What's your thoughts on asylum seekers?

[Lynds778]

I'm all for offering asylum to those genuinely in need but I've seen a lot of negative media recently around 'fake' asylum seekers; people pretending to be from war-torn countries etc to gain entry to the country. Also videos of men giving advice for future asylum seekers on where to say you're from so that you can get in.

Also seen a lot of uproar from local communities about asylum seekers behaving anti-socially, most recently hanging around outside a primary school in Deanshanger and it's got me worried.
I'm also wondering why the large majority of asylum seekers are men and there are less women and children?

So, what's your opinion?

Also, this isn't a racist post. I would have the exact same concerns if these were white asylum seekers from Germany for example. The worry is the system is being abused by some and that we are a bit too lax when it comes to documentation and monitoring of asylum seekers.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14058597/Fake-asylum-seekers-conning-way-Britain-telling-Home-Office-war-torn-Eritrea-bragging-thousands-followers-TikTok.html

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14185169/amp/Four-asylum-seekers-costing-taxpayer-estimated-160-000-year-living-575-000-luxury-home-accused-faking-Afghan-nationalities-UK.html

Define "misogyny" as it seems to mean all things to all people.

You seem to be arguing that we shouldn't take asylum seekers from countries with human rights abuses.

I pointed out that asylum seekers are people fleeing human rights abuses.

You're now asking me to define misogyny. Violence Against Women and Girls is an example of misogyny. There aren't any countries in the world without VAWAG.

I looked into this quite extensively, analysed publicly available crime statistics and demographic data when loads of stats (with no citations) were being posted on X linking vawg to immigrant populations.

Guess what? Immigrants do not disproportionately commit VAWG.

VAWG is a men's issue. Perpetrators are very much just MEN of all backgrounds.

You also won't be surprised to know that VAWAG is higher than average in Nordic countries which are, apparently, the most equal.

VAWAG is perhaps more open in some lower income countries and hidden in more advanced economies. We know that sexual abuse for example, is vastly underreported.

America is meant to be an advanced country and domestic abuse is through the roof (and they have child marriage). When I lived in less developed economies, I noted that Western men took advantage of inequality.

I did not know that about Nordic countries. I will have to do some research.

Despite leading the world in gender equality, Nordic countries exhibit the 'Nordic paradox,' with intimate partner violence (IPV) rates against women substantially higher than the EU average—32% in Denmark, 30% in Finland, 28% in Sweden, and 22.4% in Iceland, compared to the EU's average of 22%.
https://unric.org

@GoldFishPocketWatch VAWG is a men's issue. Perpetrators are very much just MEN of all backgrounds.

That's funny because someone just told me that Female Genital Mutilation is carried out mainly by women.🤔

You misunderstand. (I suppose my 'as currently constituted' might have been doing more work than I realised). It's not the borders as such that need dismantling. The Lancashire-Cumbria border does no harm, essentially I suppose because there's no passport requirement there (and so on). The England-France border, on the other hand ...

Hmm?

Sure, I see how we have greater (and different) love and care obligations and so on to family and people close to us.

That doesn't seem to entail we should deny free movement of people, though. Nor does it seem to allow discrimination based on arbitrary characteristics such as skin colour etc.

There's an argument to be made. But the start seems (naively, as I allowed) to rest on barring discrimination on moral grounds.

Do you think your love for your child allows any kind of racism, morally speaking? Surely not. But if you're disallowing that genre of discrimination, how does discrimination based on place of birth come to be justified? This all seems to one side of familial obligation/care, no?

This.

Can we agree, though, that national borders as currently constituted are immoral - and make all reasonable (and feasible) efforts to dismantle them because of that?

This is not going to work. You'd have chaos and territorial fighting. More than we have now

@squidgie Rather than looking at what's really happening - the rich are growing richer and public services can't compete. The rich own politics and the media. Elon Musk is a shining example and look how hard he is pushing the hatred of immigrants. It's easy to rile up hatred and division so that everyone blames each other for taking the things they need, rather than looking to the super rich who are endlessly building and hoarding resources and wealth for themselves.

The UK tax system is already top heavy. The top one per cent pay 30 per cent of all income tax revenues: a higher share than at any time in past twenty years. In other words, three in every ten pounds that the government receives in income tax is paid by just over 300,000 individuals. Not surprisingly, this statistic is often quoted by those who argue that the rich cannot be asked to pay more.

Record numbers of millionaires have fled Britain since Labour came to power due to high taxes and the impending end of non-dom status.

While the UK's tax take may be on the rise, there are plenty of locations looking to attract wealthy individuals with so-called golden visas in return for investment in government projects as well as businesses or residential developments.
One of the most popular locations is the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

Income tax isn't the only issue. Public money going into the pockets of private companies, public sector struggling to attain or retain assets due to competition with the super rich, private sector offering more competitive pay, etc etc, there are loads of ways in which wealth inequality shows up and impacts us all.

If those fleeing millionaires had such benevolent feelings about how they'd use their wealth to benefit the country why are they running away re: non Dom status?

You accept that it's ethical to provide more resources to people close to you, right?

I see open borders as a resource allocation exercise, since we live in a distributive welfare state. That is, part of my salary via taxes goes to support people who are physically in Britain, which includes an increasing number of immigrants via various different pathways. In practice, we have seen that immigrants from non-selective pathways consume more resources than they provide.

To help me understand your position: is it that you accept that it's moral to provide more resources to close family members rather than sharing equally, but you don't see why open borders necessarily means sharing resources? (i.e. you think I'm overstating the negative economic impact, and that immigrants "grow the pie" so to speak?)

Or is it that you see any differential allocation of resources as being discriminatory, point blank?

Deport them all. End of.

Where to?

@GoldFishPocketWatch If those fleeing millionaires had such benevolent feelings about how they'd use their wealth to benefit the country why are they running away re: non Dom status?

I've no idea.
Maybe they are fed up with shouldering most of the tax burden?

Why not ask your MP to raise a question in parliament?

I don't see how taking them in (especially young adult men) benefits us as a nation.

I'd rather (and in fact, do) lobby for things that are more important to me than the feelings of tax avoidant multimillionaires

The UK tax system is already top heavy.

It really, really isn't. Many countries, including mine, have a far more progressive tax systems where the highest earners pay way more than 30% tax.

Uzbikistan - plenty of room there !

It's the bloody system at fault. Needs a rapid overhaul so genuine asylum seekers get the shelter and support they need and the chancers are weeded out...
In my experience ( education) the AS were very grateful for all that was offered, valued education and were polite and respectful...... which is more than I can say for SOME of the entitled, ill mannered and ignorant indigenous parents.

Because they don't wish to destabilise their carefully selected contributing useful migrant workers with a shedload of grudge-bearing people who support the Muslim Brotherhood/Hamas or Hezbollah.

It may be an unpopular opinion, but the Gulf Arab states are and can afford to be sniffy about the educational qualifications and political preferences of anyone moving there. You need a job, with a sponsor, and a work permit. And if you lose any of them, you have no right to remain.

Where I live, we have a lovely park where children love to play on, dog walkers go and people cut through to go to the nearby hospital. A group of non speaking english, men are camping out in the trees and shrubbery. A few times if a woman is alone, walking, has been accosted, following them and the women have had to run to escape. There are wild animals that are being found, attacked and killed for food, you can’t warn anyone on FB groups as the posts are being rejected as racist. Imagine if anything happened to a child and the parents found out, they could have been pre warned and told their child not to play there.

It's well known that those countries use slave labour, deny them rights and treat them appallingly. They're hardly carefully selected.