To say that most people in the UK want illegal immigration to stop

[Sleepysleepycoffeecoffee]

I recently commented on a Facebook post to say the majority of British people are against illegal immigration. I was asked by several other users what survey I based that opinion on. I responded with the question ‘do you think most people want illegal immigration to continue then? Because if not, then surely they want it to stop?’ I didn’t receive any responses to that.
Without getting into any political arguments or name calling and giving no ifs, buts or reasons for your view, please vote as follows.

YABU - I want illegal immigration to continue.
YANBU - I don’t want illegal immigration to continue.

Every country in Western Europe is grappling with this. Not Eastern Europe as they take a hard line.

We need to shut down the pull factors, set up off shore processing, narrow the criteria for successful claims. It can be done if there is a will to do it.

You can claim at the border but will be rejected if you don’t fit one the accepted categories . My understanding is many apply through the family connection route.
Due to the US’s current regime I imagine more will be trying to cross at the weaker border points.

I would deport every single person. We are a small island and have taken in a very generous number of people who want to live here over the last 20 years. We are full, our wildlife is dying, our air quality is terrible, our roads are rammed. We were always going to reach this point eventually with the direction and speed of travel. No point pearl clutching.

Please enlighten us.

The UK is a different situation, as we cannot put our asylum processing offices in the EU without negotiating some agreement on that basis, meaning the applicants need to enter the UK.

In the EU itself, one of the strengths of Schengen-Dublin (which we should join) is biometric tracking from point of entry.

It’s very low for US to Canada claims, so that’s your answer on how can it be done legally.

Would you choose to get rid of the STCA so it was much easier for people to enter Canada from US and claim asylum?

My quoting failed - this is in reply to @HoneyParsnipSoup - You’re clearly frustrated with a combination of problems, and they are the same ones which utterly boil my piss too.

So with our collective piss over these issues now at a rolling boil, let’s really think about the dynamics.

I want to leave aside “we’re full” because I cannot agree with you on that at face value, but please bear with me:

“our wildlife is dying, our air quality is terrible, our roads are rammed.”

These problems which we both feel desperately aggrieved about, are ecological issues, not migration issues.

They need different solutions.

To prevent wildlife dying we need to farm more responsibly, preserve biodiversity and provide better stewardship of ecosystems.

To improve air quality, we need to phase out fossil fuel powered vehicles as fast as possible, and help that with policies like London’s ULEZ and ULEZ expansion.

Our roads are rammed because we never invest in public transport projects outside London. Put a Crossrail between Leeds and Manchester and watch M62 traffic melt away.

What you and I are both upset about is what Just Stop Oil is trying to fix, not what “Tommy Robinson” addresses.

No amount of deportation will fix these ecological issues which frustrate you and me alike.

Migration is posited as the cause of all out ills.

Oligarchs push that narrative because they earn their wealth due to fossil fuels. They are the vested interests lobbying governments to keep things shit, funding parties like Reform, funding activists like “Tommy Robinson”. They fund these “bladerunner” and “raise the colours” activists

Fossil fuels are the cause of what is upsetting you and me according to what you wrote.

Now those Oligarchs tell you ah - it’s actually because of migrants !

Don’t believe them.

If they get their way and form a government, they stand to make exactly what you worry about much, much worse, at your expense and at their gain.

Change the law to say they aren't entitled. If they arrive send them back to country of origin.

Yes we are. And even if we aren't. We can simply keep to where we are and enjoy what we have

We’re not “full”.

@OmNomShiva what do you think is the maximum population that UK could sustain?

I like renewables and clean technologies as much as the next person. Especially in the power sector.

Air quality has actually improved drastically since 2010. Not everyone can afford EVs. Poor people can't afford to all change their cars to be ULEZ compliant.

Fossil fuels aren't all big and evil. They are a vital fuel source that powers our economy. They employ many people and provide the energy we need. I bet you have a fossil fuel that heats your home.

How would you know they aren’t entitled if you don’t assess their case?

Ah. Just don't assess the case at all. Reject/deny and sent back.

It is impossible, not to mention immoral to try to invent a maximum number.

After you’ve rounded up all the brown people and sent them to your death camps, there would be easily be other reasons why the population might grow. Longer life expectancy, increasing birth rates, lower infant mortality.

Would you want to calculate that maximum number then ?

If no - why not ?

If yes - what would you use if for ?

We are an ever growing population and if you compare us to the likes of Germany and France, they are much much bigger in size and yet we are more populated than France and have also exceeded them in the amount of immigrants we have taken in.

People always deflect on their number for the population.

@Parker231you have vast country next door with a legal agreement to stop the flow of asylum seekers to Canada, would you change that?

A girl was gangraped by two boat migrants. We tried to tell you, but you said local men were worse and anyway it doesn’t happen.

Now we’ve moved to ‘almost never happens’ but a child suffered a life-changing event and she may never feel safe again. Was it really worth it for your ‘international obligations’?

Was it?

People deflect because it’s a fallacious premise.

What’s your ideal number for your street ? Your village ? Your town ? Your country ? Your continent ? Your planet ?

You just can’t put a number on it. And even if you could - would you only use it on migrants, or are we going elderly ? Are we going disabled ? Who else do you want to eradicate with that number ?

There is a number it’s called the U.K. population. How much higher do you want it to be?

Who did you try to tell ?

Who said local men were worse ?

Fundamentally the problem is MEN. And mostly ones the victims know. These incidents are horrible, but they’re a consequence of men, not their origin.

People like you say ‘all men are bad’. But actually, origin matters. European crime statistics are very clear on this, you cannot expect Britain to be any different.

So again. Was the gangrape of a child worth your ‘international obligations’?

Are you even a feminist? Because it seems you care more about the rights of foreign men over the safety of local girls.

I agree in part but I also think it's massively naive to think that background doesn't play a part in whether a man is more likely to be a danger to women. Some cultures are more misogynist than others. I say that as someone who comes from one.

I have answered that dumb question because that’s a question which cannot be answered and is deployed to distract and reduce to the absurd.

Xenophobes will say that number is “it’s the current population MINUS THE FORRINS” because they’re single-issue simpletons who literally see everything as a migrant issue.

Focusing solely on migrants easily distracts from the real causes of our problems which I outlined in some detail further above.

It looks like my clear explanation has triggered the ones who blame foreigners because now we’re screaming “rape” and calling for answers to stupid questions about setting upper limits to population sizes.

These are well-known squirms of those who want to drive the anti-migrant narratives so we don’t notice the real truth behind it.

This informs me that those now writhing and trying to bring their shock value claims about migrants back into the centre of this discussion are:

a) People who are gullible enough to believe the bullshit excuses oligarchs have fed them via their Arron Banks and co backed Reform / Farage / Tice / “Tommy” puppets

b) People actually employed to spread disinformation by the oligarchs and puppets I listed under a)

What a load of old writhing, squirming, triggering, screaming twaddle.

Honestly. People do react to that don’t they.

Let's not import more from the 3rd world.