[Closed] Whats the general view of the migrants on boats ?

lazy and only here for hand-outs and the promise of free everything.

sounds about right then…for some of [s]them[/s] the people born in the UK...

How do you propose to pick out the real claimants while turning their boat around?

my view is that we need to start building the infrastructure needed for the extra 20million people that will arrive in the next 50 years.

[i]Obviously the situation is totally appalling, but imagine if we put a footbridge from N Africa into the heart of Europe....how many would walk over it? Do you have any idea of the numbers involved if we opened up such a route? It would completely destabilise the whole of Europe.[/i]

Who said they have to end up in Europe?

There were something like 1.5million vietnamese "boat people" resettled in the 70-90s, the US took nearly half million and Aus and Canada took 100's thousands

What's changed between then and now, surely we're richer than we were then (because capitalism) but we've become less compassionate?

@mike 🙂 safe for work with headphones, I am good with one in one out BTW ! Its not a matter of the immigrants taking jobs it's the cost of supporting them, the longer they don't take a job the longer they rely on the state fully or partially. Remember that stat posted on STW which said you must earn circa £340k to pay into the state what you'll get out.

Yep, but rather than saying no what would you do instead while protecting those seeking asylum? How can you police and protect the entire med coast line to stop people leaving?

You don't protect the Med coast. You patrol coasts near to where the boats are leaving such as Libya.

a great many of the migrants are not refugees/asylum seekers, those that are there is a legal duty to protect, but economic migration (ie. those seeking a better life, but not under any direct or immediate threat at home) is surely different both legally and morally.

Legally, yes. Morally? I'm not so sure. When you're living in a small rural village with no running water or electricity and the risk of famine ever present - you can say they're "economic migrants" if it makes you feel better about locking them out, but don't try and pretend it's morally correct.

[img] [/img]

You don't protect the Med coast. You patrol coasts near to where the boats are leaving such as Libya.

Whats the general view of the migrants on boats ?

My view is that majority can survive in their countries because they are not exactly those that are fighting the govt/rebel aren't they?

I repeat: Majority are NOT persecuted in their countries. Even if the terrorists/rebels take over they are Not going to be killed because they are not fighters.

Majority are economic migrants that jump the queue or force their way in.

The real ones that are going to be persecuted never make it because they would be death before they can escape.

The majority has taken the rights/place of those genuinely needing help.

Personally, send the majority of them back to the coastline from where they came from then at that location perhaps process the real ones from the fake ones.

unfitgeezer - Member
Can Europe really cope with the cost...No ?

Print more money? Cost is of no issue but the wider societal impact can be detrimental to some communities.

Yes, some say we can live together but try overdosing it a bit see if people are still welcoming.

The ideal solution would be to turn the boats back has a migrant boat ever been returned to its original sailing point if so what happened to that boat and its passengers ?

Yes, that's the solution otherwise they are just going to keep coming.

Thoughts ?

I am not guilty.

They created it themselves then they have to live with it.

Someone is going to get rid of the Syrian govt then that someone can deal with the influx.

🙄

I reckon they should all piss off back where they came from.

[img] [/img]

Yes, I have seen how long the coast of Libya is and it's less than half of Italy's. With drones able to scan the sea's much faster than ever before ships can intercept these boats quicker and turn then around.

Legally, yes. Morally? I'm not so sure. When you're living in a small rural village with no running water or electricity and the risk of famine ever present - you can say they're "economic migrants" if it makes you feel better about locking them out, but don't try and pretend it's morally correct.

But its not the poorest of the poor who are able to migrate but those slightly better off, who can afford to do pay the traffickers - by rewarding them with success, you cast aside those in even greater need.

edit: as CheckW says, they are taking the rights/place of those genuinely needing help.

With drones able to scan the sea's much faster than ever before ships can intercept these boats quicker and turn then around.

Could we not run a sort of exchange programme with our resident unemployable scrotes?

For every boat heading our way, we send an inflatable dinghy full of track-suit clad, Stella-drinking, weed-smoking shoplifters back in the other direction.

That'd work!

Take the people back to the country of departure, sink the boat and sentence the crew to long prison terms

Yes, I have seen how long the coast of Libya is and it's less than half of Italy's. With drones able to scan the sea's much faster than ever before ships can intercept these boats quicker and turn then around.

Its all very complicated.

Could we not run a sort of exchange programme with our resident unemployable scrotes?

Who destabilized the area?

Where do the people with weapons get the weapons from and how do they afford them?

These are the kind of questions that need to be asked to get to the bottom of how the situation has developed and prevent escalation.

In the meantime, surely if the governments of wealthy countries can afford military spending, they can afford to help people affected by the actions of their (our) taxpayer funded Armed Forces and intelligence services.

Furthermore, whoever is profiting from the sale of weapons which escalate conflicts should be legally bound to provide aid for populations affected by their products.

How does a drone intercept a boat? Or does it them radio for a boat to intercept the other boat at some point when it's out to sea?

How do you then asses a legal right to claim asylum before returning those unworthy back home? When you are transferring the genuine refugees back to the EU (where they are legally allowed to claim asylum) who then patrols the border?

Could we not run a sort of exchange programme with our resident unemployable scrotes?

binners for President!

Do you think that imprisoning a few Libyan fishermen for decades is going to completely counteract all the forces driving people to the boats?

Are you going to continue to put buckets under a leaking roof or fix the leak?

The problem isn't the asylum seeker but those who profit from trafficking. Try reading my earlier post.

So you are going to setup camps in a country that is not under any control? YOu also need a large naval presence to patrol this space and lots of boats in that fleet (how about setting off 6 or 7 boats in a way that means you can't get to all of them?)

If you set up refugee processing then expect plenty to queue up and be ready to apply and also expect plenty to try and get round the system. The Australian example is not a good one as the UN point out.

Is this an issue for Russia or is it purely Western Europe they want to get to?

The problem isn't the asylum seeker but those who profit from trafficking. Try reading my earlier post.

Mike, no point debating with you. I would rather the asylum seekers reaches safety rather than be thrown over board so the smuggler can make more profit. I have no problem with offering asylum but I do have a problem with those that trade on others suffering.

The profits are vast. Each migrant is charged at least $1,000 (£580), and more than 200 are loaded into each boat, giving him a business that generates $1m or more a week. The profit margins mean he can afford to abandon boats and migrants on the high seas.

New boats are, however, in short supply, because Libyan boat builders cannot get supplies of timber in this crisis-torn country, and his crews face arrest if they are on board when the boats are stopped by Italian navy patrols.

So he has recently adopted a new strategy. His crews now search for Italian warships, which patrol near an oil platform at Bouri, 70 miles from the Libyan coast.

"As soon as the ship reaches Bouri field, I call the military forces," he says. His crew then abandons ship in a rubber boat, and waits while the Italians pick up the migrants, leaving the boat adrift. Then his crew scrambles back aboard and sails back to Libya for a fresh cargo.

If you want this to be the asylum seekers only route then why should we bother to try and change it?

Is this an issue for Russia or is it purely Western Europe they want to get to?

Certainly plenty who get to Italy and they avoid being finger printed / ID'd as once that happens they can't claim asylum in, say, the UK (that's the EU law). A large number (all ?) of the migrants in Calais have come there through Europe without registering anywhere so they can try and enter the UK and claim asylum here.

But its not the poorest of the poor who are able to migrate but those slightly better off, who can afford to do pay the traffickers - by rewarding them with success, you cast aside those in even greater need.

edit: as CheckW says, they are taking the rights/place of those genuinely needing help.

I think you're comparing someone with $5 to his name to someone with $1 - they're both still dirt poor, and genuinely need help. They're not going to risk their lives on an overloaded boat for a quick jolly, nor is this an attempt to avoid having to pay for a legal flight.

The boat trip costs $500 on a boat likely to sink or $5000 on one which can make it. Plus you've paid to travel from sub-sharan Africa

The boat trip costs $500 on a boat likely to sink or $5000 on one which can make it. Plus you've paid to travel from sub-sharan Africa

So if they're so rich (relatively) why are they coming in such large numbers?

[i]So if they're so rich (relatively) why are they coming in such large numbers?[/i]

Could it be the free house, free healthcare and substantial benefits payments by any chance? Just a thought! 😕

@mogrim as @Rockape63 says the financial upside is much much larger whether they survive on benefits or get a job legitimately or in the underground economy.

Could it be the free house, free healthcare and substantial benefits payments by any chance? Just a thought!

Only the ones that can genuinely get asylum, that doesn't apply to the economic migrants I was talking about.

[i]Could it be the free house, free healthcare and substantial benefits payments by any chance? Just a thought! [/i]

[url= http://www.refugeecouncil.org.uk/policy_research/the_truth_about_asylum/facts_about_asylum_-_page_1 ]Truth about asylum seekers and benefits [/url]

So if they're so rich (relatively) why are they coming in such large numbers?

They get to live in a tower block in Rochdale. This in itself tells you all you need to know about how truly desperate these people are. Perhaps some beachside billlboards extolling the many virtues of a life in Rochdale might do the trick?

Rockape63 - Member

Could it be the free house, free healthcare and substantial benefits payments by any chance? Just a thought!

Yes, that's why people are risking death. Substantial benefits payments? The average UK asylum seeker gets £35 per week of which only £10 comes in cash. So you think people are spending thousands of pounds and abandoning everything they have, for £1820 a year

[i]Yes, that's why people are risking death. Substantial benefits payments? The average UK asylum seeker gets £35 per week of which only £10 comes in cash. So you think people are spending thousands of pounds and abandoning everything they have, for £1820 a year[/i]

House (ok... flat in Rochdale!) Healthcare, substantial benefits and a safe environment (possibly not Rochdale then!)plus the ability to beg, borrow or steal....or perhaps even work for cash etc.

They are not abandoning much, I think.

Edit: I'm obviously talking about economic migrants not the terrified families forced from their homelands. You tend to see a certain type of person trying to hitch a ride to the UK from Calais.

[img] [/img]

Actually... now we're on to Rochdale, it looks like we are looking at [url= http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/apr/14/rochdale-councillors-son-arrested-after-being-held-near-syrian-border ]Two way traffic[/url] 😀

There but for the grace of God do I or my kids ever need to do this

Oh. Why is this god persecuting THEM, then?

You tend to see a certain type of person trying to hitch a ride to the UK from Calais.

Desperate ones, basically.

nickc- let's not muddy the waters with actual facts about what life these people end up leading. Rockape read in the Mail that there's billboards across north Africa paid for by Labour and the Lib Dems advertising how amazing our welfare system is and, presumably, he has heard that a friend of a friend's sister lives next door to someone who's an asylum seeker with 300 children claiming £400 a day from the government.

This is NONSENSE. People do not come here because they have heard about our welfare system (one of the signs of a civilised country), they come here because their own country has become unlivable.

Here's a few facts from [url= http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/ ]The Migration Observatory[/url], an independent research centre with no agenda-

- Asylum applications have reduced from 85,000 in 2002 to 25,000 in 2013.
- In 2013 only 36% of these were accepted.
- The UK receives roughly half the number of asylum seekers per 1,000 residents than the rest of the EU.
- Asylum seekers can't work until they have indefinite leave to remain after 5 years.
- No non-EU migrant can claim benefits for 5 years. The Observatory concludes "benefits alone are not realistic as the primary motivation for non-EU migrants to travel to the UK"
-As an aside, to counter the myth of EU Benefit Tourism, only 5% of EU migrants claim benefits.

So, I'm afraid the facts don't stack up in favour of your economic migrant arguments.

[i]So, I'm afraid the facts don't stack up in favour of your economic migrant arguments.[/i]

Yeah right, try and slur me if you like, but answer the question as to why there are thousands camped in Calais, when they are already in Europe.

Bloody immigrants, coming over here and taking our hard earned taxes...

[img] [/img]

Why don't they just appreciate the bombs we send their way?

I mean, don't they realize [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12806709 ]how much military intervention costs anyway[/url]?

Depending on the size, scale and associated costs of the operation, the MoD has the ability to seek additional funding from the HM Treasury Reserve for the net additional costs to Defence."

But on Tuesday, Chancellor George Osborne confirmed to MPs that the cost would be fully met by the Treasury's reserve.

He said the MoD estimated the operation would cost tens rather than hundreds of millions.

answer the question as to why there are thousands camped in Calais, when they are already in Europe.

Only 1% of asylum seekers live in the UK. I answered your question a few posts ago- those that come here tend to do so because they have some links to the UK, like family. I would suggest you read up on the issue from reliable independent sources, not the press, and the facts, not prejudices based in myth, will win out.

Rockapes plan to use military force and aid until this blows over is misguided. It never will be over, climate change caused by western consumption will see to it that everywhere below sicily becomes econonically unviable.

We have three options.

A) Integrate billions of people slowly to more Northern or Southerly climates.

B) wait until the last minute and cause massive social upheaval.

C) Deny climate change, kill those who try to enter Europe and let hundreds of millions starve. whilst simultaneously excusing ourselves with Malthusian principles and Social Darwinism.

Given humanities track record we will choose the latter.

Tom.... you forgot option D.....

[img] [/img]

If we're going to spend all that money on them, it seems daft not to use them! It'll definitely stop people drowning. 😉