GB news | Page 11 | Vital Football

GB news

shotshy said:
As you well know Jogills, it’s because it’s not politically expedient in a predominantly conservative country.
I contacted my MP when in Kent and suggested a people’s sponsorship policy.
Better off middle class people (possibly like yourself) could contribute monthly to a refugee fund to sponsor these young men.
You can’t legitimately expect poor working people to finance benefits that they themselves cannot qualify for.
Wealthy people who feel strongly should have the facility to subsidise a project.
Those who claim family ties could be sponsored by their family thus no strain on the taxpayer.
It could work.
Click to expand...

That’s not the way that things work and you very well know it By the same I’ll logic:

1. You can’t expect those who buy private healthcare to contribute taxes to pay for the NHS.
2. You can’t expect law abiding people to pay for prisons.
3. You can’t expect the young to pay for pensioner’s state pensions.
4. Arsonists should contribute to a special fund to pay for the fire-service.

And besides, poor working people pay considerably less tax than high earners so it is the high earners who are burdened with the tax.
 
I didn’t intend anything to be compulsory.
Just that anyone who genuinely cared could find an easy way of contributing.
I give to charities that catch my imagination for example RNLI, because I’ve had boats and Scuba dive.
If anyone feels strongly about this particular subject, then contribute to a charity.
It’s unfair to expect lower paid taxpayers to contribute to something that they personally cannot access themselves.
 
shotshy said:
I didn’t intend anything to be compulsory.
Just that anyone who genuinely cared could find an easy way of contributing.
I give to charities that catch my imagination for example RNLI, because I’ve had boats and Scuba dive.
If anyone feels strongly about this particular subject, then contribute to a charity.
It’s unfair to expect lower paid taxpayers to contribute to something that they personally cannot access themselves.
Click to expand...

What is it that lower taxpayers cannot access themselves? Why are you so focused on this particular, reltively small expenditure? HS2 to nowhere, a £27B road building programme which is incompatible with our climate promises, a fancy yacht, a largely unused plane with an expensive paint job, contracts for cronoies, a £37B failed test and trace system, Helen Whately's second home expenses and so on ad infinitum all passed without comment. We are trying to avoid our international obligations and tying ourselves in knots doing so in a pathetic calculation that subliminal messsages on migration nand race embarrass the opposition.
 
I’m not tying up in knots, you are.
My original point was that a sponsorship system should be available to asylum seekers.
If they have relatives here and wish to join them, then the sponsors could take responsibility for them if they chose to.
If you or anyone else feels strongly about this subject, then maybe you or anyone else could also sponsor an asylum seeker.
Simple as that really.
 
shotshy said:
I’m not tying up in knots, you are.
My original point was that a sponsorship system should be available to asylum seekers.
If they have relatives here and wish to join them, then the sponsors could take responsibility for them if they chose to.
If you or anyone else feels strongly about this subject, then maybe you or anyone else could also sponsor an asylum seeker.
Simple as that really.
Click to expand...

So it's just your idea in play? You do not know what others contribute in money or time and it's none of your business. What can't we afford? It's not finances driving this discussion
 
Jesus christ, you’re arguing with yourself.
I’ve never suggested we can’t afford it.
I’ve never bought up other Tory vanity projects.
I’ve never bought up legal obligations.
Just simply an alternative way of looking at it.
The reason given by many who come in illegally is that they have relatives here in the U.K..
So, rather than just go into the system, it might be better for them if their family wants to sponsor and support them.
 
shotshy said:
Jesus christ, you’re arguing with yourself.
I’ve never suggested we can’t afford it.
I’ve never bought up other Tory vanity projects.
I’ve never bought up legal obligations.
Just simply an alternative way of looking at it.
The reason given by many who come in illegally is that they have relatives here in the U.K..
So, rather than just go into the system, it might be better for them if their family wants to sponsor and support them.
Click to expand...

You aren't arguing you are just questioning the good faith of others and sticking to your simplistic solution. No takers on this site, or I suspect elsewhere. Why do you think this should be a charitable enterprise when it involves international agreements and responsibilities. Do you think that families do not support their relatives, of course they do. You seem to be assuming that this is always a major cost to the exchequer.
 
We hear about the odd crime and grooming etc by immigrants or muslims but no uproar about the grooming gangs and child abuse in care etc.

Hear about refugees but no uproar about the invasion or bombing of those countries that people then had to flee from.

Refugees is a problem being used to whip up resentment and ignore the actual immigration issues. There are only 36,000 refugees and many of those will be deported.

There are supposedly 1m illegals though - not sure who counted them if they are illegal.
So if you take away the EU legals then you have millions of immigrants that are neither refugees or EU citizens. Why? Is this to undercut wages or to save us training people, or ....... yet they are the unspoken number.
An immigration bill needs to be passed that is actually seen to be fair and workable and resources/services. to cover any increase un population.
 
Jerryattrick said:
We hear about the odd crime and grooming etc by immigrants or muslims but no uproar about the grooming gangs and child abuse in care etc.

Hear about refugees but no uproar about the invasion or bombing of those countries that people then had to flee from.

Refugees is a problem being used to whip up resentment and ignore the actual immigration issues. There are only 36,000 refugees and many of those will be deported.

There are supposedly 1m illegals though - not sure who counted them if they are illegal.
So if you take away the EU legals then you have millions of immigrants that are neither refugees or EU citizens. Why? Is this to undercut wages or to save us training people, or ....... yet they are the unspoken number.
An immigration bill needs to be passed that is actually seen to be fair and workable and resources/services. to cover any increase un population.
Click to expand...

And maybe not slash the aid foreign aid budget.
 
Trashbat said:
And maybe not slash the aid foreign aid budget.
Click to expand...

Yup. The normal solution to a problem is to find the cause and alleviate it. In this case we don't want to admit the cause and we don't want to assist so that people do not flee but can return home.
 
Jerryattrick said:
We hear about the odd crime and grooming etc by immigrants or muslims but no uproar about the grooming gangs and child abuse in care etc.

Hear about refugees but no uproar about the invasion or bombing of those countries that people then had to flee from.
.
Click to expand...
Just surreal that argument. If I came over to your house, punched you in the face, and smashed your windows, would you then want to come and move in with me?

The UK hasn't invaded countries without it being a last resort, for hundreds of years. It isn't the West that is responsible for the issues where these people come from, regardless of how many times you say it is.

It isn't you and me that are affected by the influx of refugees. It is children in crisis that are unable to get help. It is the homeless that are unable to get a house. They are losing out because an African can make more money from benefits from the UK taxpayer, than they can from working in their home country
 
Buddha said:
It's no surprise that a piece of shit like Farridge

.....the cowardly attack from Farridge upon the Lifeboat men and women,

Fuck Farridge. Fuck bigotry.
Click to expand...
You really cannot help yourself, can you.:wagging:
(And copying the mis-pronunciation of James O'Brien. How original.....)

Did you say "Fuck Farridge", when last winter, in a boat off Kent, he and the crew helped illegal channel crossers when their boat was sinking ?

As for the RNLI....
...have you not heard the remarks from some volunteers, while recognising that life-saving is what the RNLI does....
...they really should not have to be doing this ?

Buddha said:
Fuck bigotry.
Click to expand...
You still haven't bought that mirror have you ?:shake:
 
ThreeSixes said:
Just surreal that argument. If I came over to your house, punched you in the face, and smashed your windows, would you then want to come and move in with me?

The UK hasn't invaded countries without it being a last resort, for hundreds of years. It isn't the West that is responsible for the issues where these people come from, regardless of how many times you say it is.

It isn't you and me that are affected by the influx of refugees. It is children in crisis that are unable to get help. It is the homeless that are unable to get a house. They are losing out because an African can make more money from benefits from the UK taxpayer, than they can from working in their home country
Click to expand...

Which country (apart from WW1 or 2) did the uk and usa NOT invade or interfere in without a good reason, that list would be short? Over what period do you want?

Do you actually mean hundreds of years for the uk or just one hundred years as that would change the length of the list?
 
The Syrian crisis was not caused by external parties.
It was a civil war started by the government.
We got involved to assist the ‘rebels’ only to find out that the rebels were actually supported by terrorists.
Let’s be clear. The U.K. didn’t bomb Syrian people and cause a refugee crisis.
That’s rubbish.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.