with France btw, so it depends on what you mean by ‘working with other nations’? What are you expecting?

I don’t think it’s going to matter if it’s difficult/unpleasant to come to the UK if it’s more difficult/unpleasant to stay where you are. And I don’t want to intentionally hurt people or make them suffer just for trying to improve their lives.

I think probably the answer is improving things for people elsewhere in the world so they can have better lives where they are. That’s going to be hard and expensive but I don’t see another option. It’d have to be a multinational project, obviously.

I meant the countries people are coming from, and the countries the smugglers are based in.

I agree you're "Doing what’s essentially best for our kids"

The bit that's controversial is that you're doing what's best for your kids to the detriment of other people's kids.

Imagine your kid enters a kids' bike race. Every other entrant uses a cheap bike from Halfords. You buy your kid a £5,000 carbon fibre bike. Now imagine that your kid wins the race by 0.5 seconds, but that they would not have won it on an ordinary bike. You did the best for your child in that situation, but that large advantage that you bought for them meant that someone else's kid missed out on the gold medal. The other kid was the best cyclist, but your kid looked like they were better because of the bike.

Now substitute "private education" for "carbon fibre bike" and substitute "job" or "university place" for "gold medal".

I don't personally blame any parent who can send their kid to private school for doing so, the system is to blame not the individual, but it is daft to think that private education is not controversial, and not likely to be seen as such by those on the left.

I don't personally blame any parent who can send their kid to private school for doing so, the system is to blame not the individual, but it is daft to think that private education is not controversial, and not likely to be seen as such by those on the left

And yet is used by so many 'on the Left' as shown by this thread and also by various Labour MPs.

The same can be said for any parent who moves to get into a better state school, pays for a tutor so their child passes the 11 plus etc.

I don’t think many people want their kids to go to a shit school, private is just one way out of that, amongst others.

It does make a difference in that traffickers direct to easier countries. But that may be wanted by some which is fine, not all will agree on how many we should take

Improving where people are does sound nice but it’s going against the tide of increasing volatility and people movement - which you can see already but will increase as climate pressures do

I think the EU does give billions to various leaders in an attempt to lower the flow of people. Whether it does much I guess we’ll see

One of the problems imo is legitimate concerns about the impact of mass immigration (which tends to especially affect, hurt, and cause suffering to less advantaged communities) is dismissing that impact as simply "stoking fear" or "scaremongering".

How is it any different to the issues and impact, that is widely acknowledged and reported on, around regional within-UK 'blow-ins' adding pressure on jobs, housing, and local public services?

Absolutely genuine bigotry is never acceptable, hating people for "not being from here" (relevant both for immigration and within-UK 'blow-ins'), and any discussions need to be done in a compassionate way and without creating a climate of hate or hostility. However the issues and impact do need to be acknowledged and addressed.

How they're addressed is another debate. There's various options including limiting immigration numbers, or more even distribution of new arrivals across the country, or massive investment in jobs, affordable and decent housing for all household sizes, and public services (and ensuring all in need of these have access), or a mix of those options. It's up to everyone to decide, in a calm non hostile discussion, which option they prefer.

I’m not sure the UK is an ‘easier’ country. I think it’s seen as more desirable.

I think the story at the moment is ‘everything is shit cos there’s too many immigrants / TiNy IsLaNd’ and I don’t think that’s the truth, though I do agree there has to be a discussion about how many people can be accepted into the UK at a time and looked after properly, and what to do about people in excess of that number. Do they have to wait somewhere? Where do they wait?

I hope everyone’s gotten used to coming up with inventive and responsible solutions by the time the shit hits the fan with climate change. Suspect not though.

That makes more sense!

So of the 37.5 million working age Brits, 9.2 million are economically inactive. 16 million are disabled. 4.7 million are in education. 350 thousand are on maternity leave. 1.34 million are stay at home parents. So ignoring the disabled as some can work, the number is 2.81 million. Some of them may be independently wealthy so have no need to work. It's not as much as 9.2 million as far as I can see.

Indeed. And if it was the right thing for my family I'd do it.

But I'd recognise the issues associated with it, and the fact that it is morally dubious, before reconciling myself to it.

I wouldn't pretend those issues and that moral dubiety didn't exist. I expect the same is true of those on the left who use it for their children (incl Labour MPs)

It is desirable yes. If we make it easier then we may struggle. I can’t see emphasis on border security doing much more than making it easier. When you consider the reality of stopping trafficking networks globally.

I think high numbers will strain countries politically and socially, you can see some of that now in say Italy, EU various or Ireland

As for figuring it out before shit hits the fan, I doubt it, we can’t even discuss it calmly and properly