A Political Thread pt. 2

[Mallow]

Here's a different take. There isn't a migration issue at, there is a political and media narrative to make it an issue when it's not.

I mean they need homes, hospitals, schools, money and so on. So unless you have a tardis they can live in and a money tree, that's not really a good take, is it?

"Humza Yousaf quits as Scotland's first minister"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-scotland-68918348

I'm guessing he thought he wouldn't survive a vote of no confidence.

 

[McTallshort]

In happier news

 

[Reiser99]

I mean they need homes, hospitals, schools, money and so on. So unless you have a tardis they can live in and a money tree, that's not really a good take, is it?

"Humza Yousaf quits as Scotland's first minister"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-scotland-68918348

I'm guessing he thought he wouldn't survive a vote of no confidence.

You realise that immigration benefits economies right and that most immigrants add more to the economy than they take out. Post Brexit, immigration goes up, because it's needed economically. Italy elects a far right government, immigration goes up. It's all smoke a mirrors to galvanise a base, when actually the politicians themselves know that economically they need immigration.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

In happier news

View attachment 19732

"Nielsen sales data puts Truss's effort in 70th place on last week's bestsellers' list, outsold by ***les such as the Ultimate Air Fryer Cookbook and More Confessions of a Forty-something F**k Up."

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

I appreciate all of that, but the UK has a hard border with France and it didn't stop them getting this far, why would a hard border with Ireland be any different?
The crux of it seems to be the assumption that the government is actively engaging in this rather than just celebrating it - if they were smart/competent enough to try and sweep the migration problem onto Ireland's doorstep they'd have been doing it for the last 14 years

I mean, it wouldn't have worked prior to the threat of deportation to Rwanda. Ireland wasn't any better of an option than the UK, arguably worse for people with hopes of getting low skill employment of some sort also. The back door migration from NI is also high to the point that our government, who are staunchly against the right wing crowd mentioned above by @Saintjay, is taking preventative emergency action. The timing is incredibly suspicious to the point it's hard to believe that unofficial lines of communication are getting people there.

This isn't unique to Ireland, the UK numbers last year were very high (and almost 7 times Irish numbers) and are about to be dwarfed by this year

I'm aware of that although 7 times the amount of refugees compared to 13 times the population shows the issue on our end here. It's not an even split or close.

I mean this is a significant issue in the UK, and realistically most of the west, with groups out of America fermenting and funding all of this, it's not unique to Ireland

I'm also aware of that but when it's mostly UK based groups working with scumbags here and now the UK Gov are almost endorsing them by in their most recent actions it's really dangerous. Like it's already at the point where asylum seekers aren't safe due to a lack of infrastructure here nevermind the self proclaimed "patriots" attacking them.

I also don't think the numbers add up to freely point fingers at Germany and France (although what goes on in the North of France is shameful). They're both taking the brunt of this crisis with refugee populations that dwarf the UK. The UK have similar figures to Sweden. They could and should be doing a lot more.

So to sum up, I think there's a very high risk of Ireland receiving a disproportionate amount of refugees who have landed in the UK as a result of misaligned policies (the greatest issue across the board as pointed out) and the funnelling of people through the North. I think it would be quite hard to make the argument that the movement from France to the UK is as negligent or nefarious on the side of the French gov.

I'm not at all anti immigrant, if we could take more refugees, I would do so happily but we need a lot of time to get the country to a place where it can.

 

[Mallow]

You realise that immigration benefits economies right and that most immigrants add more to the economy than they take out. Post Brexit, immigration goes up, because it's needed economically. Italy elects a far right government, immigration goes up. It's all smoke a mirrors to galvanise a base, when actually the politicians themselves know that economically they need immigration.

Yes and I'm not disputing that. They still need homes, hospitals, schools etc and that's where the government is failing. Economically is not always the best measurement for this either tbf. It doesn't take all the factors into consideration.

 

[McTallshort]

You realise that immigration benefits economies right and that most immigrants add more to the economy than they take out. Post Brexit, immigration goes up, because it's needed economically. Italy elects a far right government, immigration goes up. It's all smoke a mirrors to galvanise a base, when actually the politicians themselves know that economically they need immigration.

Controlled immigration yes, uncontrolled influx of people crossing illegally into a country only benefits criminal gangs and foreign powers looking to destabilise one another

 

[Saintjay]

You realise that immigration benefits economies right and that most immigrants add more to the economy than they take out. Post Brexit, immigration goes up, because it's needed economically. Italy elects a far right government, immigration goes up. It's all smoke a mirrors to galvanise a base, when actually the politicians themselves know that economically they need immigration.

So Ireland should actually be happy about the influx of people. Seems like it's a win, win for them. When there government are just pandering to the riff raff

 

[Reiser99]

Yes and I'm not disputing that. They still need homes, hospitals, schools etc and that's where the government is failing. Economically is not always the best measurement for this either tbf. It doesn't take all the factors into consideration.

So what other factors are there?

In terms of homes, hospitals, schools etc...well you said it yourself. That's a government failing, not an immigration failing. It's a bit ridiculous to say the issue is immigration when actually it's government incompetence.

 

[die_mole]

So what other factors are there?

In terms of homes, hospitals, schools etc...well you said it yourself. That's a government failing, not an immigration failing. It's a bit ridiculous to say the issue is immigration when actually it's government incompetence.

Is it a government failing or is it the reality of living in a society rather than an open market libertarian free for all?

The government has to plan out the allocation of resources years in advance and sudden population surges can stress any system (particularly the uk where the government hasn't done anything for 13 years). If you want things to have instant reaction we can go back to the 1920s and have tenement housing .

 

[Mallow]

So what other factors are there?

In terms of homes, hospitals, schools etc...well you said it yourself. That's a government failing, not an immigration failing. It's a bit ridiculous to say the issue is immigration when actually it's government incompetence.

Good to see you ignore the other comments. Did they say something you can't reply with?

As others above have stated, but I would also throw in more social ones too. You're talking about bringing in people from a completely different background with different ideologies, beliefs, languages and needs person to person. You'd have to be a fool to say that doesn't have some effect.

 

[Reiser99]

Controlled immigration yes, uncontrolled influx of people crossing illegally into a country only benefits criminal gangs and foreign powers looking to destabilise one another

And Britain is rife with uncontrolled immigration?
Let's see the latest stats in June 2023 were that 1.2 million people entered the UK for that year (they seem to go from June to June for some reason), 508,000 left the uk, so total net migration was 672,000.

Now illegal migration was 52,530 with 40,386 coming via small boats. That's less than 10% of net migration and less than 5% of total migration. For the small boats 36,169 was asylum applicants which is completely different to a migrant (unless your the conservatives who can't tell the difference). So in terms of small boat migrants, we have number of migrants at less than 1% for both total and net migration.

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06077/#:~:text=The%20latest%20estimates%20on%20migration,net%20migration%20figure%20of%20672%2C000.

Irregular migration to the UK, year ending June 2023

www.gov.uk

I don't really see this as an uncontrolled influx.

Further, it is impossible to claim asylum outside the UK and it is impossible to for asylum seekers to get a visa to come to the UK. Therefore the UK actually encourages small boat crossings and supports these criminal gangs by making it extremely difficult for asylum seekers to arrive.

Applying for Asylum In UK From Outside

If you want to stay in the UK because you are unable to live safely in your country for fear of persecution, you may be eligible to claim asylum.

newcastle-immigrationlawyer.co.uk

As for foreign powers looking to destabilise a country, ignoring the fact that our own government is doing a pretty good job of that on it's own, where are we going to get a huge sudden influx of refugees from? We're not near any active war zone and the UK takes very small numbers of refugees compared to other countries around the world. It's not really relevant to the UK.

I'm sure people will disagree, but for me the issue of immigration in the UK is nothing more than political scapegoating to try and hide the fact that the country has been run down by Tory incompetence. It's not a problem now and it's unlikely to be anytime in the near future.

 

[Reiser99]

Good to see you ignore the other comments. Did they say something you can't reply with?

As others above have stated, but I would also throw in more social ones too. You're talking about bringing in people from a completely different background with different ideologies, beliefs, languages and needs person to person. You'd have to be a fool to say that doesn't have some effect.

I was, but it took some time to gather the facts and evidence.

There are social issues, but nothing for me that can't be solved. Yes there are intolerant people on both sides who refuse to try and coexist peacefully. I taught plenty of foreign born children whose parents (especially the mums) who couldn't speak a word of English. However, like with most of the 'issues' it will be a small minority and is not an issue when you see the number of migrants who do contribute and coexist peacefully.

 

[Reiser99]

Is it a government failing or is it the reality of living in a society rather than an open market libertarian free for all?

The government has to plan out the allocation of resources years in advance and sudden population surges can stress any system (particularly the uk where the government hasn't done anything for 13 years). If you want things to have instant reaction we can go back to the 1920s and have tenement housing .

I mean, if 13 years isn't long enough to plan and allocate resources then I don't know what is.

You are right that these resources take time and planning, but if the UK is allowing 1.2 million migrants in a year legally and it can't provide for all of them, then again surely that is a problem of the government and its systems. Either it provides more resources or it limits migration. UK immigration has increased since Brexit, which is a choice by the government, so you can't say it's an societal issue if they choose to do it.

 

[Reiser99]

Another point, is the fact that the home office is so incompetent there is a huge back log in asylum applications. Maybe if we had a better system in place we wouldn't have people waiting for years for a decision. Further, in the UK (unlike many other countries) asylum seekers are not allowed to work while waiting for a decision. Therefore the government has to provide for them indefinitely. If they were allowed to work they could contribute and offset some of the costs that the tax payer shoulders.

 

[Reiser99]

Most charitable policies begin to fall apart when strained. Whilst the EU and Europe wants to portray itself as a bastion of progressiveness and good-will, people are fundamentally selfish and are charitable as long as it doesn't impact their own lives.

Europe as a whole (EU and non-EU) needs a coordinated policy on asylum seekers. In theory every person living in war torn or oppressive regimes could claim asylum and, with the best will in the world, there is no way any system could survive that.

Just to clarify, but the EU has been trying to deter 'illegal migration' for years throw extremely dodgy means.

In Sudan that funded the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) which are the group responsible for the war crimes in Darfur and are currently fighting the civil war with the army.

EU accused of 'hiding' from links to Sudanese armed groups in migration funding

Paramilitary force led by Sudan military council leader Hemeti is benefiting from EU migration funds in Sudan

www.middleeasteye.net

At Any Cost—The War in Sudan and Europe’s Flawed Migration Policies - MERIP

On April 15, 2023, fighting broke out between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces in Khartoum and quickly spread across Sudan. In the three months since, more than 3 million people have been displaced.[1] The majority of the displacement—approximately 2.4 million people—has...

merip.org

"The RSF violently took up its role of patrolling and controlling Sudan's borders. Hemedti, the same man who led a militia allegedly responsible for war crimes in Darfur, began publicly announcing the numbers of migrants he arrested, boasting that the EU needed him because he was doing their "dirty work."[8] Migrants have described being detained by RSF members who held them for ransom before turning them over to other smugglers."

 

[Saintjay]

And Britain is rife with uncontrolled immigration?
Let's see the latest stats in June 2023 were that 1.2 million people entered the UK for that year (they seem to go from June to June for some reason), 508,000 left the uk, so total net migration was 672,000.

Now illegal migration was 52,530 with 40,386 coming via small boats. That's less than 10% of net migration and less than 5% of total migration. For the small boats 36,169 was asylum applicants which is completely different to a migrant (unless your the conservatives who can't tell the difference). So in terms of small boat migrants, we have number of migrants at less than 1% for both total and net migration.

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06077/#:~:text=The%20latest%20estimates%20on%20migration,net%20migration%20figure%20of%20672%2C000.

Irregular migration to the UK, year ending June 2023

www.gov.uk

I don't really see this as an uncontrolled influx.

Further, it is impossible to claim asylum outside the UK and it is impossible to for asylum seekers to get a visa to come to the UK. Therefore the UK actually encourages small boat crossings and supports these criminal gangs by making it extremely difficult for asylum seekers to arrive.

Applying for Asylum In UK From Outside

If you want to stay in the UK because you are unable to live safely in your country for fear of persecution, you may be eligible to claim asylum.

newcastle-immigrationlawyer.co.uk

As for foreign powers looking to destabilise a country, ignoring the fact that our own government is doing a pretty good job of that on it's own, where are we going to get a huge sudden influx of refugees from? We're not near any active war zone and the UK takes very small numbers of refugees compared to other countries around the world. It's not really relevant to the UK.

I'm sure people will disagree, but for me the issue of immigration in the UK is nothing more than political scapegoating to try and hide the fact that the country has been run down by Tory incompetence. It's not a problem now and it's unlikely to be anytime in the near future.

Based on those figures I'm not sure but is seems within three/four years on current pace illegal migrants / asylum applicants entering the UK by boat would equate to the population of Cambridge City. Within eight your looking at the population of Nottingham. The figures also don't reflect the amount of people who stay without the right to remain. With some studies estimating from 2017 you have any where from 594,000 and 745,000 illegal migrants in the UK. On current trends it would appear to be a problem now and possibly in the future.

As much as i dislike this government. I don't think it's solely an issue caused by them. As far as i know Europe as a whole is facing similar problems and i don't think the government's of France, Germany, Ireland etc can all be incompetent and scape goating for political gain. Maybe they are i don't know. I'm assuming they have different methods of claiming asylum legaly to the UK that also don't appear to be working. Various countries are guilty of passing the buck and burden onto others including the UK.

The Labour Party as with many governments across Europe are going to be grappling with the same issue, and don't have a credible solution either.

 

[McTallshort]

Random question: why is diesel cheaper than petrol in Ireland but infinity more expensive than Petrol in the UK?

 

[Mallow]

I mean, if 13 years isn't long enough to plan and allocate resources then I don't know what is.

You are right that these resources take time and planning, but if the UK is allowing 1.2 million migrants in a year legally and it can't provide for all of them, then again surely that is a problem of the government and its systems. Either it provides more resources or it limits migration. UK immigration has increased since Brexit, which is a choice by the government, so you can't say it's an societal issue if they choose to do it.

I don't think any government could keep up with the demands. We don't build enough or have the number of skilled people in the professions needed - or treat them well. Going by how builders are treated, I'm not surprised we have a shortage for example. It needs to be a world wide discussion on how to handle this tbh, but we're stuck with narssistics in charge, so good luck with that.

 

[ncurd]

Services can't cope.
Services don't have enough funding.
Immigration contributes more to funding than it takes away.

Therefore reducing immigration would underfund services even more.