should there be council housing/ HA in London

The_White_Horse

lemonjelly wrote: »

I think you'd be amazed what a human can do when in fear of their life.

& I pity you.

then they will be able to learn english.

you are just a gullible fool. 99% of them are in no danger. the only danger they have is fear of having to pay for their own flat/health care/ education.

they laugh at fools like you "why work when lemonjelly will work for us and give us some of his salary"

I pity you.

the_ash_and_the_oak

immigration is necessary because you white people don't really make enough babies imo

PasturesNew

the_ash_and_the_oak wrote: »

immigration is necessary because you white people don't really make enough babies imo

People are making too many babies, we can't afford to keep having them.

To suggest they'll be paying our pension is just a ponzi idea. And the cost of having them now is greater than the cost of paying pensions out to those who worked.

carolt

I think we need to separate economic migrants from genuine asylum seekers, and basic subsistence from a frankly cushy life.

We have a moral and legal duty to accept - indeed to welcome - those who flee here in fear of their lives, but owe nothing to those who just come here for a free ride.

All those on benefits should be entitled to basic subsistence, including a roof over their heads.

But the Somali family in the other thread were getting about £600/week CASH, with all housing costs, council tax, even free school meals and prescriptions thrown in! Even allowing for food for 9 of them, and bills on largish house, presumably they still have something like £300/week or more after basics left over every week.

This is just ludicrous. How many working families have over £1200/month of disposable income?

NumeroDeux

The_White_Horse wrote: »

i am happy for anyone to come to the UK provided they work, support themselves and contribute to society.

anyone else can go.

as for asylum seekers... being an island i am not sure how this is the first safe haven the somalis arrived at.

I saw a show on bbc a couple of weeks ago where some asylum seekers were desperate to get from france to here. from FRANCE!!! that is a safe country is it not???? but they want all the freebies.

Get rid of all the freebies and the majority of the problem will disappear with them.

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.

Asylum seekers have a right to come here, and to remain whilst they apply, regardless of the nonsense 'first safe country' rule we negotiated. We're one of the richest countries in the world, not to mention one of the largest players in the arms trade, we have a legal and moral obligation to soak up some of the mess we profit from creating.

inmypocketnottheirs

lemonjelly wrote: »

I'm starting to really like you...:D

Are you George Bernard??

inmypocketnottheirs

abaxas wrote: »

My question is, how do Londoner's eat?

Who gives as hit??

North - South divide? Widen it I say!!

Generali

PasturesNew wrote: »

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.

The Queen doesn't 'own' the City of London in the way she does the rest of the country, NZ, Australia, Canada and some of Antarctica. She has to ask permission from the Lord Mayor to enter. The City of London is owned by the Corporation of London, that is they own the land and grant any freeholds on it in the same way that The Queen owns all the rest of the land in the UK etc and grants a freehold over it.

The Lord Mayor's Show is an annual display of loyalty by the City of London to The Queen. IIRC, it started once it was clear that The City of London could raise more money and thus a bigger army than the King so the King made the Lord Mayor swear an Oath of Fealty.

Harry_Powell

lostinrates wrote: »

An equal share, or proportional one? If proportional based on what....size, wealth, vacancies? (or inversely lack thereof?)

An equal share for asylum seekers and a proportional share for benefits - proportional to the cost of living, so that the benefit you receive provides a similar lifestyle regardless of whether the asylum seeker is in the UK, Germany or Poland. If we all had similar benefits then the cost of tracking all the way across free europe to get to the UK would not be worth it financially.

I'd also suggest that asylum seekers and economic migrants don't receive citizenship. If asylum seekers come here to get away from a particular regime (i.e. a Kurn escaping Saddam Hussain), then when that regime changes, their case should be reviewed and they should be repatriated with a bit of cash to make their transition easier. Same with economic workers, they can come and work here when we have a boom but have to leave if they are made redundant. Both asylum seekers and economic migrants get what they want from us, but don't overstay their welcome.

Jonbvn

the_ash_and_the_oak wrote: »

immigration is necessary because you white people don't really make enough babies imo

Is this today's official strawman thread, or will there be another one later?