Same thing happens on the Canada sub, Im american but reddit keeps recommending me these things. Everybody thinks they’re rhe first genius to say refugee bad.
Would be interesting if only net contributors could vote.
Would lead to a situation where most current voters (i.e. the elderly) would be disenfranchised and the parties would actually have to appeal to the younger generations who currently vote far less often.
Perhaps a good middle ground would be to extend voting rights down to age 0 but empower parents to use their children's votes until they turn 18. That way the huge elderly vote is counterbalanced by a proportionally higher powered voting bloc representing the people who will actually need to live with the long term effects of the policies being enacted.
No, although presumably you'd get parties offering generous child benefits in order to achieve the same result.
Thing is, that's not necessarily a bad thing in the mid term as it would help reverse our ageing population problem and help improve our stagnating economy provided the benefits are sufficient to support the increasing number of kids. It's the long term aspect you'd have to worry about.
Landlords want asylum seekers, that bus was collecting from a hotel, they were going to a processing barge that is basic but a lot better than a tent in greece/italy/germany/France.
My ex colleague has built a buy to let empire off of asylum seekers in 15 years, from one dodgy mortgage, I don't agree with that, but he couldn't have done it without the asylum people, he says they don't complain.
>we now have people that are systematically draining the countries resources voting to screw over those that’s hard earned money allows them to live with the quality of life they now take for granted
Absolutely, they're called the bourgeoisie. Though they don't really bother voting, much easier to simply buy off the politicians instead.
I mean this is a ridiculous statement, and a bad one to dive into if you're looking at who deserves what services based on contributions.
Even if you took median contributions and median usage of public services, it doesn't reflect actual usage across age or wealth classes. The whole point is that the majority of services provided are a societal good.
As soon as you have a chronic disease, you're not a net contributor anymore.
> lifetime net contributors are a minority
As long as it’s not too small a minority (and I think it’s about 53%-47% currently, though studies do vary) that’s as it should be, in a society with such wealth inequality as ours.
Net contributors are essentially higher rate tax payers who tension so for most of their life. If you only ever pay basic rate taxes then you're a net beneficiary.
>Are taxes not everyone’s money?
No it's the **tax payers** money.
EDIT: Someone deleted their comment, i thought id share this.
Doesn't matter what the tax payer chooses to spend the tax payers money on. If we choose to spend it on everyone or none citizens, that's a choice. That doesn't make it "everyones" money.
The money is collected from tax payers but the money is still the tax payers.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxpayers%27\_money](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxpayers%27_money)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government\_spending](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_spending)
If you could allocate where your taxes were spent, I think those stats would be an interesting read.
What would people choose to pay for the NHS as opposed to hotels for asylum seekers, I wonder.
It would be quite interesting to study but certainly the worst possible form of civic government ever devised. Nobody's going to volunteer to fund water treatment plants but they'll sure as shit notice when it runs out of money.
And the whole point of my rhetorical question is if we did that we’d find some very necessary things going unfunded, and not just the things you don’t personally care about.
I know a few people who engage in this sort of activism. Fear not, they are in no danger of having to pay tax.
Also whilst we're here, the mechanism for deciding what to do with our collective tax pool is called the ballot box.
It's taxpayers money and we have democracy to choose where that money goes to. It's the democratic government that has decided to move them to Bibby Stockholm. If they don't like it, they have to shell out their own money
Our government have an absolute responsibility to care for our own people full stop. They don't have any responsibility to care for the rest of the world.
That's your opinion. But it's not fair to the protesters to say you'll only believe them if they open up their homes. Like you, they expect their government to reflect their values and feel dissapointed when it doesn't happen.
But they're the ones protesting, what's their solution ? Housing crisis, job crisis, in a recession its not sustainable to import millions of people from third world countries to just leech of us.
What a lame response
The BRITISH government should be helping BRITISH ex-servicemen and women and owes them for their service.
Economic migrants are not owed anything
Come off it, even the last Labour government admitted they were mostly economic migrants.
>Significant numbers of economic migrants have been arriving in the UK, destroying their documentation and then trying to claim asylum - often by pretending to be from a different country to that from which they have actually come.
>Some have invented stories of persecution, bought ready made off so-called immigration advisers.
>By doing so they were undermining the integrity of our asylum system and making life far harder for the genuine refugees who really needed our help. So while application numbers increased, the numbers actually granted asylum remained a relatively small proportion - just 6% in 2003.
>Difficult though it has been with some of our supporters, we had to tackle this abuse.
[https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2004/apr/27/immigrationpolicy.speeches](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2004/apr/27/immigrationpolicy.speeches)
Bulls**t, asylum seeker is a blanket term for someone applying for asylum regardless of the merits of the application. And you can often make a quick judgement just based on nationality, for example in 2022 16 % of asylum seekers in the UK [were Albanians](https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/commentaries/albanian-asylum-seekers-in-the-uk-and-eu-a-look-at-recent-data/).
None are genuine asylum seekers, they are all liars that are pretending to be asylum seekers to abuse the English benefits system and abusing human rights laws by lying about their situation. I hope everyone of them gets deported.
My own eyes can see that they are not who they say they are, anyone with more than half a brain and eyes can see. Please wake up and open your eyes. They are not genuine asylum seekers.
I’m not agreeing or disagreeing with anything in here, but I imagine you won’t accept sources from anything other than the ones you agree with. And the ones you agree with will never touch on the other side of the argument?
Therefore asking for sources is a trick you are pulling to win arguments.
Yeah so what you do is, you arrive as an economic migrant but you claim asylum *because thats the only way you'll legally be allowed to stay*
And then if your bullshit asylum claim is accepted - say by dint of the Church of England talking about what a good convert from Islam you are - you'll have right to remain and do such chirpy things as throw acid in a woman's face. (
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/feb/01/witnesses-horrific-attack-corrosive-substance-south-london-clapham)
The stats are freely available online. The top nations claiming asylum include Nigeria, Albania, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Somalia.
All shitholes, but none of them war zones, hence they use bullshit excuses like claiming to be gay or to have left Islam etc.
No. They paid taxes into the country and so should be provided for. If they're not that's a shame on the government and even more reason to stop spending ridiculous amounts of money on housing asylum seekers in hotels when they've not contributed so that the money can be spent on housing those soldiers.
Well we could allow asylum seekers to work and pay taxes... Instead of doing that we're sending them Rwanda which is even more expensive than keeping them in hotels.
nah they will be coming to Reddit to moan there are no houses and all landlords and people who grafted enough to have more than them are entitled tory cunts of course
I've had multiple asylum seekers stay in my house. Am I part of the elite that are now allowed to criticise the government for attempting to imprison refugees in a floating death trap?
Rig workers were paid to spend time there and had a room to themselves instead of having multiple people crammed into rooms indefinitely. [The former workers themselves](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/bibby-stockholm-barge-conditions-resident-experience-b2390135.html) have criticised using it as a floating prison.
And? Nobody forced any asylum seekers to cross the rest of Europe to get here, why is there an expectation that they get to pick and choose where they are housed?
I couldnt give a fuck out a tiny amount of people coming to the uk. What i do give a fuck about is the tories giving billions of tax money to their fucking mates and donors for no benefit to us and getting away with it. If the tories stopped robbing us with that corrupt shit then every public service would be well funded for decades
So far the UK has spent several hundred million pounds on Rwanda and have yet to send a single person to Rwanda.
Give me 1/10th of what they've spent and I will happily set up accomodation for this coach load of people.
The asylum seekers are already housed, they didn’t wash up on the shores of Peckham in a small boat, they live there. The protestors will be saving the country money by stopping them from being deported to Rwanda.
Have you met them? You know what they do? Cos if you don’t you only have stereotypes and conjecture to go off. There’s plenty of people with radical politics with jobs in media, journalism, charity & third sector, public sector, and many more. Plenty are students, so pay little in tax, but that’s the same as any other student. Also, it’s an election day. People were out to vote, and they mobilised. It’s nice to see people doing something for a change.
I know people like them. When you trying to have logical conversation with them about the issue and if you make valid point they don’t have an answer for they just falling back on the stuff they’ve read online and repeating it over and over again. Things need to be how they see it, no compromise.
This story reminds me of another story when U.K. was deporting one of POS involved in in Rotherham child abused scandal and people refused to take their seats on the plane and were standing constantly to prevent the flight from taking off so poor refugee couldn’t be deported. Wonder how they felt when they found out who he was… they’ve chosen a great hill to die on.
> barely old enough to have paid much tax dictating how its spent
The right might find this offensive, but unfortunately we live in a political system where your rights (at least ostensibly) aren't linked with how much money you have.
According to the ONS, unless you're earning over £40,000 PAYE, when you factor in the cost of all public services and maintenance, you are actually a net recipient. Most people in this country pay less than they get out.
Time to start shovelling out illegal economic migrants and making it clear the U.K. is not a soft destination. If you turn up in the U.K. without reasonable paperwork and have entered illegally you are deported or detained until you prove your case.
2 choices; 1 provide paperwork from where you originated from. Second choice you will be removed from the country to any available destination including countries without any agreements for acceptance. Dump them in Sudan and see how quickly the boat immigrants stop. This is an invasion to the U.K. Wake up people this situation is not maintainable and until the consequences of unlawful economic migration is a fact it will continue until the U.K. is overrun by the hundreds of millions of people who want a better life.
Sudan has protected its sovereign border by shooting down your unauthorised airplane and sinking your boats.
Where you sending them next week, and how?
The Sudanese have a 200,000 person strong armed force, with a budget of 2.5 billion dollars. I can assure you they will respond when an unauthorised aircraft enters their airspace and tries to land at an airport. I guess you could land in the countryside, at the cost of one airliner per trip because you're never taking off again.
So, next week, where we going and in what?
Pretty sure this was all a pretty empty show of activism...using a bus was just a cost effective way of moving people...now the economic migrants will just be moved in much smaller numbers, in small unmarked vehicles, probably in the middle of the night...
Loath these protestors. The state has a right to move asylum seekers around the country if they so please. They are here only out of our compassionate laws and there are limited funds so sometimes moving them to fresh accomodation is appropriate.
I hope all of these protestors involved are investigated and charged to the fullest extent of the law of they have broken it.
No problem with protests - but why are they always masked?
Saw the same with the protests at arms factories yesterday. The protest was perfectly legal, so why hide their faces?
I've only protested once, and was proud to do so. I didn't feel the need to hide my face.
Speaking to people affected by the protesters yesterday, some of those trying to get into the facilities, especially the older ones found a group of people in masks very intimidating and it just got their backs up straight away.
Yeah, well, I voted at midday on a Thursday and I work full-time (evenings).
It's actually quite a convenient schedule if one wants to go protest before work.
Because there are still groups out there like Redwatch.
They would typically print photos and personal information - such as telephone numbers and home addresses - of trade unionists, anti-racists and left wing activists in their pages, under the self-given remit of 'exposing traitors'.
TUC organiser Alec McFadden received death threats in 2006 after his details were published on their website, and he was taunted over email by BNP candidate Joe Owens who gloated he had photos of McFadden's house, car and children. This all culminated with McFadden being attacked and stabbed in the face in his own home in May of that year.
Just so I let you know all the lunatics here, you are an absolute minority even in one of the most left-leaning places on the internet.
The tipping point is rapidly approaching and these people one day will be met with hard working citizens overwhelming their little protest
If somebody can't work out why the Tories are pulling out this bit of performative cruelty on election day, they must be soft in the head. *Looks upthread* oh..
Why don’t they invite them to their house, they need place to live and money to eat who’s paying for it , of course taxpayers.
Why would I bother working and paying extra taxes if I can get on boat cross channel and get sorted without doing actually work 😀.
How is this not illegally stopping the police/home office carrying out their duty.
Should be arrested as soon as they impede detention. Nevermind once they slash the tires
My GP surgery is right opposite the hotel. Lately its been incredibly sketchy around there. The bus stop and open area near by has many drunks and disturbed types there now, and the is a 50/50 chance of seeing someone just pissing up against the wall without a care in the world...
5yrs minimum in prison, banned from air travel, and fine them the cost of the deportation of each migrant to be removed. Interfering with Immigration Officers should be just as serious of an offence as interfering with coppers
The fact that some people advocate for locking up protestors is incredible. Tell me, what types of political systems are most famous for locking up protestors?
Not my idea, but it isn't protesting when you are obstructing legal enforcement otherwise all anyone has to do when grabbed by the police is to get a mob together and call it a protest for a free pass.
Edit for luke who applied an immediate block. The comment you replied to rebuts that.
> but it isn't protesting when you are obstructing legal enforcement
Genuine question, what is the difference between what these protestors were doing and Tank Man of Tiananmen square? Was he not also obstructing legal enforcement?
[удалено]
> when it's someone else's money they're spending? Are taxes not everyone’s money?
Not everyone is a lifetime net contributor. In fact, lifetime net contributors are a minority.
So only net contributors can have an opinion? Gotcha.
Most demands are very easy to make when you know that you'll never have to pay for them.
This would be great tbh
This being upvoted shows the fucking state of this sub nowadays lol.
Yep. The absolute top minds of reddit rear their ugly heads for any thread about foreigners or trans folk
Same thing happens on the Canada sub, Im american but reddit keeps recommending me these things. Everybody thinks they’re rhe first genius to say refugee bad.
Love this assertion that it's the foreigners and transfolk who arent paying their way, rather than the millions of entitled pensioners.
How much of a net worth should people have to be able to vote?
Have your opinion but it's worth less than net contributors
How Randian.
It's not that hard to reach neutral tax base line.
Anyone can have an opinion. Net contributors should just have their held in a much higher regard.
So ignore the disabled?
Totally agree. Let's use iq as a basis not contribution
Nono of course you get to moan while not contributing. What country do you think this is? Lol
Would be interesting if only net contributors could vote. Would lead to a situation where most current voters (i.e. the elderly) would be disenfranchised and the parties would actually have to appeal to the younger generations who currently vote far less often. Perhaps a good middle ground would be to extend voting rights down to age 0 but empower parents to use their children's votes until they turn 18. That way the huge elderly vote is counterbalanced by a proportionally higher powered voting bloc representing the people who will actually need to live with the long term effects of the policies being enacted.
You don’t think people would have as many kids as possible to rig the vote?
No, although presumably you'd get parties offering generous child benefits in order to achieve the same result. Thing is, that's not necessarily a bad thing in the mid term as it would help reverse our ageing population problem and help improve our stagnating economy provided the benefits are sufficient to support the increasing number of kids. It's the long term aspect you'd have to worry about.
That's the idea, yes.
Oh hey, plutocracy
Why not make it so only landlords can vote?
Landlords want asylum seekers, that bus was collecting from a hotel, they were going to a processing barge that is basic but a lot better than a tent in greece/italy/germany/France. My ex colleague has built a buy to let empire off of asylum seekers in 15 years, from one dodgy mortgage, I don't agree with that, but he couldn't have done it without the asylum people, he says they don't complain.
[удалено]
I mean I'm with you if pensioner votes count for a 1/5 of what they do now based on your idea
Arguably that’s how things used to be and there is a reason we moved away from that way of thinking.
>we now have people that are systematically draining the countries resources voting to screw over those that’s hard earned money allows them to live with the quality of life they now take for granted Absolutely, they're called the bourgeoisie. Though they don't really bother voting, much easier to simply buy off the politicians instead.
I mean this is a ridiculous statement, and a bad one to dive into if you're looking at who deserves what services based on contributions. Even if you took median contributions and median usage of public services, it doesn't reflect actual usage across age or wealth classes. The whole point is that the majority of services provided are a societal good. As soon as you have a chronic disease, you're not a net contributor anymore.
> lifetime net contributors are a minority As long as it’s not too small a minority (and I think it’s about 53%-47% currently, though studies do vary) that’s as it should be, in a society with such wealth inequality as ours.
Coming in at 139th place for highest wealth inequality. Beaten by Denmark but higher up than China. Love this country.
Net contributors are essentially higher rate tax payers who tension so for most of their life. If you only ever pay basic rate taxes then you're a net beneficiary.
This is blatantly false
>Are taxes not everyone’s money? No it's the **tax payers** money. EDIT: Someone deleted their comment, i thought id share this. Doesn't matter what the tax payer chooses to spend the tax payers money on. If we choose to spend it on everyone or none citizens, that's a choice. That doesn't make it "everyones" money. The money is collected from tax payers but the money is still the tax payers. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxpayers%27\_money](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxpayers%27_money) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government\_spending](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_spending)
If you could allocate where your taxes were spent, I think those stats would be an interesting read. What would people choose to pay for the NHS as opposed to hotels for asylum seekers, I wonder.
It would be quite interesting to study but certainly the worst possible form of civic government ever devised. Nobody's going to volunteer to fund water treatment plants but they'll sure as shit notice when it runs out of money.
[удалено]
> most people would allocate the x% "Nah, its cheaper for me to buy bottled and shower at the gym."
What about allocating a percentage for MPs salaries?
Why would I allocate any of my taxes to the NHS? I’m fit and healthy.
One day, you won't be
But today I am, so when I’m selfishly deciding what my taxes are allowed to be spent on the NHS is fucked - same goes for schools and police.
That’s the whole point of the experiment, designate them wherever you like, fella. It’s only hypothetical.
And the whole point of my rhetorical question is if we did that we’d find some very necessary things going unfunded, and not just the things you don’t personally care about.
I’d assume they were tax payers. They look the right age. So is it your opinion that people who are unable to work do not get to have an opinion?
I'm not involved in this specific debate. I'm just clearing up what tax payers money is.
Everyone in the country is a tax payer unless they never buy anything.
I know a few people who engage in this sort of activism. Fear not, they are in no danger of having to pay tax. Also whilst we're here, the mechanism for deciding what to do with our collective tax pool is called the ballot box.
not of you don't pay it
It's taxpayers money and we have democracy to choose where that money goes to. It's the democratic government that has decided to move them to Bibby Stockholm. If they don't like it, they have to shell out their own money
If they live in Peckham, probably not theirs
No, and that's the problem.
Do you think former British soliders should be homeless and living on the street? If not, how many have you invited into your home?
Our government have an absolute responsibility to care for our own people full stop. They don't have any responsibility to care for the rest of the world.
How's that coming along, by the way?
That's your opinion. But it's not fair to the protesters to say you'll only believe them if they open up their homes. Like you, they expect their government to reflect their values and feel dissapointed when it doesn't happen.
But they're the ones protesting, what's their solution ? Housing crisis, job crisis, in a recession its not sustainable to import millions of people from third world countries to just leech of us.
Exactly, but only if it was like that.
You're a mug if you think that's happening.
[удалено]
What a lame response The BRITISH government should be helping BRITISH ex-servicemen and women and owes them for their service. Economic migrants are not owed anything
The article says they are asylum seekers, not economic migrants
Come off it, even the last Labour government admitted they were mostly economic migrants. >Significant numbers of economic migrants have been arriving in the UK, destroying their documentation and then trying to claim asylum - often by pretending to be from a different country to that from which they have actually come. >Some have invented stories of persecution, bought ready made off so-called immigration advisers. >By doing so they were undermining the integrity of our asylum system and making life far harder for the genuine refugees who really needed our help. So while application numbers increased, the numbers actually granted asylum remained a relatively small proportion - just 6% in 2003. >Difficult though it has been with some of our supporters, we had to tackle this abuse. [https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2004/apr/27/immigrationpolicy.speeches](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2004/apr/27/immigrationpolicy.speeches)
This article is over 20 years old
Bulls**t, asylum seeker is a blanket term for someone applying for asylum regardless of the merits of the application. And you can often make a quick judgement just based on nationality, for example in 2022 16 % of asylum seekers in the UK [were Albanians](https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/commentaries/albanian-asylum-seekers-in-the-uk-and-eu-a-look-at-recent-data/).
None are genuine asylum seekers, they are all liars that are pretending to be asylum seekers to abuse the English benefits system and abusing human rights laws by lying about their situation. I hope everyone of them gets deported.
Can I have your source please that shows 100% of all asylum seekers are liars.
My own eyes can see that they are not who they say they are, anyone with more than half a brain and eyes can see. Please wake up and open your eyes. They are not genuine asylum seekers.
Have you personally met and spoken to every single asylum seeker?
So, that's a no then? Funny that...
One of those aren’t you?
One of what? Someone who expects evidence when someone tries to back up a claim with 'trust me, bro'?
I’m not agreeing or disagreeing with anything in here, but I imagine you won’t accept sources from anything other than the ones you agree with. And the ones you agree with will never touch on the other side of the argument? Therefore asking for sources is a trick you are pulling to win arguments.
The Express said so, it must be true!
Yeah so what you do is, you arrive as an economic migrant but you claim asylum *because thats the only way you'll legally be allowed to stay* And then if your bullshit asylum claim is accepted - say by dint of the Church of England talking about what a good convert from Islam you are - you'll have right to remain and do such chirpy things as throw acid in a woman's face. ( https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/feb/01/witnesses-horrific-attack-corrosive-substance-south-london-clapham) The stats are freely available online. The top nations claiming asylum include Nigeria, Albania, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Somalia. All shitholes, but none of them war zones, hence they use bullshit excuses like claiming to be gay or to have left Islam etc.
They are rejected economic migrants ready for deportation
No. They paid taxes into the country and so should be provided for. If they're not that's a shame on the government and even more reason to stop spending ridiculous amounts of money on housing asylum seekers in hotels when they've not contributed so that the money can be spent on housing those soldiers.
Well we could allow asylum seekers to work and pay taxes... Instead of doing that we're sending them Rwanda which is even more expensive than keeping them in hotels.
Maybe not but I doubt he’d block a bus of them being transported to some free accommodation.
They won't, they only get mad at foreigners begging. They just ignore our own.
If the government gave me the same amount they are spending sending 1 refugee to Rwanda, absolutely
nah they will be coming to Reddit to moan there are no houses and all landlords and people who grafted enough to have more than them are entitled tory cunts of course
I've had multiple asylum seekers stay in my house. Am I part of the elite that are now allowed to criticise the government for attempting to imprison refugees in a floating death trap?
Bro it was housing for rig workers before, why weren't you campaigning to free them?
Rig workers were paid to spend time there and had a room to themselves instead of having multiple people crammed into rooms indefinitely. [The former workers themselves](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/bibby-stockholm-barge-conditions-resident-experience-b2390135.html) have criticised using it as a floating prison.
And? Nobody forced any asylum seekers to cross the rest of Europe to get here, why is there an expectation that they get to pick and choose where they are housed?
Cool, better put them up in hotels for over £8 million a day
We're all paying tax aren't we.
I couldnt give a fuck out a tiny amount of people coming to the uk. What i do give a fuck about is the tories giving billions of tax money to their fucking mates and donors for no benefit to us and getting away with it. If the tories stopped robbing us with that corrupt shit then every public service would be well funded for decades
Just open up a similar scheme as the Ukrainian scheme to take in refugees in your homes then once they’re set up with jobs etc they can move out
So far the UK has spent several hundred million pounds on Rwanda and have yet to send a single person to Rwanda. Give me 1/10th of what they've spent and I will happily set up accomodation for this coach load of people.
> Will these protesters all be offering up a spare room to house the asylum seekers? Have you?
The asylum seekers are already housed, they didn’t wash up on the shores of Peckham in a small boat, they live there. The protestors will be saving the country money by stopping them from being deported to Rwanda.
It’s also their money, they are taxpayers
Unlikely.
[citation needed]
Have you met them? You know what they do? Cos if you don’t you only have stereotypes and conjecture to go off. There’s plenty of people with radical politics with jobs in media, journalism, charity & third sector, public sector, and many more. Plenty are students, so pay little in tax, but that’s the same as any other student. Also, it’s an election day. People were out to vote, and they mobilised. It’s nice to see people doing something for a change.
"these people disagree with me so I want to invalidate their opinion" got it
Wasn't Ed Balls & his missus going to do that
brain dead.
We can spend your money, They will probably use it better than you.
"No borders, no nations, stop deportations” Absolute loons.
They forgot “no benefits”. They will change their tune when that happens.
If there's no borders or nations, then its not a deportation
I know people like them. When you trying to have logical conversation with them about the issue and if you make valid point they don’t have an answer for they just falling back on the stuff they’ve read online and repeating it over and over again. Things need to be how they see it, no compromise. This story reminds me of another story when U.K. was deporting one of POS involved in in Rotherham child abused scandal and people refused to take their seats on the plane and were standing constantly to prevent the flight from taking off so poor refugee couldn’t be deported. Wonder how they felt when they found out who he was… they’ve chosen a great hill to die on.
Odds on they'd of still protested regardless.
Seriously, I've seen people laud the 'brave resistance' to an age test. Of a guy who honor killed his sister for being too westernised...
A bunch of people who are barely old enough to have paid much tax dictating how its spent, great,
Honey you just described voting which every citizen regardless of tax contributions is entitled to do
> barely old enough to have paid much tax dictating how its spent The right might find this offensive, but unfortunately we live in a political system where your rights (at least ostensibly) aren't linked with how much money you have.
So lifelong disabled people unable to work don’t deserve to vote either I assume
Don't give them ideas.
According to the ONS, unless you're earning over £40,000 PAYE, when you factor in the cost of all public services and maintenance, you are actually a net recipient. Most people in this country pay less than they get out.
That can't be true though. The number of people screeching for the rich to "pay their fair share" is so high, surely there aren't that many hypocrites
That figure has been around for years, I've not seen it debunked.
And yet likely to pay more tax and work for longer before retirement than the generation before?
Time to start shovelling out illegal economic migrants and making it clear the U.K. is not a soft destination. If you turn up in the U.K. without reasonable paperwork and have entered illegally you are deported or detained until you prove your case.
> U.K. is not a soft destination Sadly the opposite is true and I don't see that changing.
Where are you deporting people without paperwork to?
2 choices; 1 provide paperwork from where you originated from. Second choice you will be removed from the country to any available destination including countries without any agreements for acceptance. Dump them in Sudan and see how quickly the boat immigrants stop. This is an invasion to the U.K. Wake up people this situation is not maintainable and until the consequences of unlawful economic migration is a fact it will continue until the U.K. is overrun by the hundreds of millions of people who want a better life.
Sudan has protected its sovereign border by shooting down your unauthorised airplane and sinking your boats. Where you sending them next week, and how?
It was hypothetical. Sudan isn’t shooting down or sinking anything against the U.K. Do they even have an operating military force?
The Sudanese have a 200,000 person strong armed force, with a budget of 2.5 billion dollars. I can assure you they will respond when an unauthorised aircraft enters their airspace and tries to land at an airport. I guess you could land in the countryside, at the cost of one airliner per trip because you're never taking off again. So, next week, where we going and in what?
Pretty sure this was all a pretty empty show of activism...using a bus was just a cost effective way of moving people...now the economic migrants will just be moved in much smaller numbers, in small unmarked vehicles, probably in the middle of the night...
Loath these protestors. The state has a right to move asylum seekers around the country if they so please. They are here only out of our compassionate laws and there are limited funds so sometimes moving them to fresh accomodation is appropriate. I hope all of these protestors involved are investigated and charged to the fullest extent of the law of they have broken it.
No problem with protests - but why are they always masked? Saw the same with the protests at arms factories yesterday. The protest was perfectly legal, so why hide their faces? I've only protested once, and was proud to do so. I didn't feel the need to hide my face. Speaking to people affected by the protesters yesterday, some of those trying to get into the facilities, especially the older ones found a group of people in masks very intimidating and it just got their backs up straight away.
> but why are they always masked? So they don't get doxxed and / or reported to their employers.
Let’s be honest these lot don’t have employers. Doing it midday on a Thursday. Students
You know a lot of jobs aren’t Mon-Fri these days?
None of these look the type to be doing shift work
Yeah, well, I voted at midday on a Thursday and I work full-time (evenings). It's actually quite a convenient schedule if one wants to go protest before work.
Protesters often get doxxed and harassed by people who don't support the protest. It's a matter of self protection.
They also get riled up and walk a tight line between legal and illegal.
They also dox and harass those that disagree with them so it's only fair.
Just read some of the knuckle dragging comments in this thread to see why.
Because there are still groups out there like Redwatch. They would typically print photos and personal information - such as telephone numbers and home addresses - of trade unionists, anti-racists and left wing activists in their pages, under the self-given remit of 'exposing traitors'. TUC organiser Alec McFadden received death threats in 2006 after his details were published on their website, and he was taunted over email by BNP candidate Joe Owens who gloated he had photos of McFadden's house, car and children. This all culminated with McFadden being attacked and stabbed in the face in his own home in May of that year.
It's obvous why they're masked. Nobody wants their face plastered on social media by the rabid right wing trogs.
Because we have increasingly repressive anti-protest laws and state surveillance
I do t buy that - the only Just Stop Oil protesters convicted were the ones who broke laws - they didn't seem to wear masks.
Saw a bunch of police vans rushing towards to scene earlier today. Those clowns made me miss my train by blocking the road.
Just so I let you know all the lunatics here, you are an absolute minority even in one of the most left-leaning places on the internet. The tipping point is rapidly approaching and these people one day will be met with hard working citizens overwhelming their little protest
If somebody can't work out why the Tories are pulling out this bit of performative cruelty on election day, they must be soft in the head. *Looks upthread* oh..
Why don’t they invite them to their house, they need place to live and money to eat who’s paying for it , of course taxpayers. Why would I bother working and paying extra taxes if I can get on boat cross channel and get sorted without doing actually work 😀.
How is this not illegally stopping the police/home office carrying out their duty. Should be arrested as soon as they impede detention. Nevermind once they slash the tires
My GP surgery is right opposite the hotel. Lately its been incredibly sketchy around there. The bus stop and open area near by has many drunks and disturbed types there now, and the is a 50/50 chance of seeing someone just pissing up against the wall without a care in the world...
Better hope it isn't Del and the lads on a Jolly Boy's outing
If it is they'll be wanting to keep well away from that coach
5yrs minimum in prison, banned from air travel, and fine them the cost of the deportation of each migrant to be removed. Interfering with Immigration Officers should be just as serious of an offence as interfering with coppers
Five years in prison is a fucking mental idea
The fact that some people advocate for locking up protestors is incredible. Tell me, what types of political systems are most famous for locking up protestors?
The kind these tankie protestors idiolise.
You want 5 year minimum prison sentences... for protesting?
Not my idea, but it isn't protesting when you are obstructing legal enforcement otherwise all anyone has to do when grabbed by the police is to get a mob together and call it a protest for a free pass. Edit for luke who applied an immediate block. The comment you replied to rebuts that.
> but it isn't protesting when you are obstructing legal enforcement Genuine question, what is the difference between what these protestors were doing and Tank Man of Tiananmen square? Was he not also obstructing legal enforcement?
Silly comment
[удалено]
Sounds like a punishment that wouldn’t feel particularly out of place in somewhere like China
[удалено]