To find it shocking how brazen people are with their hatred of refugees?

[GreenFairy93]

Another day, another Facebook post calling for the army to be bought in to stop the boats. Another comment section full of people shouting "sink the boats!" "Use as much force as necessary to stop them!"

There are women and children on these boats and people are brazenly calling for force to be used against them and for them to be sunk, with pictures of their faces next to their comments. Not an ounce of shame. And there's hundreds of them.

I just find it absolutely abhorrent and honestly, really upsetting that so many people have dehumanised asylum seekers to the point they have absolutely no compassion in their hearts to the point they are publicly calling for harm to come to families fleeing war.

AIBU to be shocked that people think this is ok now?

I do earn in the 45% range.

Also, the article here talks only about non-dom status when talking about the UK. The Labour Government scrapped the non-dom status.

Because of this. Someone I know got a work transfer from his bank from London to New York. This was so he could avoid being taxed on his global assets.

How many asylum seekers can I support for £125.67?

I currently pay £4 per year for one King, so if we’re talking value for money - seems like a better deal at face value.

Brazen? Do you mean in Britain?
You should try the Czech Republic or Hungary.
Funnily enough, these countries still have their own identity, protected.

The government response and narrative around Ukrainian refugees was totally different. We were encouraged to see them as our fellow human beings and to come together and support them through hardship.

Ukrainian refugees were given vastly more government support than refugees from other countries.

Having worked with asylum seekers from other countries, I found it odd that Ukrainians were seen as more deserving of support than others with similar experiences, knowing the conditions other asylum seekers were living in.

I think what you're saying about Ukrainian refugees being "more similar to the local population" is questionable. Ukraine of course has it's own unique language and cultural heritage/practices. More similar in that they are white, perhaps. You can see how whiteness plays into perceptions of assimilation.

See second or third generation migrants from other majority-white communities Vs non white communities. Black and brown British people being told to "go home" while white people are not, regardless of whether our parents/grandparents were migrants.

I don't think the difference in response is because Ukrainian people are more deserving or more British-like than other people fleeing violence.

It's more to do with the way the government and media responded to the situation in Ukraine, humanised Vs dehumanising rhetoric. See how "small boats" is used as a dehumanising/objectifying shorthand which distances us from human experiences.

How would this conversation change if we focused on the experiences of people on the boats, why they are on the boat, who they are, rather than seeing boats as nuisance objects to be batted away? If we heard their voices in the media? Would people be talking about blowing up boats if we started actually talking about people?

And no, I don't see migration as "exotic restaurants". And I don't see white working class people as a monolith. I'm a white person, I'd say one side of my family is working class and the other side middle class. My husband is white working class and has grown up in a council house, worked manual jobs. He probably looks like some of the stereotypes of white working class people. Certainly I've seen people react to him in line with this stereotype. I'm more middle class in my profession. People assume things about me, too. We have very similar political views.

As I've said before, I have grown up in an extremely multicultural community where 85% of people are not white, and the majority speak English as an additional language. This is not a rich community, but one I love. It is also a welcoming community.

Meanwhile, big media and big tech get likes driven by rage against each other and benefit from our division.

I wasn't saying that you didn't, I don't even know you, it's not really that hard to be on that range in the South East so I'm sure you are.

I think it's hilarious that you think that the UK has high tax rates.

1% of the UK owns 70% of its wealth if that trajectory of wealth inequality continues, how is anyone, including the middle classes going to see their life improve so excuse me why I don't fret about your pal moving to New York to avoid paying tax in a country that he is a citizen of!

I really like King Charles. I will happily pay your £4 per year - you can pay my £125.67.

Exactly this.

I think you know the reason Ukrainian refugees were more welcome is because they are white christians@CicerosHead

The government have never started a campaign for britons to house Afghan or Syrian women and children in their homes have they? I wonder why that is?

All of the Ukrainian refugees weren't women and children either. That is a false rhetoric. Many whole families came to the UK and were hosted gladly. But refugee families in boats are to be shot at and sank to make sure they don't get here. See also the laughing emojis left on news stories of children drowning in the channel. CHILDREN!?! Why is that?

I remember seeing something on the news where Ukrainian refugees complained about the large "Muslim population" in the areas they were placed in.

ForgetMeNotRose
Ukrainian refugees were given vastly more government support than refugees from other countries

The Ukrainian scheme was sold to the British public on the basis of offering temporary sanctuary, with the expectation that most refugees would return home when they are able. That may not turn out to be the case but that was how the scheme was presented.

It does. The 45p rate is way too much. We are taxed to the brink and expected to all cheer and be happy about it.

If you tax the 1% to the brink they'll find a way and leave. Billionaires don't hoard billions in cash, it's usually in the intangible shares etc of the companies they've grown or run.

My friend did leave. He thought taxes were too much and he left. I hopes he's having the time of his life in New York City.

I’m sure I already do pay some peoples £125, and their £4.

If that £125.67 is accurate, there were also 110,000 asylum claims in 2024-2025.

So, I guess it depends if we think individual human beings are worth £0.0011.

Because that figure is per year. The 860,000 plus the 430,000 people are still here. Still using housing, NHS and other resources.

That’s why the economic pressure caused by immigration hasn’t changed.

Asylum seekers are not allowed to work in the first year of their claim, but can after that. Refugees are expected, and arguably should be obliged, to work, in order to at least contribute something towards the support they have received.

No they don't all leave, leave and go where? Do you not think that have ties to the country they were born in, familial set ups, a culture they are attached to. I know they personally don't leave so please stop spouting this rubbish!

It is not acceptable for this pattern to continue- 1% of people get the benefits of 70% of wealth.

Why shouldn’t we choose to help those that have far more cultural and practical similarities to us and will settle in far more easily as a result?

As an example of one quantifiable aspect, many Ukrainians either already spoke English or made efforts to learn very quickly so didn’t increase the need for even more £millions to be spent on interpreters in the NHS than we already spend. (£64 million last year). If NHS users can’t speak English, I think it is fairly likely they are not working here and paying tax and NI.

We are not the only country in the world that can take asylum seekers, there are many other options for people from Syria and Afghanistan - we cannot take them all. The cultural and religious differences are vast.

Our government has an obligation to consider our needs and welfare as a society as well as people who want to come here for whatever reason.

Historically, that's not the case. If you take France, for instance, they may have received far more applications than the UK, but they also rejected a far higher percentage, whereas the UK at one point was accepting around 75%. I wonder where all those rejected asylum seekers went? 🤔

I believe few are refugees and most are economic migrants. I’d never want the boats sunk mid channel but I’d you could do it close to shore they’d line and you’d kill the route, not the economic migrants.
I’m pro migration but they either need to be in genuine danger or bring value to the UK. Few in those boats do.

Nobody is being pushed out of London and ending up in Bolton because of a foreign billionaire buying a £250mn mansion.

You may not understand the fact that if people are very rich, and taxes get too high, it becomes economically preferable and feasible for them to be domiciled elsewhere.

Just look at what happened in the 70s, the exodus was such that the phrase ‘tax exile’ entered common spheres.

Government has to find a balance between taking enough tax from the richest and making it desirable for them to leave for tax purposes. It’s not like they have to leave and never return to see their family and friends.

I know people that have this capacity with houses in other countries they already spend a lot of time in.

But a large number of those super wealthy tax evaders are also immigrants. Aren't you blaming them? Or is it okay to blame some immigrants, especially the ones who probably do still contribute far more than most people, and particularly more than irregular/illegal/whatever-this-week's-moniker-is individuals?

So it’s ok to sink boats full of young men? Lovely.

I disagree. It is absolutely personal as many of the arseholes spewing this stuff are the same people who have been wanting brown-skinned people they see to “go back where they came from” for decades, even when those brown skinned people are British.

Who’s advocating sinking boats 😳

In 23/24 there were approximately 36.5mn income tax payers in the UK, footing an asylum bill of over 5.4bn. Thats nearly £1500 per taxpayer. Bear in mind that some taxpayers will only be earning min wage. Even if the bill was split between all adults (some of whom rely wholly on state support themselves), it would work out at £80 per person. Stop being so dismissive.

The people on Facebook that OP’s initial post referred to.