Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

interestrateripoff

Danish Parliament Approves Plan To Seize Assets From Refugees

Recommended Posts

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/26/danish-parliament-approves-plan-to-seize-assets-from-refugees

European states have reacted in some of the most drastic ways yet to the continent’s biggest migration crisis since the second world war, with Denmark enacting a law that allows police to seize refugees’ assets.

The vote in the Danish parliament on Tuesday, which followed similar moves in Switzerland and southern Germany, came as central European leaders amplified calls to seal the borders of the Balkans, a move that would risk trapping thousands of asylum seekers in Greece.

Under the new Danish law, police will be allowed to search asylum seekers on arrival in the country and confiscate any non-essential items worth more than 10,000 kroner (£1,000) that have no sentimental value to their owner.

The centre-right government said the procedure is intended to cover the cost of each asylum seeker’s treatment by the state, and mimics the handling of Danish citizens on welfare.

This appears a very dangerous slippery slope we are on. First they came for the refugees.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any refugee falling under this rule should demand a fully itemised list of their processing/welfare costs in return for their possessions, and have the full right to challenge the Danish government for any costs that seem excessive, inefficient or unreasonable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is exactly the same thing that they demand from Danish citizens who have assets and are trying to claim welfare.

Subtle difference. They can demand from a Dane, but not search them. Its a reasonable idea in principle, but I'd definitely challenge them to justify the 'costs' of welfare provision if it isn't directly given in cash to sort themselves out, as it presumably is to Dame claiming welfare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any refugee falling under this rule should demand a fully itemised list of their processing/welfare costs in return for their possessions, and have the full right to challenge the Danish government for any costs that seem excessive, inefficient or unreasonable.

Erm. No.

Anybody who wants to come into my house, has to come under MY RULES! If you don't like it then stay where you are.

Good God man! Are we all communists or something? :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Erm. No.

Anybody who wants to come into my house, has to come under MY RULES! If you don't like it then stay where you are.

Good God man! Are we all communists or something? :lol:

Well if i come to your house, ask to stay and you search me, confiscate my shit, then suggest to all the other guests I'm pondlife thats eating you out of house and home whilst giving me bread and water, the very least I'd want is a breakdown of what your costs of housing me really are ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If someone from a war zone has proper wealth they would have left ages ago, not travel across the med in a sinking wreck. They won't be carrying wealth either, it'll be transferred out beforehand.

This will generate no money at all for the Danish state, its just a nasty policy designed to get a few votes at the expense of those with little to begin with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if i come to your house, ask to stay and you search me, confiscate my shit, then suggest to all the other guests I'm pondlife thats eating you out of house and home whilst giving me bread and water, the very least I'd want is a breakdown of what your costs of housing me really are ;-)

And I would tell you to do one!

Especially if I already had 1,100,000 people in my front room. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I would tell you to do one!

Especially if I already had 1,100,000 people in my front room. :P

Well you better give me my shit back then. Whoops - what's that, you've sold it to pay the latest interest payments on the national debt to your banker mates? Not my problem mate. Give me back my Leica or I'll loot your stuff now. This is just one of the slippery slopes the OP was alluding to.

I can see you ooze compassion for people less fortunate. And we wonder why the society is full of rentier scum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If someone from a war zone has proper wealth they would have left ages ago, not travel across the med in a sinking wreck. They won't be carrying wealth either, it'll be transferred out beforehand.

This will generate no money at all for the Danish state, its just a nasty policy designed to get a few votes at the expense of those with little to begin with.

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see you ooze compassion for people less fortunate. And we wonder why the society is full of rentier scum.

These people are the fodder for the rentier scum... :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see you ooze compassion for people less fortunate. And we wonder why the society is full of rentier scum.

You're ignoring the fact that refugee camps have been set up provide a (relatively) safe place for them to shelter from the war. The majority have no need to travel to Europe for their own safety. They are economic migrants. From other posts about this subject it seems obvious a large number of these migrants do not want to integrate into our culture. There are so many examples of how their presence will turn our countries into the very places they do not want to stay .

Why should any European country not try to dissuade them from entering their country?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why should any European country not try to dissuade them from entering their country?

Exactly! - Or do you prefer this....

Kent Council is having to place children in its care system with other counties because young asylum seekers are taking up its capacity.

Council chiefs say they have no choice but to place local youngsters elsewhere due to the influx from across the English Channel of those aged under 18 seeking sanctuary.
Kent County Council (KCC) currently has 924 unaccompanied asylum seeking children (UASC) in its care.
The number has risen from nearly 630 at the start of last August.
Councillor Peter Oakford, KCC's cabinet member for specialist children's services, said the number of children being looked after by the council had risen by 30% in the last seven months.
He told a council committee: "This has affected our ability to place citizen children within Kent ourselves.

"Citizen children"? - Peter Oakford you *******.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On that I can definitely agree.

The multimillionaire boss of the housing firm at the centre of the asylum seekers’ red doors storm was tonight accused of profiting from refugees’ misery.

Say what?

Asked if he believed the issue had been “blown out of all proportion”, Mr Monk said: “I do think it has been blown - a lot has been made of it.”

Committee members lined up to criticise Mr Monk , with chairman Keith Vaz blasting his “unsatisfactory evidence”.
The Labour MP accused him of behaving like “Pontius Pilate”, saying he tried to blame G4S, the Home Office and the Press for the row.
Fellow backbencher David Winnick said the businessman had a “complacent attitude”.
And Labour MP Chuka Umunna told him: “You buy up cheap homes in some of the most deprived communities and you’re making money out of housing some of the most vulnerable and poor people in some of the most deprived and poor places in our country.

Why doesn't he give them free housing, like we have to?

Source:- http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/red-doors-row-millionaire-stuart-7251153

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/26/danish-parliament-approves-plan-to-seize-assets-from-refugees

This appears a very dangerous slippery slope we are on. First they came for the refugees.....

Actually in Denmark first they came for everyone else on benefits and asked them to contribute. However don't let facts get in the way of a good rhetoric

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If someone from a war zone has proper wealth they would have left ages ago, not travel across the med in a sinking wreck. They won't be carrying wealth either, it'll be transferred out beforehand.

This will generate no money at all for the Danish state, its just a nasty policy designed to get a few votes at the expense of those with little to begin with.

If someone was a genuine refugee than this is the case, yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This appears a very dangerous slippery slope we are on. First they came for the refugees.....

What a load of baloney.

Denmark is the most progressive and liberal democracy on the planet and always tops league tables.

Get your tinfoil hat recalibrated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a load of baloney.

Denmark is the most progressive and liberal democracy on the planet and always tops league tables.

Get your tinfoil hat recalibrated.

Denmark tops the scales for social mobility in the developed world while the UK comes near the bottom. In that respect you can see why it might be attractive to some people. As a consequence the Danes are probably justified in collaring asylum seekers assets because if they are given leave to stay they are going to benefit from the fact they are living in a society where they have a very good chance of realising a better future. By contrast migrants who come to the UK and are settled outside of London as inevitably happens now are probably just condemning their children to being poor in an increasingly wet country where it looks pretty certain that the power will soon be going off.

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/may/22/social-mobility-data-charts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/26/danish-parliament-approves-plan-to-seize-assets-from-refugees

This appears a very dangerous slippery slope we are on. First they came for the refugees.....

No it's not.

A "refuge" with the latest iphone345899. Refuge, ********.

Those are opportunists that are pretending to flee from war zones when instead they come from relatively peaceful and relatively well off countries such as Algeria and Morocco.

Given that if they were gay then there would be a case of danger if they satyed in their home countries, but I doubt that the 800,000 men that have illegally crossed into Europe are benders, after cologne it's been proven that they are not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff at an Austrian swimming pool have been told to “pay attention” after a horrified mother caught a migrant sexually assaulting her three year old son in the children’s pool.

The latest migrant sex violence outrage took place at the Linz baths, where a 36 year old mother of three identified only as ‘Sandra F’ by Austrian paper Kronen Zeitung was paddling with her children, a ten year old daughter and two sons aged three and six. She told the paper: “I had noticed six foreigners aged between 30 and 40 years old in the indoor pool. Two were sitting on the edge of the children’s pool.

source: http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/01/21/yet-another-migrant-on-child-sex-attack-at-a-european-indoor-pool/

Above link, "poor refugees" molesting and robbing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Denmark tops the scales for social mobility in the developed world while the UK comes near the bottom. In that respect you can see why it might be attractive to some people. As a consequence the Danes are probably justified in collaring asylum seekers assets because if they are given leave to stay they are going to benefit from the fact they are living in a society where they have a very good chance of realising a better future. By contrast migrants who come to the UK and are settled outside of London as inevitably happens now are probably just condemning their children to being poor in an increasingly wet country where it looks pretty certain that the power will soon be going off.

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/may/22/social-mobility-data-charts

Well Britain is a much bigger, more urbanised society than Denmark that has a relatively entrenched class system, with collapsed traditional manufacturing industries that were bigger than Denmark's, so more gulfs and lower social mobility is expected. The UK is a huge migrant magnet because low paying jobs and the welfare system is more easier to access for incoming people (which is unsustainable and fermenting political extremism).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Next General Election   90 members have voted

    1. 1. When do you predict the next general election will be held?


      • 2019
      • 2020
      • 2021
      • 2022

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


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.