[News] Mass Migration

[raymondo]

Layers is putting it mildly. The idea that our government is sending billions overseas in order to help those in need when they're happy to have hunger and homelessness at home is laughable.

As I suggested before, some money does go to the right places but the whole thing needs reform. Problem is there's no political will to effect change as the current system does what is was designed to do.

Yep, you're right, it is laughable sadly.

 

[raymondo]

Fascinating interview with an ex FT journalist who investigated and wrote a book on Foreign Aid. Its a real eye opener

I am learning a lot that I had ZERO idea about before. Cheers

 

[beorhthelm]

is this about economic migrants or asylum seekers, and do they have the same solutions?

 

[Winker]

We should just broadcast to the rest of the world the truth; this country is bankrupt, we are £2.5 Trillion in debt, we have the highest inflation in the western world. Our doctors, nurses and train drivers are on strike because they are forced to work for poverty wages. You won't be able to buy or rent a house unless you are a millionaire. We can't even empty the bins or weed the pavements. Everyone here is a racist, homophobic, transphobic, Islamophobic, bigoted Tory scumbag, so why the f*** do you want to come here?

edit - I see the swear filter is back on!

 

[Live by the sea]

England is perceived as a wealthy stable , safe country by Folks around the world so there’s always going to be a mass queue of people wanting to come

 

[portslade seagull]

I've never quite understand why climate change denying / ignoring seems to be a right-wing viewpoint. If the climate does change how most scientist predict then places that are going to be the most affected by it are going to be poor countries in Africa / Asia etc. Where are all their fleeing people going to go? Here.

So it should be the other way around, no? Right-wingers should be more concerned about climate change than anyone else if they don't want a load more Johnny Foreigners converging on our shores. I've never understood why it's even seen as a political subject in the first place.

Most sane people cannot argue that global warming is happening. When I was younger at least we used to see snow more often and you could utilise your tin lid or sledge knocked together by your dad. Youngsters these days never see it unless they travel to find it.
On the water front have never understood why more desalination plants haven't been built. I suppose it hits the shareholders

 

[B-right-on]

I think your figure for us is a little (doing lots of lifting there) out. Isn’t it about 2.5 billion rather than 2500 billion (which is 2.5 trillion which is not far off our total gdp).

£2,500 billion? No. We don’t.

Oops copied the wrong figure. Don't post without glasses on.

It was $15.7 billion in 2022

 

[B-right-on]

I think it is more like £12Bn, but you have demonstrated my point about it being a hard sell. Your position is that it doesn't do much good and ends up in the wrong hands, so we shouldn't do it, or do it less.
The US spends $51Bn as you say, but much of that is military aid, particularly to Israel and Egypt, in the form of American made weaponry, in effect a subsidy to their defence industry.
You can't say money does not work, it is how the money gets deployed that is the issue.
It needs to be made to do good and not end up in the wrong hands. But when you have a bunch of corrupt self serving ****s such as we have in charge in the UK, it's a bit rich to insist we get tough with the Yemeni President.

And it isn't just a choice between Carrot or Stick, we can do both.

Oh I completely agree. Although no matter how corrupt and self serving our Govt is, it's a baby compared to the USA, Yemen etc...

There's no easy answer.

 

[Eeyore]

More Foreign Aid? We already give about £2,500 Billion a year, mainly to Afghanistan, Nigeria, Pakistan, Ethiopia and Yemen which have incredibly corrupt Govts.

The USA gives $51Billion as a comparison.

The only way is to get non corrupt Govts in these countries but look at how it's gone in Afghanistan, Iraq etc... when military might is used.

I don't know what the solution is, but with corrupt and uncaring Govts, more Aid means more taxes for us and newer Rolls Royces and more money in the Swiss Bank Accounts of the people in charge of those countries

I think foreign aid is miss-understood. Much of it is political in nature, a bargaining chip, so to speak.

I remember having a very eye opening conversation about aid with a senior director at a major NGO a couple of decades back. I was told that there were even situations where aid was offered in a conflict, but only to the sufferers on one side. Ordinary citizens on the other side of the divide were not to be assisted. A stipulated condition (much of the foreign aid is channelled through NGOs)

 

[B-right-on]

I think foreign aid is miss-understood. Much of it is political in nature, a bargaining chip, so to speak.

I remember having a very eye opening conversation about aid with a senior director at a major NGO a couple of decades back. I was told that there were even situations where aid was offered in a conflict, but only to the sufferers on one side. Ordinary citizens on the other side of the divide were not to be assisted. A stipulated condition (much of the foreign aid is channelled through NGOs)

This answers a lot of questions IMO. Explains the point I was trying to make

Fascinating interview with an ex FT journalist who investigated and wrote a book on Foreign Aid. Its a real eye opener

 

[portlock seagull]

is this about economic migrants or asylum seekers, and do they have the same solutions?

Anyone and everyone. I don’t think there’s really a difference these days. People are mass migrating for both reasons, and no one’s getting deported. If you make it here, or anywhere in Europe, you can generally stay. Nobody arriving on our coast tomorrow is going to be sent back. Same in US/Mexican border. Or Spain. Greece. Italy. Poland. Germany. The numbers are becoming greater, and what are you supposed to do anyhow? Walls and fences aren’t the answer. Rwanda isn’t, and was a utterly bizarre Preti Patel piece of idiocy anyhow. People easily break through, under or go over barriers / even tear down or rush them. Then what? Are Border forces supposed to open fire like East Germany? No. Realistically the only solution is to accept and accommodate them. Migrants know this. The traffickers know this. But as said, what happens when we’re talking millions? Each year? Hungry, without accommodation or employment? Traumatised? Without any cultural connection to host country? Is it possible to transfer the entire populous of one country to another smoothly? Can never see that happening without complete breakdown of both. Is it even right?

 

[pastafarian]

Borders are going to become impossible to control and then possibly obsolete in the next 50 years.

Who controls the ingress and egress from a territory will be determined by who has the biggest guns and the most motivation to use them.

The notion that people are just going to sit back and accept their fate is unlikely.

I predict that with resource shortages will come locals trying to to take over and operate energy, water, and fuel facilities. Much like black farmers took over and tried to run agriculture in Zimbabwe. And failing miserably.

It’s gonna get real messy.

Cant see borders being obsolete in 50 years or even possibly obsolete.(whatever that means)
In any case, if the ingress and egress in the future will be determined by who has the biggest guns, this suggests borders or boundaries will be being protected, or attempts will be made to protect them, and wont be obsolete after all.

 

[BadFish]

This human tragedy continues with daily drownings and governments unable to devise or implement effective controls or solutions regardless.

The scale will continue to rise, and seemingly so will the problems.

Realistically what if anything can be done? The drivers are unstoppable eg climate, famine, war, unemployment, population growth. All summarised as survival basically.

It seems the only eventually will be such disorder as to rival something rarely or never witnessed in history ie complete collapse of civil society. I concur with David Attenborough in this sense, have done since before he upped the rhetoric.

Can we get this sorted via NSC I wonder? Post comments here and I’ll ensure the PM gets ‘em!

You don't need to send it to the PM the Tories have got the situation sorted.

They are the only party to sort the problem out. They might just need another election .


Or two.