Why is the public directing their anger at the individual asylum seeker that arrives at the shore…

[AnotherNC12345]

… rather than the smuggling / trafficking gangs that are responsible for the journey?

I think it’s very extreme to put all of the blame and the anger at the individual that arrives, rather than the people responsible for orchestrating the whole process. These individuals are often ‘sold the dream’ and hooked in by organised crime groups who direct them to the UK. I’ve looked at sample routes from different parts of the world (screenshots may be pending) and these are complex and would need local people, as well as law enforcement, customs officers and other government officials to turn a blind eye involved in smuggling across multiple borders.

It’s no secret that these crossings likely cost a lot of money, and I think it would be safe to assume that refugees would often be in crippling debt to the OCGs who will put pressure on them to pay it back, by threatening them and their families and I would go as far as to say they could then be coerced in to further committing crimes when granted asylum in order to pay back their debt.

These OCGs are likely involved in other trafficking / crime, not just of asylum seekers but likely drugs, weapons and sex as they have the connections across those borders.

I think it’s very unlikely that an asylum seeker is sitting there looking at all the European government websites and shopping for a country with the best benefits package and approaching a trafficker with a brochure like they’re picking a Jet2 holiday. But this is the narrative that’s often put us and fuelled in the media.

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to have a better system and want to control our borders better on a whole, but this sheer anger and blame placed at the human in front of us seems very misplaced, when they were likely manipulated in to thinking they can have a better life in this particular country and not another, and the problem is way way bigger than an individual.

Nope, AI will trounce any need for immigration.

Can AI provide personal care? How, exactly?

There will be hundreds of thousands of British natives, without jobs, after AI takes it's toll, there will be people queueing up for care jobs.

AI will change things wrt immigration

And this is the biggest point for me.
You can be the biggest, fittest bloke on the planet (in this case I’m referring to the commentary around ‘why is it mostly men that come over’), you make this journey, lasting weeks if not months, staying in some awful conditions, thrown in to backs of vehicles, potentially sitting in camps with questionable sanitary conditions, people harassing you - nobody can say that because you’re a young man, fit and healthy that this isn’t going to have an impact on your mental state and break you down. So to then have a crowd of local people shouting in your face saying you’re not wanted, you’re bad, you’re the reason for all of our problems, you’re the drain on our society must just feel like being kicked while you’re down. On a human to human level.

Perhaps it’ll streamline the processing framework - that would be a great investment from the Gov in order to speed things up.

If AI was to replace ‘loads of jobs’ it’ll will replace most data entry, data analytics, IT jobs. Those will not eliminate existing jobs, just shift people in to different areas. Someone needs to program, quality check, fix issues.

Hundreds of thousands of jobs, if not millions of jobs will be lost.

Why not stay with your family and your support network and work to make everyone's lives in your home town or village better?

Do you mean speed processing up so we can take more people?

This is a good debate but I suppose that’s down to how the individual feels. You can have two parents that are not native to the UK, but a child being born in the UK and providing the parents have settled status the child is given a British citizenship. So then it’s down to the values and culture you have around you and you’re brought up in to make the choice of how identify with those cultures. If those parents bring you up as the other nationality then there’s a high probability that they will identify as the other nationality because ‘blood’, but you can also go the other way. It becomes a personal choice, but theoretically you would be both.

You can be given a British passport and become "British"

You will never, however, be a "Briton"

There’s a man in the news today - a rapist actually - who appears to have been floating round Europe for some years, having a family in one country. Anyway, in Britain he has been “an asylum seeker” and it turns out actually he has fled terrorism charges in his own country.

There may be many honest people desperate for a new life… and there may be many who may be desperate - but not decent humans with anything to offer except to be a burden on the prison system.

Not necessarily, we already know that 52% are refused refugee status. So instead of keeping them in limbo, you can issue decisions quicker, return people who don’t qualify and improve public perception.

So at what point do you? Where down the family tree do you get to be a Briton?

DPs parents are Irish + another nation. He has always been brought up British. My kids are now half British. They will grow up to know they are British. Your view of whether they are ‘true Britons’ does not matter in the slightest - no institution will ever question how ‘pure’ they are.

You can't be "half British"

They will be British when it suits them and not British when it doesn't.

Law is law and someone with a British passport is deemed as British, this is a fact. However, just because you're born in a stable, it doesn't make you a horse.

There are many unemployed British citizens. Care companies still struggle to recruit. Many British citizens see care work as somehow beneath them.

Yeah, I agree, it's tough work in harsh conditions for poor pay.

My point is, that frame of mind will change, relatively soon.

Enjoy your stable. You may be a horse, but you’re no more pedigree than anyone of mixed heritage.

So how many generations in the UK does it take to pass your “Briton” test?

I don't think it should be considered " beneath" people. But it is low paid on the whole. So if AI.did replace all the well paid jobs you would see a big reduction in the wages of the population. Like everyone gets demoted all at once. Which would not be popular. Worse, because it is funded through either the state, or through private payments it relies on people paying into the state or directly to care homes to care in order to pay the wages of care home staff. Which won't be possible because all the other jobs will be gone. It's not a very sustainable model unfortunately. Unless you somehow taxed the large corporations now using AI instead of staff through the nose but I imagine they would strongly resist that. And it would negate the costs savings switching to AI created for those companies.

It's not about having a pedigree.

It's about pointing out that a given nationality is more important than just holding a passport. There are millions of people in the UK that hold British passports and they hold it purely for convenience. They don't count themselves as British and would always put their country of origin first, always.

Cats and cows and horses are all born in stables and all belong in stables. They are all stable dwellers. Or stable-izens of you will.

How could you possibly know that?

Cricket.

We can all read between the lines of the multiple comments this poster has made and it is very clear what their view of ‘otherness’ is.