Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

1 in 10 Council Homes go to immigrants, up more than 50% in 5 years

Scroll to see replies

Clearly we are not going to agree on this. I believe that the government we vote in should serve the people who vote them in first (ie British people). You clearly think they should serve anyone who decide that they want to live here. I am ok with asylum seekers getting social housing as long as they are genuine and don't break serious laws.

I don't think this is at all unreasonable I am just curious as to why you would allow your fellow country folk to suffer. Do you despise the British poor people so much?

Posted from TSR Mobile

But your survey includes foreigners who obtain citizenship, amongst whom voter turnout is very high.

The point is that the system works by first come served. It's completely fair for a foreigner to get accommodation if they beat a brit to it. And as for the last point, that's just meaningless sensationalism. I don't give two ****s where someone comes from. I would rather have no-one suffer, but that is unrealistic.

Reply 41

Born_Survivor

Original post by The_Duck

Foreigners who obtain citizenship is fine, as for the system for first come first served is very short sighted and detrimental to social cohesion and the community that already exists. Also I'm not convinced that they have 'beat a Brit to it' like you say when there are massive waiting lists. In what way is thinking the government should serve the people of this country 'meaningless sensationalism' if they are not there for the people of this country what the hell are they for? Your argument makes no sense.

Reply 42

anarchism101

Original post by Born_Survivor

People who don't vote have made a choice and have accepted the consequences of that.

OK, but that's not really the point. You said the government should cater to those who vote it in first. So what differentiates those who can't vote and those who can but choose not to?

Firstly, how can you regard the island we live on and it's borders to be 'arbitrary' they are not random but clearly defined by the seas and oceans that surround it.

What about Northern Ireland or Gibraltar? What if Scotland becomes independent?

Secondly, I and many people was not born here by luck, but deliberately conceived and born here

But that's a decision made by your parents, not by you. No-one chooses their parents.

in a democratic country were the citizens are and should be served in their best interests.

You're assuming a particular concept of citizenship. When was that voted on?

Your anarchist view point is misguided and delusional, good luck with that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

Reply 43

Born_Survivor

OK, but that's not really the point. You said the government should cater to those who vote it in first. So what differentiates those who can't vote and those who can but choose not to?

The fact that they are entitled to vote which is recognised in some form by all democracies.

What about Northern Ireland or Gibraltar? What if Scotland becomes independent?

What about NI and Gibralter, one is an island and the other has a border with ROI, if we cannot agree on borders then we can't have democracy for them regions.

But that's a decision made by your parents, not by you. No-one chooses their parents.

What? So governments should not consider the citizens of the country it governs because they didn't decide to be born here. Yeah great logic you've got there.

You're assuming a particular concept of citizenship. When was that voted on?

See above. If it doesn't serve in it's citizens best interest who do think it should serve for? Who would vote it in and why?This is considered to be the status quo and you clearly don't accept it and I am not going to argue with you about the merits of it because it's a waste of my time, you're just going to have to live with it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem Answers in bold. As for the Ad Hominem reference I have not attacked you but you views on this particular issue and it is clear to see they are borne out of the anarchist view point you have. Maybe one day you look back and realise how stupid you are to have these views, perhaps when you have kids and you want the government to look after their best interests. I am done with this thread your arguments have been weak up to now. If you have any strong arguments that are worth my time feel free to express them though.

Reply 44

Mystery_Man

In the last 10 years I have witnessed my estate turning into some sort of UN congress.

Reply 45

billydisco

Original post by Born_Survivor

Yeah because all young poorer people are chavs aren't they? Well done, you have taken in the demonisation of young poorer people for the government own purposes.