The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Reply 60
It is not a valid opinion to imply, as you did, that Somalians have something intrinsincally wrong with them (and different to asylum seekers, since you chose to mention them in addition). That is not on, and if you think that's a valid opinion, don't let the door hit you on the way out.
Reply 61
Socrates
It is not a valid opinion to imply, as you did, that Somalians have something intrinsincally wrong with them (and different to asylum seekers, since you chose to mention them in addition). That is not on, and if you think that's a valid opinion, don't let the door hit you on the way out.


It was a random example of a group of people that i think get "indefinate leave to remain" too often. Seeing as we are dealing with nationality, immigration, legal entitlements, their nationality is wholly relevent. Its got nothing to do with race.
Zebedee
Wah, wah wah. How does this mean i have some sort of obligation to pay my taxes to feed these people? britains not a charity and to be quite frank these people can sort out their own problems thousands of miles away.



No, if i were in their position i would probably do the same. They are getting a good deal, the british taxpayer is being rimmed.

Again, the problem isn't so much the idea that at british citizens should get equal benefits (i support this,,, i think). But that these people should not be british citizens at all.



Somalians should not be given citizenship/asylum or all asylum seekers should be turned away? Which one?
Reply 63
robinson999
we should work on a point systems like they down under


Yes, a good model to follow imo.
Reply 64
Zebedee
It was a random example of a group of people that i think get "indefinate leave to remain" too often. Seeing as we are dealing with nationality, immigration, legal entitlements, their nationality is wholly relevent. Its got nothing to do with race.

Bogus asylum seekers covers all of them, from Somalia or elsewhere.

In case you hadn't been following the news recently, its the white skinned Eastern Europeans who are flooding the country at the minute....but they're white, so its ok, right? :rolleyes:
Reply 65
mizfissy815
Somalians should not be given citizenship/asylum or all asylum seekers should be turned away? Which one?


Neither.

I'm saying that the only asylum seekers we should accept are those that have come direct from their home country, straight here literally escaping for their lives and we are the first safe country on their way.

In the case of Somalia, they could go to a country in the immediate area, if they arrive here directly (say by plane) then they most probably had planned where they wanted to flee too, saved up the money etc. So effectively chose their destination of asylum. I don't see that as genuine tbh, asylum is when you escape your country for fear of your life, you don't shop around for conveient destinations.

I used Somalia as an example where this happens, there are plenty of other countries though. One of many.
Zebedee
It was a random example of a group of people that i think get "indefinate leave to remain" too often. Seeing as we are dealing with nationality, immigration, legal entitlements, their nationality is wholly relevent. Its got nothing to do with race.


Somalians make up about 1.7% of the total number of immigrant and only 0.27% of the total population of the UK, so get a grip.
Reply 67
Socrates
Bogus asylum seekers covers all of them, from Somalia or elsewhere.

In case you hadn't been following the news recently, its the white skinned Eastern Europeans who are flooding the country at the minute....but they're white, so its ok, right? :rolleyes:


Legal EU migrants. You are showing your ignorance, not once has race been mentioned in this debate so far.
Reply 68
Zebedee
Legal EU migrants. You are showing your ignorance, not once has race been mentioned in this debate so far.

It hadn't been mentioned until you decided to bring in Somalians. Explain to me what makes them so distinct, in that you mentioned bogus asylum seekers and then mentioned Somalians, which implies to any sensible people that they are two different categories as far as you are concerned, and further implies that you think anyone from Somalia is not deserving of council housing regardless of whether they are bogus or not. That sir, is racism.
Zebedee
Neither.

I'm saying that the only asylum seekers we should accept are those that have come direct from their home country, straight here literally escaping for their lives and we are the first safe country on their way.

In the case of Somalia, they could go to a country in the immediate area, if they arrive here directly (say by plane) then they most probably had planned where they wanted to flee too, saved up the money etc. So effectively chose their destination of asylum. I don't see that as genuine tbh, asylum is when you escape your country for fear of your life, you don't shop around for conveient destinations.

I used Somalia as an example where this happens, there are plenty of other countries though. One of many.



You do realise that living in the immediate areas surrounding Somalia would be no different to the rural bits of Somalia? Ever been to Ethiopia or the refugee camps of Kenya? So bloody what if they save up whatever they can to get a plane ticket out of the h*ll the entire region happens to be?

BTW, AFAIK for those who apply for asylum from abroad their plane tickets/money for the tickets are given to them. I think.
Reply 70
It is not racist to single one example out it would be racism when you acuse them of all the problems and thats when the problems arise.

There are many people in the world who would give anything to be inthis country and once they get here would work so so so hard to make a life for themselves these are the people we want.

If you have ever visited countries in Africa such as Tanzania and seen how hard those people work for so little it makes you realize how lucky people here are. There are people here who do not deserve the lifestyle they lead, the ones who remain on benefits because they dont want to work because thats how they were brought up.

This kind of lifestyle should not be allowed as it is not productive and is not for the benefit of the country. Equally we dont want vast numbers of non english speaking foreigners regardless of race moving to this country.

Council houses should be allocated primarily to British families but not at the expense of hard working individuals who will contribute in the future.

The whole issue is just a way to placate the fears of the "native" population without actually solving the problem.
Reply 71
Socrates
It hadn't been mentioned until you decided to bring in Somalians. Explain to me what makes them so distinct, in that you mentioned bogus asylum seekers and then mentioned Somalians, which implies to any sensible people that they are two different categories as far as you are concerned, and further implies that you think anyone from Somalia is not deserving of council housing regardless of whether they are bogus or not. That sir, is racism.


As i have said, a random example. Bogus asylum seeker, such as some Somalians is what i meant to say. They seem to be the most recent immigrant group.

Even if they are not bogus i sitll think ANYONE (china, somalia etc) who enters the UK should be classes as immigrant and later (after passing certain tests) make the move to british citizenship with the various benefits.

If its racist to say that people from other countries shouldn't be given citizenship and housing straight away then i guess the debate is over. But its not racist and the debate is not over.

You do realise that living in the immediate areas surrounding Somalia would be no different to the rural bits of Somalia? Ever been to Ethiopia or the refugee camps of Kenya? So bloody what if they save up whatever they can to get a plane ticket out of the h*ll the entire region happens to be?

BTW, AFAIK for those who apply for asylum from abroad their plane tickets/money for the tickets are given to them.


I don't care tbh, explain to me why my taxes should go help some people from Somalia, Ethiopia etc who i have nothing to do with, much less pay for their airline tickets here! if you have the time to "apply and wait for tickets" then you are not in proper danger IMO.

This is totally ludicrous, the UK is not a charity, we are an overcrowded island with plenty of other problems. Who the hell makes these crazy decisions.
Reply 72
I don't see how this is a racist policy. A British Asian family also would count as British. I don't really see a problem in having a point base system for the queue based on need, in which being a British citizen gave you bonus points would give you a few extra points.

Two families a) 2 Poles who came over to fulfill the cheap labour that we need and b) a British couple who are also doing the cheap labour that society requires.

I would say b) has greater claim to the house. The British couple could be whatever creed: black, white, asian - whatever - that really isn't the point.
Reply 73
well, quite. This money should be spent on the OAP's, the people that gave birth to us, raised us, fought the war, built the wellfare state, put in the hard graft. They are the people we should be focussing on, they are the most deserving.

and yes, the key requirement is that we seperate recent immigrants and british people into two distinct bands. So that british citizenship is earnt, not given for free. You need to invest in the system with taxes before you can withdraw through benefits, social amenties etc.
Zebedee
As i have said, a random example. Bogus asylum seeker, such as some Somalians is what i meant to say. They seem to be the most recent immigrant group.

Even if they are not bogus i sitll think ANYONE (china, somalia etc) who enters the UK should be classes as immigrant and later (after passing certain tests) make the move to british citizenship with the various benefits.

If its racist to say that people from other countries shouldn't be given citizenship and housing straight away then i guess the debate is over. But its not racist and the debate is not over.



I don't care tbh, explain to me why my taxes should go help some people from Somalia, Ethiopia etc who i have nothing to do with, much less pay for their airline tickets here! if you have the time to "apply and wait for tickets" then you are not in proper danger IMO.

This is totally ludicrous, the UK is not a charity, we are an overcrowded island with plenty of other problems. Who the hell makes these crazy decisions.


Ahh, now we have come to the root of the problem.

See most people do care about the welfare of all humans regardless of nationality. If every country adopted your ridiculous policy of turning away any asylum seekers because they just don't live in the region, we'd have the world's huge humanitarian crisis in our hand right now. If every community stuck with their 'own kind' the world would turn into an apartheid state which in turn increases resentment, racism, etc…and ultimately terrorism.

It would also effectively leave all Africans/African nations to pretty much rot without being given a chance to improve.

It's good to know the world isn't filled with people that think like you.
Reply 75
All people are essentialy selfish to some degree.

if we or any other country did not adopt policies to curb immigration then they will all become a humanitarian crisis. Change can occur but not all at once.... if we want to keep the same standard of living we cannot help everyone, our country is not that big and is already very heavily populated.
Reply 76
mizfissy815
Ahh, now we have come to the root of the problem.

See most people do care about the welfare of all humans regardless of nationality.


I do care, but if i choose to help it should be voluntarily. not forced on me by state taxes.

If every country adopted your ridiculous policy of turning away any asylum seekers because they just don't live in the region, we'd have the world's huge humanitarian crisis in our hand right now.


How so? evidently countries "within the region" would take them in. Its quite simple, if you come through half a dozen countries to get to britain your not an asylum seeker, you are a migrant. If you arrive from france then you were allready safe in france and should be sent straight back.

If every community stuck with their 'own kind' the world would turn into an apartheid state which in turn increases resentment, racism, etc…and ultimately terrorism.


Care to back up your last statement? - so... unless we have an open door immigration policy we will be creating terrorism.... yeh right! Infact the evidence (if anything) would seem to point the oposite way, it is precisely your open door policy and complete lack of thought about the long term integration that has created terrorism in this country through the likes of the 7/7 bombers.

It would also effectively leave all Africans/African nations to pretty much rot without being given a chance to improve.


The nations should improve themselves, people coming here isn't the solution. Infact it may be bad for african nations if they lose their most able/doctors etc.

It's good to know the world isn't filled with people that think like you.


Its good to know not everyone thinks like you either.
Reply 77
Zebedee
we are an overcrowded island with plenty of other problems. Who the hell makes these crazy decisions.

Problems are self inflicted. The legacy of colonialism, rightly or wrongly, means that the UK has a responsibility to deal with these issues. It isn't a crazy decision, its a consequence of what was then perfectly politically rational.
Reply 78
excuse me? colonialism?! so we will go back a few hundred years to place blame? why not make it a few hundred more blame the French for our problems or several hundred more and blame the Romans?

The UK is not the world power it once was, we cannot solve the worlds problems
Reply 79
I'm finding the results of this quite hard to believe, since we know for a fact there are people in this country...white native brits, who do nothing for society, yet simply by being here they deserve a house?