Tory MP's vote AGAINST allowing 3000 refugee children into the UK

Yeh. It is more sensible to bring in small kids that will be a burden on the state for longer.

...but will be less likely to become thugs.

I don't see why citizens of this nation need anymore help. No one is starving to death on the streets. They have access to free healthcare and protection. They are not being forced into sex slavery.

3000 children do not have access to such provisions and would be a relatively small burden on our welfare system.

or more likely.

The reality is that you have no clue.

I'm ashamed to be British sometimes. These are kids, they aren't ****ing jihadis. It was 3000. 3000 kids that will now have to continue living in absolute poverty, being picked up by child traffickers and having their whole future taking away.

We aren't full. You can't get a GP appointment or a place in your school of choice because YOUR GOVERNMENT IS CUTTING FUNDING TO THE NHS AND SCHOOLS. House prices are going up BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT ISN'T BUILDING ENOUGH HOUSES.

This is pure and simple greed. Mostly from people who think they're "suffering" because they can't afford a new smart phone or they had to wait a few hours in A&E. Most people in this country couldn't even begin to comprehend the suffering that these refugees go through daily, because they've lived immensely privileged lives.

I'm honestly disgusted. I hate this country.

Irrelevant. The reason taxes should be spent on infustructure and social welfare isnt because citizens are dying on the streets but because that where taxes should be spent. If there is surplus it should be spent on the benefit of the citizens, or taxes should be reduced.

Let those that want to help, help. But dont force others to do so.

In other words.....

I only want taxes spent on things I like and people should be forced to spend money on that.

Exactly, it's everyones money, not just those that believe we should help or those that believe we shouldn't. The default position of spending however, would be not to pay for it.

Although it's difficult to say what the majority want in this regard, as the house of commons does not represent the voting population.
This may be so, and that is a great argument for donating time and money to helping them on an individual basis. It is not however, a strong argument for donating other peoples money to those outside of the society.

Well do something about it. Volunteer to sponsor a refugee child in a camp.

Send them all your spare money. Go and work with refugees so you feel less "sad."

Do something constructive to help rather than emoting on a student website.

Even if we did help this 3000 so what? There are millions of people in desperate situations like this all over the world. We can't do anything about it as a country, won't do anything about it.

Any more than you will, individually.

This whole taxpayers money shouldnt go on tghings we dont all agree on is bull. What if i suddenly dewcide that i dont wanna pay for ambulances? Or the police, or whatever. Do i have the right tp do thayt just because a tiny portion of it is my money.

What's the difference between 'virtue signalling' and Brexit signalling? If you want to leave the EU so much why don't you move to Russia instead of bitching on the Internet? Or at least campaign for brexit? I'd wager practically no one on here has bothered door knocking or campaigning for either side (I haven't, though I do chat to colleagues)

We're naturally social creatures who will share our opinion regardless of our ability to fulfil or influence decision making.

Charity is just a way for us escape out obligations by making them appear as rational choices. I blame religion.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/charity/against_1.shtml

So we should take on totally valueless people on the basis of subjective feelings?

To an extent, yes. Taxes are a forced subscription for living in a nation, and I believe what taxes should be spent on should therefore be justifiable for the improvement of that nation.

Taxes should not be used as forced state-sponsored charity, but instead be practical ways of improving the conditions of the society.

Our affairs will never be in order according to people like you. It is just an excuse to avoid taking refugees.

It was this dumb attitude that allowed millions of Jews to get murdered at the hands of the Germany.

The actual right thing is to take have a united front and send ground troops to stop the refugee flow. That was the right thing to do 5 years ago. It is the right thing to do now. Obviously, the public in this country lacks the foresight to support such a move.

What's the difference between 'virtue signalling' and Brexit signalling? If you want to leave the EU so much why don't you move to Russia instead of bitching on the Internet? Or at least campaign for brexit? I'd wager practically no one on here has bothered door knocking or campaigning for either side (I haven't, though I do chat to colleagues)

We're naturally social creatures who will share our opinion regardless of our ability to fulfil or influence decision making.

Charity is just a way for us escape out obligations by making them appear as rational choices. I blame religion.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/charity/against_1.shtml

Oh yes...because your excuse of "our affairs are not in order" is totally objective.

Have a heart, they're children

Would you take a look at this
Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,


It was written by people worth far more than you will ever be.

The Tories are heartless, so it doesn't surprise me.

That's the argument I hear all the time. "I can't help them, but I want to force everyone else to."

No we dont.

I'm not saying we cant afford it, of course we can. I'm saying we shouldn't, surplus should be helping the citizens of the nation, not citizens of other nations.