We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
should there be council housing/ HA in London
Comments
-
The_White_Horse wrote: »
no asylum seekers or immigrants should be allowed NHS treatment (except A&E) until they have paid in for at least 7 years. Same for schools.
I am under no illusion that there are bogus asylum seekers. In fact, I am sure I meet them occasionally at work. Proving it is another matter.
However, in respect of the part you stated which I quote. A genuine asylum seeker flees persecution from their country of origin. The Uk is the first country they land in. They apply for, & are granted asylum. By your logic, we should refuse them the opportunity to learn english? Is that not self defeating? After all, the sooner they learn english, the sooner they could become self sufficient.
I think your logic is flawed.
If you are that keen on those from abroad supporting themselves, perhaps you would support the right of asylum seekers to works whilst awaiting a decision on their asylum applications?It's getting harder & harder to keep the government in the manner to which they have become accustomed.0 -
It's getting harder & harder to keep the government in the manner to which they have become accustomed.0
-
inspector_monkfish wrote: »infact why don't we just seperate London from the rest of the country, like Monaco from France?
Just have it as a rich playboy's paradise full of racing drivers, bankers and hot totty
call it the Principality of London.
bagsy I'm Mayor.
Actually, I believe that already exists. "The City" - even the Queen has to request permission to enter. I only found that out the other week.0 -
lemonjelly wrote: »...A genuine asylum seeker flees persecution from their country of origin. The Uk is the first country they land in.
Mostly not true. Mostly they've already moved through 1, 2, 3, 4 other EU countries first.0 -
Some research was done a few years back that proved that Cornwall was subsidising London. Cornwall had Objective One funding because it was one of the poorest regions in the whole of the EU ... and it was subsidising London.Being born and bred I quite agree. Keep Greater London and the home counties for inhabitants, all the taxes from city of London stays in London's pot and isn't divided out amongst the rest of the country. Sounds fair doesn't it? :beer:
We can build all the LA and HA we like then
With their mouths, how do you eat?
0 -
lemonjelly wrote: »I am under no illusion that there are bogus asylum seekers. In fact, I am sure I meet them occasionally at work. Proving it is another matter.
However, in respect of the part you stated which I quote. A genuine asylum seeker flees persecution from their country of origin. The Uk is the first country they land in. They apply for, & are granted asylum. By your logic, we should refuse them the opportunity to learn english? Is that not self defeating? After all, the sooner they learn english, the sooner they could become self sufficient.
I think your logic is flawed.
If you are that keen on those from abroad supporting themselves, perhaps you would support the right of asylum seekers to works whilst awaiting a decision on their asylum applications?
if they want to learn english, that is for them to fund, not the state. I absolutely agree they should work whilst their application is awaiting decision.0 -
Harry_Powell wrote: »Our borders are porous because we're in the EU, so we should have an EU wide policy on asylum seekers (ie. quotas for all EU countries, where each country takes an equal share) and an EU wide harmonisation on benefits.
but once in the EU, surely they will be able to move freely?0 -
The_White_Horse wrote: »if they want to learn english, that is for them to fund, not the state. I absolutely agree they should work whilst their application is awaiting decision.
How do you propose they do that? They've fled their home fearing death. They have nothing.It's getting harder & harder to keep the government in the manner to which they have become accustomed.0 -
lemonjelly wrote: »How do you propose they do that? They've fled their home fearing death. They have nothing.
i don't care how they do it.
they have nothing, and yet they manage to get here. perhaps they can be equally as resourceful in learning the language of the country they flee to.0 -
The_White_Horse wrote: »i don't care how they do it.
they have nothing, and yet they manage to get here. perhaps they can be equally as resourceful in learning the language of the country they flee to.
I think you'd be amazed what a human can do when in fear of their life.
& I pity you.It's getting harder & harder to keep the government in the manner to which they have become accustomed.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards