Asylum Seekers; Yay or Nay?

[Scouse]

Thank fuck Turkey has much better infrastructure than we do eh?

Spoiler

It looks like they're *gagging* to get to Britain. I, for one, am terrified of the cultural implications!

 

[Raven]

It might also be the fact that they do not have to swim 25 miles across the busiest shipping waters in the world...maybe?

I think you will find, if they get here then they get processed. If they don't want to come here do you suggest we ship them over against their will or what?

 

[Bodhi]

Syria crisis: how does Britain's aid donation compare?

So we're second in the world in terms of donations to the Humanitarian effort in Syria itself behind the US, so I would say that in terms of helping refugees at the source, we are leading the way. Then we bring back those most in need so they don't have to pay some dodgy Turk the rest of their life savings to cross the Med in a Dinghy. What's more we seem to be helping in a big way without having the recent issues Germany and Sweden have had.

Wouldn't accuse you of hating your country as I don't need to make accusations when things are clear as day, but what I will accuse you of is being the King of the False Dichotomy. If you don't want to fling open borders in the way that's currently fucking Germany and Sweden, you're automatically a rabid right winger by your logic, which I'm sorry, but just isn't the case. Some people (who aren't quite so misanthropic) like to consider the wishes of the people already living in the places you want to introduce half of the Middle East to.

 

[Raven]

Its the usual leftie name calling bollocks, it happens when you don't instantly agree with them. I wouldn't worry about it too much.

 

[Scouse]

Wow. You two are predictably touchy

 

[Ormorof]

sweden planning on deporting the approx 50% of applications that are rejected as most of the rejected are economic migrants rather than asylum seekers

there was a nice interview in danish news with an Iranian who was working happily in Iran, but some of his mates were gonna give europe a shot

They had been told by someone, who exactly is unclear, that if they can get to Denmark or Sweden they get a house, a car and job with better pay and less work than what they have

after sleeping in a refugee camp made up of tents in the snow and rain they have decided to cancel their applications and go home as they didnt like the weather or the food, their flights are ofc paid for, none of them were worried about going home as they werent being pursued by authorities they just wanted more

The same story is repeated in France, Spain and Italy about Algerian and Morrocan migrants - they get sold on the myth of magical no work free money europe by the guys with the boats and charged their life savings - hell i bet the traffickers hope the guys DONT make it so they cant tell the truth to anyone "back home"

the sad thing is that these cases cloud the issue and make the "legit" asylum seekers an easy target for right wing loonies (such as the Sweden Democrats, Danske Folkeparti or PS in Finland) - these arent reactions to this crisis, these guys have been banging this drum for years (decades even) about the funny brown people coming and stealing our jobs, its just now their target is much bigger and the way it has been handled by EU governments has been mostly inept (surprise surprise)

 

[Raven]

Attempting to provide more information to show the bigger picture "touchy" righto.

 

[Bodhi]

Its the usual leftie name calling bollocks, it happens when you don't instantly agree with them. I wouldn't worry about it too much.

I suspected as much. It's kind of like the logic that saw the usual handwringing suspects accuse the Danes and Swiss of being Nazis, just because they imposed the same rules on new arrivals as they do for their citizens.

Perish the though eh?

 

[DaGaffer]

I know I'll be accused of "hating my country" or some such bollocks by the right wing rabids around here, but Britain's leading the way eh?

Spoiler

View attachment 31297

Er, that's the per cap figure and its only Germany that looks odd relative to population. Apart from that one exception the higher population countries tend to be towards the bottom and the smaller population countries towards the top, which is what you'd expect. Criticise Ireland more than the UK frankly. I also note with interest that Spain is missing from the list altogether.

 

[Gwadien]

Throwing money at problems...

I think we should meet in the middle somewhere, accept children only or something, but unlimited amounts.

 

[Gwadien]

I was watching that very very poorly made documentary on the BBC about Nicholas Winton - he was saying that the only people that complained about him bringing loads of kids to the UK, were Jews, who were upset that good jewish kids were being put with christians.

 

[Shagrat]

I think the UK's approach is right at the moment tbh. We're assisting financially with aid for the refugees 'at source' and bringing those most in need to the UK ourselves from the camps. The German let them all in approach is clearly not the right and has exacerbated the problem by allowing floods of people who aren't refugees to also follow the money into Europe of the back of myths that have been sold to them that Europe is full of free money/education/jobs etc.

It should always have been about establishing places of refuge for these people in or near the countries they are in, guaranteed by the UN or other organisations where they can be vetted and the neediest cases then move out to countries who all have set allocations.

 

[Job]

40% of Germans think Merkel should be sacked for allowing so many migrants in.

 

[Ormorof]

So 60% dont? shes still in a job democratically at least!

 

[fettoken]

It was a good thought letting them in at least. Who'd have known some of em were rapists, looters and what not.

 

[Job]

In orderr to match England's population density of 413 people per square kilometre, European countries would have to take in the following numbers of migrants:-


Austria 26.4 million
Denmark 12.4 million
France 162.3 million
Germany 65.6 million
Greece 42.8 million
Italy 64.7 million
Poland90.5 million

Romania 79.4 million
Spain 162.1 million
Sweden176.3 million



Conversely, if England had the same population density as say France,it's population would be 14.5 million.

 

[Scouse]

Conversely, if England had the same population density as say France,it's population would be 14.5 million.

So? We still use less than 3% of our land space...

 

[Raven]

Bollocks.

We use a fuckton more than that for farming alone.

According to Wikipedia (Yeah, I know!) we use 70% for agriculture.

 

[Scouse]

Bollocks.

In terms of tarmac'ed over / built on - I've provided the evidence earlier in the thread.

The point is, we're not "running out of space" or somesuch shite.

 

[DaGaffer]

In orderr to match England's population density of 413 people per square kilometre, European countries would have to take in the following numbers of migrants:-


Austria 26.4 million
Denmark 12.4 million
France 162.3 million
Germany 65.6 million
Greece 42.8 million
Italy 64.7 million
Poland90.5 million

Romania 79.4 million
Spain 162.1 million
Sweden176.3 million



Conversely, if England had the same population density as say France,it's population would be 14.5 million.

Well played. Conveniently using the English population density rather than the UK one (which is 255 people per square km, not much higher than Germany at 229).

Don't play the stats card with me my friend, you'll lose every time.

 

[Job]

True...of course you can get 30 people in a Mini, but I would say you are running out of space at around 8.

Those figures bring the entire migrant debate into context, England is full to the brim by any European standards.

 

[Gwadien]

Well played. Conveniently using the English population density rather than the UK one (which is 255 people per square km, not much higher than Germany at 229).

Don't play the stats card with me my friend, you'll lose every time.

'You can prove everything with stats, apart from the truth'

 

[Job]

Well played. Conveniently using the English population density rather than the UK one (which is 255 people per square km, not much higher than Germany at 229).

Don't play the stats card with me my friend, you'll lose every time.

England is a country FFS, how can you justify bringing the rest of a Union into the figures.

 

[Scouse]

England is full to the brim

No it fucking isn't, by any measure.

We've loads of room. The UK isn't a car, it's a mass of land measuring 243,610 square kilometers.

 

[DaGaffer]

England is a country FFS, how can you justify bringing the rest of a Union into the figures.

Because asylum seekers apply to the UK, not England you tool.

 

[Job]

Stop calling England the UK, and dissing my analogy was pathetic.
ENGLAND has a pop density as above...Scotlands is probably 20 people per sq mile or summit...so they should obviously take the brunt of immigrants to the UK, but of course they wont...1 because they are epically racist and 2 because no fucker wants to go there.
90% of migrants settle in England.

 

[DaGaffer]

Stop calling England the UK, and dissing my analogy was pathetic.
ENGLAND has a pop density as above...Scotlands is probably 20 people per sq mile or summit...so they should obviously take the brunt of immigrants to the UK, but of course they wont...1 because they are epically racist and 2 because no fucker wants to go there.

Except loads of Asylum seekers ARE going to Scotland (and Wales) and besides it shows up how ridiculous your argument is; you could reduce the argument to London instead of England and...oh noes, London isn't even in the top ten most densely populated cities in Europe; quick, take more people. Its the kind of retarded argument beloved of Facebook users because their tiny brains can't handle anything more complex.

 

[Job]

You are just trying everything to weasle out of the facts, partly due to a desire to contradict everything I post and also to grab the intellectual high ground, but you are starting to look silly, the facts speak for themselves and trying to dodge the truth with 'why don't you just say London' is just nahnah arguing.
No doubt Swedish and Spanish migrants settle in the population areas and don't hike off into Swedens artic wilderness, but still England has practically no wilderness left, a few national parks..though Scouse would like them covered in social housing...
The green belt shrinks everyear, what was three seperate towns by us only 30 years ago is now one continous urban sprawl and they are now building sideways.

I mean really...

 

[Embattle]

Land isn't really the problem, it is all the other resources.

 

[Raven]

In terms of tarmac'ed over / built on - I've provided the evidence earlier in the thread.

The point is, we're not "running out of space" or somesuch shite.

No, I agree we are not running out of space but what city folk tend to conveniently forget is that for every acre of shitty housing estate you need X amount of acres of farmland, industry and room taken up by infrastructure, let alone room for recreation.

What we need to do is build more new towns, every town and city in the country is expanding with those horrible estates and there is nothing being built to to accompany them.