They are, but not because of immigration be it asylum seekers or other migration.
Services are stretched because of 14 years of deliberate running down and defunding by the Tory government.
All the evidence is that immigration and immigrants increase economic activity and are good, indeed essential, for growth and prosperity.
You really need to put some time and effort into finding out what actually happens rather what some RW Twitter feed has told you.
Asylum seekers get accommodation which is usually shit (sadly the Bibby Stockholm was actually an improvement) and £49.18 a week to cover food, clothes, toiletries, phone and everything else. They cannot work and depression and social isolation is common. You often hear complaints that “these people have iPhones” - please tell me how you exist in modern society without a mobile phone?
If they are granted leave to remain then they have no inherent rights beyond normal levels of benefits.
Those who arrive on a visa usually need sponsorship by an employer, have to pay to use the NHS and have no recourse to benefits if they loose their job.
The Tories deliberately slowed processing applicants so their self-created problem could be used as a dog whistle to blame migrants for the ills of society and the Tories could get away with feathering their own, and their crony’s nests.
^ This, in a nutshell.
Migrants (the overwhelming majority of whom arrive perfectly legally and are not seeking asylum or any form of handouts) are net contributors to the UK economy - i.e. the UK is richer because they are there.
Also bear in mind that the “net migration” figures include people coming in on tourist and educational visas, who are only short-term residents.
The net fiscal balance of overall immigration to the UK between 2001 and 2011 amounts therefore to a positive net contribution of about £25 billion, over a period over which the UK has run an overall budget deficit.
Our analysis thus suggests that – rather than being a drain on the UK’s fiscal system – immigrants arriving since the early 2000s have made a net contributions to its public finances, a reality that contrasts starkly with the view often maintained in public debate.
This conclusion is further supported by our evidence on the degree to which immigrants receive tax credits and benefits compared with natives. Recent immigrants are 43% (17 percentage points) less likely to receive state benefits or tax credits. These differences are partly attributable to immigrants’ more favourable age-gender composition. However, even when compared with natives of the same age, gender composition, and education, recent immigrants are still 39% less likely than natives to receive benefits.
Source: University College London https://www.ucl.ac.uk/economics/about-department/fiscal-effects-immigration-uk
Is this the “no one was arrested at Harehills” lie?
I listened to James O’Brien on LBC attempting to deal with misinformation. He recalled people phoning his programme to say that asylum seekers were given £20,000 to help them set up a business, and also they were given a car. He said that it’s often very difficult to disprove these statements, but even when you can the people who make them don’t accept the evidence.
I have to confess that in the past I have watched with a certain degree of smugness as France suffered with rioting. But no more. I am alarmed by what is happening here.
Blaming immigrants fior housing shortages, NHS pressures, etc., is a smoke screen. Decades of piss poor government planning has caused these issues. Immigrants and their descendants are net contributors to the economy. Huge numbers work in our public services and indeed were invited to the UK to fulfil these roles. They work and pay taxes. They spend and pay taxes. Every penny the poorest of them spends goes back into the economy one way or another. Unlike those at the other end of the scale who squirrel it away thinking they’ll be able to buy their way out of armageddon when it comes.
When someone points the finger they’re trying to get you to look away from them.
That applies to all of life. Most Brits don’t have that. Hence
British Empire
Winston Churchill
Margaret Thatcher
Brexit
All viewed positively but when one digs down …
You may be right - I wish there was an emoji for sarcasm that people could apply (is there?).
Why not? If you want to contravene the rules of society then what do you expect? If we hadn’t been so lenient and soft as we have been with these “people” over the last 80 years or so we wouldn’t be in the situation we see ourselves in.
Who are “these people”? Don’t you see a prison role for rehabilitation? Especially given the awful rates for recidivism compared to, say, Norway.
Getting back to the original proposition - self-evidently it’s a handful (relatively speaking) of thugs who are responsible for the riots. They seem to be travelling from town to town, picking up the usual disaffected and easily-influenced of society and then moving on.
If almost 50% of society has a lower-than-average IQ then, given enough malevolence directed at them, they’re not going to be hard to sway when they see people in authority, newspapers, sources online telling them nonsense.
We definitely live in an age where belief and emotion trumps facts. Maybe it’s always been that way!
I’ve been heavily influenced by reading Ian Dunt’s book: Westminster: how it works and why it doesn’t.
It gives a worrying insight into why the UK is falling to bits. I highly recommend it.
Those that choose not to conform to the rules of society. Those that choose to steal, murder, rape, indulge in violent thuggish behaviour, etc. Why would you want to rehabilitate them, what purpose does it serve? They’ve had their chance they chose not to take it, others live a honest, purposeful life and contribute to the well being of those around them. Those adherents to a life of crime need to be crushed. Literally.
Rather than paying to keep them locked up, I’d prefer rehabilitation so that they can become constructive members of society that do contribute to the well being around them. That’s the purpose right there.
Excuse a moment of flippancy but do recall that famous quip by Dorothy Parker “You can lead a whore to culture but you can’t make her think”
Another American, a friend of mine who live in England for 30 years, made the observation that the British had ‘sold out’ their working class. The results of that are coming home to roost. The rioting/violence is the knuckle-draggers response to this process but there is a genuine point here.
Interesting comment on present society from the BBC. Don’t think this has been linked yet.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czx66dkx3wlo
My concern is that this is not guided by brainless thugs, but rather has been carefully encouraged by smart individuals wanting to destabilise society. There are nation-states and also political groups that have good reason to wish anarchy and lawless behaviour here, and it’s not unreasonable to think they might cooperate. Some of the stories spread will have a basis in truth, undoubtedly with adjustments to inflame feelings, some not at all. We can see from the reactions of those in court yesterday - embarrassment and even tears - that these actions by some are not from strong convictions and anger, but rather by weak and gullible pawns used for harm.
There is going to be an huge amount of misinformation coming out in the next weeks and months, and we will need to be very careful about what we accept and believe.
R4 had an interview With (lord) Tony Sewell this evening regarding his 2021 report on race and ethnic disparities:
From memory: he made the point that it had been heavily criticised at the time for showing that generally outcomes for black and other non-white ethnicities were doing surprisingly well in terms of how they were progressing in society, but there were significant numbers of poor white people that because of a general deterioration of infrastructure and support, were doing very much worse. The report was apparently criticised by the Guardian and the BBC - he viewed it as misleading propaganda - because it didn’t fit the narrative of poor & troubled non-whites being oppressed. His view was that it should not be a surprise that this trouble had arisen, because there were a plenty of people who had done badly and were extremely unhappy about it.
Well worth considering, and if valid, adding to the mixture of causes.
