What Does Asylum Cost?

[tbaldwin]

Why is it a bad thing for people to come here to get jobs, especially jobs that most people don't want to do? It doesn't bother me.

Giles..

Economic migration is a bad thing because it leads to poorer countries losing the people the need most.

Economic migration increases the competition for Jobs and Housing. In the UK there are well over 5 million people of working age Unemployed or Underemployed.

 

[syd mullet]

Asylum seekers are supposed to seek refuge in the first safe country they enter. How the hell do we have so many in the first place, they would all have passed through such safe terrotories.

 

[winterinmoscow]

Asylum seekers are supposed to seek refuge in the first safe country they enter. How the hell do we have so many in the first place, they would all have passed through such safe terrotories.

Well if one comes with an agent, one might not always get the choice and may be threatened by the agent: "do as I say, or else".

others might not know where they're going. Jump on a lorry somewhere, get off somewhere else...

Just possibilities like.

But why do you think we get so many?

 

[CyberRose]

Asylum seekers are supposed to seek refuge in the first safe country they enter. How the hell do we have so many in the first place, they would all have passed through such safe terrotories.

We don't have the most (Germany does) or the most per head (Holland does)

 

[TremulousTetra]

Asylum seekers are supposed to seek refuge in the first safe country they enter. How the hell do we have so many in the first place, they would all have passed through such safe terrotories.

that cannot possibly be true, where does you say an asylum seekers "are supposed to seek refuge in the safe country"? If there was some kind of legal or systemic obligation on refugees to claim asylum in the first safe country they come to, every single claim in this country would be bogus automatically and could be rejected.

Secondly, are you are saying you wish this method to be applied? If so then by default you are saying you do not want this country to accept any refugees, unless you have some other method. Do you have some other method so Britain could take its fair share of asylum seekers?

ResistanceMP3

 

[tbaldwin]

I think the UK should be proud that it has taken in so many genuine refugees over the years. But i dont think anybody can be proud of the way we have plundered developing countries for there most valuable resources. Imperialism goes on today with the most valuable resource from developing countries being skilled workers.

It is one thing to be in favour of giving refuge to people persecuted and tortured etc and quite another to be in favour of economic migration.

 

[TremulousTetra]

I think the UK should be proud that it has taken in so many genuine refugees over the years. But i dont think anybody can be proud of the way we have plundered developing countries for there most valuable resources. Imperialism goes on today with the most valuable resource from developing countries being skilled workers.

It is one thing to be in favour of giving refuge to people persecuted and tortured etc and quite another to be in favour of economic migration.

how many times do I have to agree with you Mr Baldwin?

ResistanceMP3

 

[fela fan]

But i dont think anybody can be proud of the way we have plundered developing countries for there most valuable resources. Imperialism goes on today with the most valuable resource from developing countries being skilled workers.

The europeans basically never stopped stealing from africa and asia did they.

Barbarians really. And i'm not forgetting that we have some great movements for justice in europe, but that's not accidental. It's a reaction to the deeds of our governments and their muderous and thieving actions.

Personally i can't think why anyone would want to move to england. The best direction is OUT.

 

[TremulousTetra]

The europeans basically never stopped stealing from africa and asia did they.

Barbarians really. And i'm not forgetting that we have some great movements for justice in europe, but that's not accidental. It's a reaction to the deeds of our governments and their muderous and thieving actions.

Personally i can't think why anyone would want to move to england. The best direction is OUT.

No you are wrong! It is nothing to do with being European, if the boot was on the other foot and Africa had developed capitalism first, they would be doing exactly the same thing to Europeans. That is what a multinational has to do, put profits FIRST!. It's the nature of the beast my friend.

I cannot understand why anyone in England would not want them to come , when it is quite plain the increase in economic migration to this country has coincided exactly with this countries rise in the economic league tables. Plainly UK Plc benefits from economic migration.

ResistanceMP3

 

[Giles]

Economic migration is a bad thing because it leads to poorer countries losing the people the need most.

So, if you lived in a poor country, you wouldn't mind being told that you couldn't go abroad to get a better job, then?

Giles..

 

[fela fan]

No you are wrong! It is nothing to do with being European, if the boot was on the other foot and Africa had developed capitalism first, they would be doing exactly the same thing to Europeans. That is what a multinational has to do, put profits FIRST!. It's the nature of the beast my friend.

But you can only assume mate. The boot was never on the other foot. And to say that is mere conjecture.

They have far more music culture reality heart than the invading europeans.

 

[tbaldwin]

So, if you lived in a poor country, you wouldn't mind being told that you couldn't go abroad to get a better job, then?

Giles..[/QUOTE With all due respect Giles not exactly a very advanced arguement..

I dont blame anybody for wanting to improve their life chances.In the same position i would do the same thing.

But the effect of supporting free market policies on migration is having an awful effect internationally.
Taking the resources poorer countries need most is something that i think we should be totally opposed too.

 

[Giles]

So, if you lived in a poor country, you wouldn't mind being told that you couldn't go abroad to get a better job, then?

Giles..[/QUOTE With all due respect Giles not exactly a very advanced arguement..

I dont blame anybody for wanting to improve their life chances.In the same position i would do the same thing.

But the effect of supporting free market policies on migration is having an awful effect internationally.
Taking the resources poorer countries need most is something that i think we should be totally opposed too.

But people aren't "resources" in the same way that animals, minerals and produce are!

We are talking about intelligent human beings who can make their own choices about what they want in life, not livestock.

No-one goes to a country and rounds them up as slaves.

How do you propose preventing someone from leaving their home nation in search of a better standard of living?

If a person wants to go and live or work somewhere else, by what right to do you think you can say "no, sorry, you are a resource that belongs to this country, and you can't leave"?

Giles..

 

[Blagsta]

But people aren't "resources" in the same way that animals, minerals and produce are!

Capitalism treats them as such.

 

[Giles]

Capitalism treats them as such.

That's a valid point, although it doesn't really answer my questions.

Giles..

 

[TremulousTetra]

But you can only assume mate. The boot was never on the other foot. And to say that is mere conjecture.

They have far more music culture reality heart than the invading europeans.

it is not conjecture, it is observable scientific fact. You give me one example of a multinational capitalist company that does not put profit first, and I will show you an example of a multinational capitalist company that is about to be bought out and assets stripped. This is the nature of the capitalist beast, it doesn't matter on which continent it operates.

Respect ResistanceMP3

 

[Pigeon]

We don't have the most (Germany does) or the most per head (Holland does)

Actually, worldwide, the majority of refugees are in countries like Pakistan and Chad.

 

[TremulousTetra]

That's a valid point, although it doesn't really answer my questions.

Giles..

exactly! Mr Baldwin always ignores the fact that the left constantly agree with everything he is saying about Third World plunder, that is not in dispute. And then he wonders why people get exasperated with his tedious regurgitation of the same argument over and over.in the end Mr Baldwin thus have to move on the debate and deal with this question.

But people aren't "resources" in the same way that animals, minerals and produce are!

We are talking about intelligent human beings who can make their own choices about what they want in life, not livestock.

No-one goes to a country and rounds them up as slaves.

How do you propose preventing someone from leaving their home nation in search of a better standard of living?

If a person wants to go and live or work somewhere else, by what right to do you think you can say "no, sorry, you are a resource that belongs to this country, and you can't leave"?

Giles..

no one is ignoring the fact that there is an economic slavery taking place here, what we are questioning is why should the punitive measures be taken against workers instead of against capitalist?

Respect ResistanceMP3

 

[kyser_soze]

Well the average asylum seeker gets about two-thirds of the basic income support level to live on, about £40 a week I think. According to this 13 month old Beeb report there were 393,800 asylum applications in the UK over the past year, that means that to give the pittance given to asylum seekers in this country costs just over £1.5M a year, or 0.025% of the annual cost of the war in Iraq that you quote.

Where did you leave your calculator?

£40x52 = £2080 pa per claimant
£2080x393,800=£819,104,000 p.a before other social costs such as housing, healthcare, adminstration of claims etc, so you're probably looking at upwards of £2bn a year.

Not that this matters of course, but I thought the math could do with some correcting...

fela, a good way of assessing how Africa would have behaved in the theorectical 'boot on the other foot' situation can take two approaches:

(BTW, I'm assuming you are talking about sub-Saharan Africa here?)

1. See how African nations behaved toward each other before the arrival of the Europeans (war, expolitation, slavery)

2. See how any society that achieves economic, military and cultural might behaves toward other, less well equipped societies.

You'll find that human history is populated with a story of exploitation and murder. To argue that one set of peoples are somehow morally superior for having been defeated and enslaved by another without referring to their own history. That and the point that any culture/society that still exists has, at some point, been involved in fucking someone else over.

Regards economic migration...if someone wants to go work in another country I think it's wrong to stop them. If someone is coerced into moving somewhere to work that's wrong.

 

[fela fan]

it is not conjecture, it is observable scientific fact. You give me one example of a multinational capitalist company that does not put profit first, and I will show you an example of a multinational capitalist company that is about to be bought out and assets stripped. This is the nature of the capitalist beast, it doesn't matter on which continent it operates.

Respect ResistanceMP3

They may put profit first, but they can only make profit if people buy their product or service. They will always alter their behaviour in keeping with the demands or otherwise of their buyers.

So for what you say to be true, it would mean that an eastern buddhist would behave towards the consumption culture (ie the west) in the same way as an indian sikh in the same way as an african tribesman in the same way as a pacific islander, and would have done so were they first to reach 'developed' nation status.

Can you be sure they would mate? Or do they have cultural values that would lead them down a different path? And remember that your comparison is not about now, it is about the west and now vs asia or africa in the past.

 

[fela fan]

That and the point that any culture/society that still exists has, at some point, been involved in fucking someone else over.

I think you're wrong here mate. I can't be certain of my claims, but i'd say there are plenty of examples of societies not fucking others over. My guess would be in australia, north america, parts of asia, parts of south america, not sure about africa.

Obviously we'd need to look at those places before the europeans got there.

 

[fela fan]

How do you propose preventing someone from leaving their home nation in search of a better standard of living?

If a person wants to go and live or work somewhere else, by what right to do you think you can say "no, sorry, you are a resource that belongs to this country, and you can't leave"?

Giles..

It is one of the worst impositions that humans have put on other humans. It is a dreadful crime, and a massive abuse of power.

Can i just add mate that some people leave their home nation for a different standard of living, not just a 'better' one. Plenty of people leave developed nations to go live in third world ones and developing ones. I'm one of them.

[so the brain drain i've read about on this thread works both ways!]

 

[tbaldwin]

exactly! Mr Baldwin always ignores the fact that the left constantly agree with everything he is saying about Third World plunder, that is not in dispute. Respect ResistanceMP3

Sorry rmp3 but that is miles from the truth. The Orthodox Left in the UK accept free market migration policies which i totally reject.
I am against economic migration and most of the Left are very pro it. Even to the ridiculous extent of supporting "Open Borders"

The Left is dominated by Liberalism and constantly ignores the effect of economic migration Internationally and what Class of people benefits most from the so called free movement of people.

 

[tbaldwin]

It is one of the worst impositions that humans have put on other humans. It is a dreadful crime, and a massive abuse of power.

The real crimes in my opinion are that so many people continue to die from hunger and preventable diseases every day. Issues like Iraq are totally insignificant in comparison.
Its also a disgrace that third world countries are losing the people they need most to the lure of the dollar and the euro.
The Free market leads to millions of people dying across the world. And free market migration policies add to this.
Regulating migration is not going to be great and some will undoubtedly lose out as a result but it is a whole better than plundering poor countries of skilled workers.

 

[kyser_soze]

I think you're wrong here mate. I can't be certain of my claims, but i'd say there are plenty of examples of societies not fucking others over. My guess would be in australia, north america, parts of asia, parts of south america, not sure about africa.

Obviously we'd need to look at those places before the europeans got there.

Australia is difficult because of the lack of much written history from the Aboriginals, but the Maori's were a conquernig race; China was dominated by the the Han millenia ago; The North American indians fought wars among each other, as did the Aztecs, Mayans etc. India I'm not sure about, but happy, fluffy societies don't produce rigidly entrenched caste systems.

Mankind's history is a cascading succession of wars of conquest over resources and the need for space - both physical and cultural (in the case of religion). The societies that are around today have conquered and before being conquered by someone else have managed to build enough resource to com through to the other side.

You seem to have this twisted view of history that Europe was the only region to produce imperialist states and subjugated others - it wasn't, it's just the most recently successful and as such the easiest to point at.

 

[Giles]

The real crimes in my opinion are that so many people continue to die from hunger and preventable diseases every day. Issues like Iraq are totally insignificant in comparison.
Its also a disgrace that third world countries are losing the people they need most to the lure of the dollar and the euro.
The Free market leads to millions of people dying across the world. And free market migration policies add to this.
Regulating migration is not going to be great and some will undoubtedly lose out as a result but it is a whole better than plundering poor countries of skilled workers.

Well, I think that if you asked most people, anywhere in the world, whether they would prefer:

a) to be able to go and live and work wherever they wanted.

or

b) to be told, sorry, because you were born here, you belong to us, and as an important state resource you cannot be allowed to leave. We own you, in the same way that a farmer owns his cows and pigs.

I think I know which most people would go for, don't you?

Do you think British people should not be allowed to emigrate or temporarily work somewhere else (surely we are just as much "resources" belonging to Tony Blair?), or does your desire to have people ordered to stay in their country of birth only apply to poor countries?

Giles..

 

[TremulousTetra]

They may put profit first, but they can only make profit if people buy their product or service. They will always alter their behaviour in keeping with the demands or otherwise of their buyers.

So for what you say to be true, it would mean that an eastern buddhist would behave towards the consumption culture (ie the west) in the same way as an indian sikh in the same way as an african tribesman in the same way as a pacific islander, and would have done so were they first to reach 'developed' nation status.

Can you be sure they would mate? Or do they have cultural values that would lead them down a different path? And remember that your comparison is not about now, it is about the west and now vs asia or africa in the past.

yes, I think we can be fairly sure if we observe history as any scientists should. For example, if you look at the Christian religion, and history, you will see that the Jews played an important part in Christian society because Christians were banned from "banking". So what? Well I think this shows morality, standards, culture etc etc, are a function of class society. as capitalism proved to be the best at maximising the amount of well-being the maximum number of people could experience, so the standards of what was right and wrong in Christian society were changed. Banking, was no longer considered to be wrong.

There are many other examples of how religions/culture/standards were moulded and formed by class interests if you're interested in reading about them.

Respect ResistanceMP3

PS. There is already in a thread on this topic, "what is morality" and "how is culture formed" in the "new workers party" thread.

PPS. I am using the word function in the way economists use the word. For example supply is a function of demand, in other words supply it as a result of demand. I am not talking down to you, I just do not know what you know, and so just trying to explain what I'm saying.

 

[TremulousTetra]

Sorry rmp3 but that is miles from the truth. The Orthodox Left in the UK accept free market migration policies which i totally reject.
I am against economic migration and most of the Left are very pro it. Even to the ridiculous extent of supporting "Open Borders"

The Left is dominated by Liberalism and constantly ignores the effect of economic migration Internationally and what Class of people benefits most from the so called free movement of people.

you are still not answering a question from Giles.

well I think it would be illogical for the left to take the position you say, but for the sake of argument let us accept what you're saying. Now, I give you my word that I accept everything you are saying about the economic plunder of the Third World, so answer Giles question for me.

Respect ResistanceMP3

 

[TremulousTetra]

Well, I think that if you asked most people, anywhere in the world, whether they would prefer:

a) to be able to go and live and work wherever they wanted.

or

b) to be told, sorry, because you were born here, you belong to us, and as an important state resource you cannot be allowed to leave. We own you, in the same way that a farmer owns his cows and pigs.

I think I know which most people would go for, don't you?

Do you think British people should not be allowed to emigrate or temporarily work somewhere else (surely we are just as much "resources" belonging to Tony Blair?), or does your desire to have people ordered to stay in their country of birth only apply to poor countries?

Giles..

this is the question I always ask most people who are against immigration too. Especially the right wingers (not suggesting anyone here is one of them).

 

[fela fan]

Well, I think that if you asked most people, anywhere in the world, whether they would prefer:

a) to be able to go and live and work wherever they wanted.

or

b) to be told, sorry, because you were born here, you belong to us, and as an important state resource you cannot be allowed to leave. We own you, in the same way that a farmer owns his cows and pigs.

I think I know which most people would go for, don't you?

Do you think British people should not be allowed to emigrate or temporarily work somewhere else (surely we are just as much "resources" belonging to Tony Blair?), or does your desire to have people ordered to stay in their country of birth only apply to poor countries?

Giles..

I think you've misunderstood me giles.

In answer to a) i think anyone should be able to go anywhere they choose to

and to b) this is a crime.

I left britain to go find a better life. I want people of all nationalities to have that opportunity. No borders for me mate. No passports, no visas, no immigration, no customs. That's the kind of free trade and free people i wish to see.

I'm a bit confused at your reply mate, unless you were talking to tbaldwin, but you did quote me

[Incidentally i think most people in the world don't want to leave where they're born, assuming clothes shelter and food are no problem.]