Labour's new policies for asylum seekers

[frommyheadtomyfeet]

Are rumoured to follow Denmark's, which include the seizure of valuables from people arriving here to pay their accommodation costs.

Is anyone else disgusted by this?! How will it work, they can take people's jewellery, phones etc., and leave them with nothing? What sort of message does that send?

Why would you do that?

@clavinova- yes, obviously that depended on the statistics that we had. I think a factor in Brexit is that people didn’t really believe them (and kind of were right to!) because the government wasn’t being honest about it. My father worked for a water company and he knew that there were far more people living locally than were officially reported - you can tell from the amount of sewage output - he and other counterparts from other water companies had their own estimates of population that were above government numbers for ages. Because we don’t actually properly record who comes in. The reality is that people voted against freedom of movement, when freedom of movement is only the right to work or be removed after 3 months of worklessness, but the government didn’t actually enforce the last bit.

No tax without defence. That's the basic social contract and the basic requirement of a government. If we have no borders we have no defence. So no right to tax people. Every person for themselves.

I suspect she may be a bit of a tease. Or mad. Either.

This isn’t the 1800’s we don’t need ‘defence’ anymore. A standing army and nuclear weapons are a waste of taxpayer’s money that would be better spent on combating inequality on our streets.

I don’t believe you would behave in that manner somehow so this hypothetical you draw upon is rather pie in the sky don’t you think?

Have the 2 world wars long after the 1800s escaped your attention?

Nuclear weapons get you a 'seat' around the table! What do we think is stopping Putin? Sadly how we want the world to be, how it is and how we need to act to make it safe, costs us all and immigration is hurting the UK in ways many have yet to see but will soon, if we don't hang on to what made us a 'pull' in the first place. Acting now is to stop what comes next, something I think many totally underestimate, particularly as it is not yet on their doorstep. The pot is empty, it is not racist to stop funding others and protect our society.

Obviously not, but that would not happen again. If it did, then fine build your army, build your navy. But until then we are paying billions of pounds every single year for a few angry blokes to march around with dangerous weapons effectively doing nothing. How is that sensible?

Hobbesian, I think. Yes - the government offers safety and we yield them money to pay for it.

@Swiftasthewind

how do you tax a bunch of people who will likely leave? If all the people with lots of assets decide to leave to elsewhere because they don’t want to live in a country of 200m people paying for everyone else’s welfare, who do you tax then? Who gets the houses - can people just drag me out of my four bedroom house because I have a spare bedroom?

They ‘haven’t happened again’ because of the nuclear deterrent and NATO. You’re so shockingly naive I would deprive you of a vote if it was up to me.

I’m sorry? What wars have NATO and nuclear warheads specifically stopped from happening? I haven’t heard of any. Do you have any peer reviewed sources for your outlandish claims?

Peer reviewed sources to prove wars haven’t happened because of NATO? Are you actually mad? Do you want a peer reviewed study to prove the sun hasn’t expanded yet as well? A basic understanding of modern history provides a clear answer but I’m not surprised you don’t have that.

I don’t partake in the ancient game of chess but I believe this is what they call a ‘checkmate’.

I knew that you would have no way to substantiate your absurd claims. You right whingers never do 😏

Substantiate a theoretical negative? You sound so incredibly devoid of any thinking skills at all. Why do you think Russia has attacked Ukraine but not Poland? Any guesses?

I think this was answered last night (?) and that it turned out contributors/non contributors weren't separated by country, meaning that the specifics around which nation's migrants are less likely to contribute is unclear

Also thank you @Clavinova for the clarity on which iteration of the ECHR has been responsible for more "overturnings" of our decisions.
Looks like a previouus post was another example of selective data-picking ... quelle surprise

Did you ever hear about something called "the soviet union". This was an expansionist arrangement centralised in Russia and it sought to build spheres of influence and a buffer zone round its core by invading neighbouring countries like Czechozlovakia and Hungary. It would have continued to expand in Europe nhad it not been for NATO creating an opposing buffer.

In those days there were only two superpowers. The Soviets and America backed by NATO. NATO and Article 5 deterred the soviets from expanding further into Europe (which would have started another major war possibly). So NATO and a fear of MAD due to nuclear weapons created balance in the world and avoided either side starting another major world war.

Currently the only super power is America. China is hot on its heels. And we dont know if they are enemy or friend yet. But the balance has gone.

She’ll want a peer reviewed study confirming the existence of the USSR next.

🤣🤣

Don’t be ridiculous, my father taught me an awful lot about the USSR growing up actually, much of what the capitalist ‘West’ would rather you didn’t know even.

Are those on the left ok being called whinger?

I don’t mind the excessive posts but I do see this insult used more by one side on here.