LittlePig

UK housing is bad (for refugees)

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, iamnumerate said:

I was talking to a good friend from South America about this and the number of people we know (not her) from South America who have got cheap/free accommodation and she said "It is English people's fault".

Which annoyed me, but she was right, we vote for for these parties.  Unless you have at least once voted UKIP you cannot really complain.  A lot of people on this board are partly responsible by attacking people who complain as racists, daily mail readers etc.

 

Very very true. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mrs Bear said:

Sorry.  The family were perfectly nice, well educated and very anxious to work rather than be dependent   on benefits (hence the mother wanting to improve her already pretty good English) but I did find it a bit galling too, when I knew how many working UK nationals would be delighted with such a flat at an 'affordable' rent. 

This was a one off (unpaid) for me, BTW - I was asked by a mutual acquaintance to help, since I used  to teach EFL.

Did you think about writing to your MP?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Rave said:

A kind and noble thing to do Mrs B! No need for any justifications, especially since they sound like people keen to integrate and participate in the economy rather than people keen to sponge.

One can be against the current system without disliking the people who have taken advantage of it to improve their own lot in life, and that of their children.

It depends on how much they have taken advantage of it, if they are genuine refugees, then providing they have a will to work then yes.  If they lied to get asylum and benefits then I do dislike them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, iamnumerate said:

It depends on how much they have taken advantage of it, if they are genuine refugees, then providing they have a will to work then yes.  If they lied to get asylum and benefits then I do dislike them.

I do think they are genuine.  The woman didn't dwell on it, but did now and then tell me some pretty horrific stories of their journey to the UK, particularly in Sudan, where she also lost a baby at 7 months pregnant.  I gather that her husband was at serious risk because of his political views. 

On the other hand, given the parlous political/economic state of so much of Africa (never mind anywhere else ) is the UK, or any other country, come to that,  obliged to give asylum to everyone with a shit/dangerous life  elsewhere?  That is the question. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/01/2018 at 6:14 PM, Mrs Bear said:

I do think they are genuine.  The woman didn't dwell on it, but did now and then tell me some pretty horrific stories of their journey to the UK, particularly in Sudan, where she also lost a baby at 7 months pregnant.  I gather that her husband was at serious risk because of his political views. 

On the other hand, given the parlous political/economic state of so much of Africa (never mind anywhere else ) is the UK, or any other country, come to that,  obliged to give asylum to everyone with a shit/dangerous life  elsewhere?  That is the question. 

 

 

Even if they are genuine why should they be given a place in Wandsworth? (If they are genuine fair enough, but why Wandsworth)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14/01/2018 at 4:27 PM, iamnumerate said:

Even if they are genuine why should they be given a place in Wandsworth? (If they are genuine fair enough, but why Wandsworth)?

Why not Wandsworth? IMO it's best if eveywhere has to take their share (in proportion to their existing population, and putting aside more general issues about how legitimate the claims to refugee status are etc.)  Why should cheap areas have proportionally more of their housing used for housing refugees, just so the wealthy don't have to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Riedquat said:

Why not Wandsworth? IMO it's best if eveywhere has to take their share (in proportion to their existing population, and putting aside more general issues about how legitimate the claims to refugee status are etc.)  Why should cheap areas have proportionally more of their housing used for housing refugees, just so the wealthy don't have to?

By putting them in a cheaper area it saves the tax payer money, isn't that a good thing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Brexit   463 members have voted

    1. 1. Since voting on the UK leaving the EU, have you reconsidered your position?


      • Voted remain, still want to remain
      • Voted remain, now want to leave
      • Voted leave, now want to remain
      • Voted leave, still want to leave

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic