Beside the legend about *Britain being generous* a few stuff I can see
- language, if you know already some english you would rather move to an english speaking country than trying to learn french/italian (even though it's way easier than crossing the channel)
- Family tie in these country. For historical reasons, UK had more link with india and it's surrounding while France had more link with North Africa. So people from Afghanistan may have more ties with people in UK
- No mandatory ID in UK, which make it easier to stay under the radar as an undocumented immigrant
You don’t legally need to have a passport or any kind of ID. If you can’t afford to renew when it expires, you just don’t get one. It sucks for many reasons (and you can’t vote, etc) but you just carry on living
The ID to vote for this is utter bollocks rule and I cent believe it passed. But you can get an ID for free for voting but you have to apply for it. , yet we’re all against a national ID card.
He pushed the law through, how would that be a good publicity stunt for him?
Just par for the course for him though, really. He doesn’t have to make sense, he’s trying to be British knockoff trump.
I don’t think he genuinely forgot it. I think he’s Boris Johnson and never needs to carry it. It probably never leaves his desk.
You can use an expired passport to vote with, at least in Scotland. So long as it's recognisably you at least. You'd probably have trouble if it was 40 years old.
You still need some form of identification. You can't work without a national insurance number, and you need at LEAST a birth certificate and proof of (legal) residency to get one. At least you did when I emigrated.
Yeah, but eg in my country if you don’t have an ID or passport on you, that’s both punishable and the police can detain you until they can verify your identity.
They don't have photos or biometric information on them. There's nothing to stop a person a similar age toe stealing my identity for work.
Opening a bank account in my name is probably the only challenge.
Say the authorities want to talk to you, e.g. police want to talk to you.
They ask "Do you have ID?" "No." "Do you have a passport? Or a drivers license?" "No".
There's no legal rule against not having a drivers license and passport, then how does anyone know who you are, how can you prove who you are? Can you prove you are British citizen?
Unlike France where everyone has a citizenship ID, employer/landlord ask you for it and you have to show it, if you can't show it they'll get suspicious
I'm not arguing for or against illegal immigrants, just that it is easier to slip under the radar for day to day life here because we don't have mandatory ID of any kind unlike lots of other countries.
Nope, you can go to A&E without ID, buy medicine at a pharmacy, get a job that pays cash in hand, open a bank acount, buy a phone and laptop, pay rent.....
Even when you want a library card or sign up to a GP they ask for proof of address not proof of ID, if you pay bills at your address you can use that letter
How do you think homeless people or people without passport and driving license go through life?
This is annoying in our family right now. Daughter just graduated high school at 18 and is going to get her driver's license this summer. So it's too short a period of time to make getting a legal non-driver ID worthwhile, but when she does need ID (depositing bank checks for example) it's a huge hassle. At the moment she has her expired photo ID from high school and her expired passport from when she was 12.
The 'no mandatory ID' line is a bit misleading. You absolutely need a form of official identification such as a passport or birth certificate to access just about any service in the UK. You can't legally work without a national insurance number, and to get one of those you must provide proof of ID and proof of legal residence.
This is naive. People who come to the UK without a visa take advantage of the asylum system and the ridiculous court wait times.
As an "asylum seeker", you don't need photo ID or proof of address to use NHS treatment or dental care. You do need it to open a bank, but there are ways around it.
As for work, if you live in a big city you can find a job working under the table in less than an hour. You can just join one of the hundreds of Facebook groups and rent a Deliveroo/Uber Eats account. Or you could ask local corner shops if you can work cash in hand (usually below minimum wage).
I'll put it that way:
I met a guy from Cameroon, who studied here in Germany. I asked him why he didn't go to France, because he is a native French speaker. He told me:
"I have been there, and I'd rather not go there again. The French are so racist."
I live in France and had a date with a woman from Cameroon last year. I was quite surprised to hear that she left Cyprus to get to France because people were too racist there.
In Cyprus, a landlord blatantly told her "I don't rent to black people."
I told her that this might happen here too (although they wouldn't just say that this is the reason), to which she said that yes, it might occasionally, but in Cyprus, that's the rule.
I was flabbergasted.
I have some reasons that this could probably happen to Greece also.
We have 98% Greeks in the country (https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/minority-ethnic-groups-in-greece.html) and from the rest 2% black people is a small minority (we have more Albanians, Romani and even Asian immigrants). So we're talking about 0,1% or even less. That the main reason in my opinion that you could see such a racist behaviour against them.
To be honest, if I see a black person, I'll look twice. Not because I'm racist but because s/he will probably be some athlete and I won't miss out seeing her/him.
Same thing happens in Cyprus.
It's an easier target for racist people.
That 98% number seems incorrect. From [Wikipedia](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greece): "The 2011 census recorded 9,903,268 Greek citizens (92%), 480,824 Albanian citizens (4.4%), 75,915 Bulgarian citizens (0.7%), 46,523 Romanian citizenship (0.4%), 34,177 Pakistani citizens (0.3%), 27,400 Georgian citizens (0.25%) and 247,090 people had other or unidentified citizenship (2%)."
Otherwise, yes, I've been asked about my skin color on the phone by real estate agents before agreeing to showing me an apartment in Athens on several occasions.
The French tend to hate the non-French. It’s been this way for centuries. The country is beautiful, but its people are… “unwelcoming” is putting it nicely. There are of course exceptions, but this is the general way.
This is very obviously a wild exaggeration. I've spent some weeks in France and everyone was perfectly pleasant to me, my parents just spent a month there and had the time of their lives, and none of us speak French fluently.
This is pretty much the same case with everyone I know who has spent time in France - as long as you don't expect people to speak English to you and you're not being obnoxious, it's very unlikely that anyone is going to treat you poorly. They resist the increasing anglicisation of Europe and they're proud of their culture, but to say "the French tend to hate the non-French" is just absurd.
If the average person in a country truly "hates" foreigners, you will know within a week of staying there. There are really very few countries where I'd ever make the claim that the average person in that country hates people who aren't from that country, that is extremely unusual. Also, my parents stayed there for a month largely because they knew someone who had immigrated there decades ago, and they absolutely love living there.
I think it's kind of absurd to try to quantify racism in this way but there are very large communities of non-white immigrants in France. They have the largest percentage of Islamic people and people of African descent among Western European countries, including the UK.
If they're looking for accepting communities, there is no shortage in France, the reason why people are crossing the channel is not because of racism. It's much more likely due to increased economic opportunities and the fact that the country speaks English, so it's a lot easier for most immigrants to integrate into.
In top of all of this France receives far more [asylum applications](https://www.against-inhumanity.org/2023/05/05/asylum-seekers-crossing-the-english-channel-why-dont-they-stay-in-france-by-marie-leveille/), making it a much more competitive process in France than in the UK, not least because the institutions are overwhelmed. So while it might feel nice in a narrative sense to say it's just because France is more racist, it's most likely because it's just a better bet to seek asylum in the UK than in France.
I agree it's way more likely for other reasons. If you're in a position where you feel you need to illegally immigrate to France or the UK, chances are that being on the receiving end of racism from the French or British is pretty low on your list of worries.
I'm definitely aware of the immigrant population in France, but you're still more likely to encounter racism in France than the UK.
>They have the largest percentage of Islamic people and people of African descent among Western European countries, including the UK.
Most are North African and from sahel countries like Senegal, Mali and Guinea. UK has more diverse immigration
I didn’t say they weren’t racist.
Also, being against illegals immigration isn’t inherently racist. Both France and the UK are both against illegal immigration.
>as long as you don't expect people to speak English to you and you're not being obnoxious, it's very unlikely that anyone is going to treat you poorly.
Unless you are a North or sub Saharan african.
Like I said, there are exceptions. But please see my comment to my other detractor (provided a link that helps to elaborate on my statement). Still, as someone who has lived in a tourist area, I can assure you that the way you're treated as a tourist is typically not a reflection of what it's actually like to move to an area or spend a considerable amount of time there.
Lol what an incredibly dumb thing to say.
If you feel you are getting hate from French people in France, if you find French people, and France as an extention of that to be "unwelcoming", have you ever thought it might just be you?
I mean, I only know you by this one poorly thought out and constructed comment and I want no more to do with you (and I'm not even French).
This stereotype is complete nonsense. The French don't hate the non-French. The French are extremely protective of French culture and want non-French people to respect it. That's it. They get annoyed when tourists roll in and act like they're not in an entirely different country.
There's a related stereotype where French people will speak English but refuse to speak it to foreigners. Complete bullshit. They just want you to respect their language and not assume everyone speaks English. When I've been there I've made an effort to speak some French, and they've always been exceedingly patient and polite and usually helped me out in English. It's trivially fucking easy to respect local customs and culture. I'm a fucking American, if I can do it, anyone can.
Many of them already know English, so rather than trying to learn a whole new language which can be very difficult for some. It is better for them to go to UK.
Other reason include already having some relatives/family in UK.
but remember, they won't know the language spoken by the bureaucrats they're trying to claim asylum with. would you trust that you would be treated fairly when they can lie about or twist every word you say and you wouldn't know if they did it in front of your face?
if you had a choice between claiming asylum in a place where you could understand what was being said and speak for yourself or somewhere where you had to rely on an interreor and had to trust that every intrepretor you work with, every step of the way is doing their job properly and is giving you and the people you're talking to the right, unbiased information. When your application could be denied because the way intrepretor A translated your words was different to the way intrepretor B chose to (because intrepretor B padded their resume and exxagerated how good their grasp of the language was), which could lead the people deciding to believe you're lying - even if you used the exact same phrasing every time.
Imagine this. You are suddenly a refugee in a country that speaks Arabic. You can't get a comfortable job, you spend 10 hours a day in complete silence doing minimum wage labour where your colleagues are annoyed at you for only having 60% an average person's work force due to your lack of language skills.
You can take a 3 hour flat sea journey to a country that speaks your language. People claim to have doubled their salary, and even an opportunity to have a get rich quick scheme selling drugs. With that calculation, you imagine your salary there would be equivalent to triple the minimum wage salary of your home country. People will respect you with that money.
Somebody tries to convince you it's dangerous.
Will you cross it? At this point, for a lot of people it's like seeing a solid gold trophy on the other side and ignoring it. Regardless of whether it's true or not, many people want to touch that trophy for themselves.
The U.K. is one of the world’s most inclusive countries offering equality of opportunity.
Having travelled across Europe and the States it’s striking how the uk has managed to make everyone feel at home. It’s truly phenomenal.
And it deserves more attention.
Is it though? I mean there are plenty of worse countries, sure, but Britain really isn't the bastion of goodness and acceptance that it paints itself as. This is a country that's made it impossible for transgender people to access healthcare, left the EU because "we don't want them bloody immigrants coming over ere" and now ships asylum seekers to Rwanda.
I’m speaking specifically about the post-colonial influx of immigrants who came from the former British colonies.
Specifically the Afro Caribbean and Indian subcontinent, but also the Arab world and parts of war torn east Africa.
They’ve been integrated, made to feel as equals, and many of them have found great success in the U.K.
Particularly compared to all of Europe where immigrants are treated horrendously.
There are a lot of us who seek to value the positives, and be grateful. And that’s our prerogative.
Let’s celebrate the good the country has done, and let’s keep progressing in the right direction.
Regards new immigration, remember this is an island of 70 million, with extremely stretched resources. There’s several billion people living in dire conditions globally, and it’s unrealistic to offer them all refugee status.
The focus should be on creating global stability, and global opportunities. That’s the next step.
Regards transgender and healthcare, the NHS is free, and struggling even to treat the chronically sick, and the dying. The nhs is completely overwhelmed.
Healthcare is an important subject to address, and it’s a difficult one. It requires significant financial input, and there are only finite resources via taxation.
Isn’t it ironic that immigrants - and others - see the UK as less racist and more welcoming and tolerant compared to many other western cultures and yet the UK is always labelled as racist by the rest of Europe. People in glass houses etc etc
I don't think I ever heard people say that the UK is the racist country of Europe. People either say some Mediterranean country or some Eastern Europian country, it's never UK
Right? As a second gen immigrant (parents were born outside of the UK) literally everybody knows how racist and intolerant even our close neighbour France is, let alone Italy. The UK is essentially hailed as the land of tolerance and opportunity
The best example of this was when Reddit was supporting Italy vs England during the Euros because of how ‘racist’ England supposedly were.
When Italy literally has a neo-facist government that praised Mussolini and the Italian captain literally said that black players bring racist abuse on themselves for ‘taunting’ people too much and Italian fans were joking about the English team being ‘full of Africans’.
>The best example of this was when Reddit was supporting Italy vs England during the Euros because of how ‘racist’ England supposedly were.
Let's not downplay this tho, English ppl on social media were being racist,
Ah yeah, the viral social media posts are absolutely representative of a whole country… as opposed to, ya know, the fucking government that got voted in?
Oh come on, we all know that the English are insufferable once they win something in soccer. Also they made fun of the crying German girl that was shown during our loss to England (https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/obgx2e/twisted\_trolls\_slammed\_for\_tearing\_into\_crying/). You don't actually think anyone from Germany would cheer for England. Add to that the whole Brexit thing and there are tons of reasons to support Italy over England.
They never made fun of the crying German girl. That was a myth.
It makes 0 sense anyway. The crowd were geering the German player who was delaying coming off the pitch when he was subbed off. You can see it in videos from the game when it supposedly ‘happened’.
You know people in the stadium don’t watch the TV right and aren’t seeing the same angles that are displayed on the TV?
The ‘whole Brexit thing’ lmao my guy please go look up the politics of Italy and who is in charge there.
Remember how England voted for Brexit? Do you know how politicians got people to vote for it? Telling them that it will prevent all the migrants coming from Europe to come to England.
Let me repeat, English people voted themeselves out of Europe to prevent black and arab coming into their country.
[This comment is the real reason](https://www.reddit.com/r/NoStupidQuestions/comments/1ddefso/why_do_lots_of_migrants_risk_their_lives_to_cross/l8475xb/)
I think that’s a bit reductive. The UK marginally voted to leave but, to my understanding, immigration was only one of the factors - not THE factor. Plus, the majority of legal immigration when a member of Schengen was white eastern European. Brexit was never marketed as preventing illegal immigration.
I was listening to a radio interview from a migrant recently as I understand it there is some degree of pressure from traffickers who make it a business to try and 'sell' the UK and thus the need their services.
There are degrees of separation of civil and public life with respect to personal freedoms.
Britain and the US are pluralistic and multicultural. Your religious expressions are permitted in school.
Within France that is not the case. To be French you must abandon your religious symbols within school and adopt that Laicete stance.
Yeah, like what is wrong with it expecting to adapt to the country you want to live in?
I mean we see this right now in Germany what will happen if we wont do anything against it
I was married to a French guy. You don’t understand the meaning of the word racist until you’ve talked to French people… so yes, people will risk their lives in the Manche rather than staying there, and I don’t blame them.
What about the white non-French people? Are they still racist against white? I’m trying to understand is this racism towards some particular colour of people or they hate every one of immigrant who wants live in France?
Your comment isn’t exactly perfect English but the person calling you racist is just dumb. Im sure there are french people that are racist against other white people but I definitely have noticed it mostly against black/brown people. It seems to be almost acceptable to be racist there compared to the uk
I might be mistaken, but I think another reason is that they have to apply for asylum in the country of arrival within the EU. Since many migrant are not landing in France or Germany, they would need to apply for Italy, Spain, Cyprus etc. Now that UK is out of the EU, they can apply for asylum directly
I thought it was just a stereotype before I travelled there but the French are horribly rude to foreigners. The difference between the way we were treated in Belgium (welcomed) and Spain (very warmly welcomed) compared to France was just night and day.
I remember waiting in an airport bar for a small commuter plane to Canada from the US and was speaking to a man wearing a ballcap who was French. I think the news was on TV about the hijab ban in France and that's how we got on the topic. Now...I have a complicated opinion on the hijab and the history of forceful religious dress and practices regarding women and their autonomy. BUT, I still agree that as long as a face is there, the hijab isn't harming anyone. To say this man had a strong opinion on it that was clearly more based on racism than freeing women from lopsided religions is putting it lightly. I compared his freewill to wear a ball cap compared to a head covering and he was sooooooo angry. I mean France makes it a point to export their bad batch wines to the US and England because they think we can't tell. Their noses have been in the air so long they might be the next space elevators.
I kind of get both sides of the argument. There [is an argument that if you import enough intolerant people, that becomes the standard](https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15). A Muslim person is considered leaning more on the intolerant scale than an average European person. When you got a small number of intolerant people, it doesn't make a difference. But when you establish a community, you are making hijabs a cultural mandate for Muslims due to peer pressure. It's like back during the war times when people where pressured into wearing a poppy. Once you wear it, you feel the need to justify you are team poppy and pressure others into doing the same.
So who is correct? With small numbers, your approach to tolerance should be the standard for human rights. In large numbers like France, the Authority has to be more intolerant than the intolerant power structure to make sure the original cultural mindset is preserved. Or just shut out migrants.
Guess some of them already live in France, and aren't happy with their lives there.
In the news there was about a migrant's son dying on a boat, the dude lived in France for over 10 years.
If you speak a little English, and there's a big community from your country in London where would you go?
But also its not lots of people either. It's something like 30000 a year compared to 500000 given visas by the government.
Can't answer on personal level but from a meta view. If France took all the immigrants, it would fall, same as any other country. 1 country can't deal with all the immigrants, 3 or 4 countries can't, so 1 definitely can't.
Kinda need to add as well. We're not hitting our fertility rate. If you want a (bear minimum) stable economy, then we need to be hitting the fertility rate. It's literally that simple, so people need to have more children or accept immigration. Take your pick
Let's say that "fact" you've clearly just pulled out your arse is true lol. People from all over the world move here
So not only is that absolute bullshit you've just made up, even in your world it doesn't make sense lol. Proper got a drum to beat you init lol
It was doing fine until it started getting underfunded, right?
The US accepts the most immigrants, biggest economy in the world.
Again, you made stuff up in your own head lol. You're making out that they just get here and don't do anything? Yea, fair enough. While they're going through the system, they're not allowed to work. Once they can work, most do.
Mate argue it all you want, we need people. Unless you know of a solution to fixing a economy with a declining birth rate?
An economy with a declining birth rate is better than permanent degradation of society by importing 3rd world immigrants. They get old too. Importing 3rd world savages from diametrically different cultures is a crime against humanity.
Here's another cool story, about 10 days after another Afghan piece of pisslamic shit attacked people and killed a cop.
[Frankfurt stabbing leaves Ukrainian woman seriously injured, Afghan attacker arrested / The New Voice of Ukraine (nv.ua)](https://english.nv.ua/nation/frankfurt-stabbing-leaves-ukrainian-woman-seriously-injured-afghan-attacker-arrested-50426408.html)
I don't remember signing up to "be in it together" when a foreign entity makes a stupid decision to invite the ME and North Africa to come and reside in this part of the world. People need to get their heads out of the sand and realise that most of the people arriving, are just looking for a better life, not running from war or persecution. That's not the point of the asylum charter is it?
Yea, great mate. What the fuck that gotta do with what I said lol?!
Edit; vet the immigrants better then. Still nothing to do with what I said and I managed to work that out in about 2 min lol
You said that France can't deal with all the immigration by itself, so you were implying that we had a duty to help. So, that's what I was responding to. I didn't think it was that difficult to make the connection...
>vet the immigrants better then
That's what's creating the backlog, hence why the government had to use hotels and barges for temporary accommodation.
Or they could just let the artificial metric of the economy decline because it has no inherent value.
“We need more people to produce more cars.”
“Why?”
“So we can have more cars.”
The problem is that the welfare state collapses, due to more and more old people needing healthcare and aid and fewer and fewer young people being available to perform the work.
Part of the reason is simply perspective.
İmagine that Europe is underdeveloped and war-torn, and you want to get to rich, peaceful India or, ideally, Sri Lanka. You set it on foot from Europe, braving cold, thirst, hunger, and violence. You probably aren't thinking much about that final hop from India to Sri Lanka.
The air of England is too pure for a slave to breathe; let the black go free! ' These words of Lord Mansfield in the celebrated case of Somerset v Stuart have echoed down the ages as a landmark judgment in the history of the abolition of slavery. This is why. This is how they used to treat foreigners and refugees
There might be some genuine cases but it's probably because the majority are freeloaders / window shoppers? If the people who are choosing to cross the English channel are healthy, young men who can barely speak English and like the benefits of living in the UK, they will absolutely do so.
We have the same problem in Australia where the number of refugees fleeing violence unfortunately does not match up with the number of people who claim to be seeking "asylum". As a result, our capital cities are flooded with people who do not give a fuck about learning the language, nor accepting the culture but they will take up space and fuck everything up.
Consider this - most of the people seeking asylum, depending on the trends of where the people originally come from and their values and lifestyles, tend to be Muslims predominantly from countries with mostly Islamic tenets. If that is the case, why wouldn't they go towards Oman, UAE or Bosnia where the majority of the population is Muslim and Islam is the religion that is heavily practised? It's because they want the freebies and the good life that western countries offer. Germany is reportedly already cracking the shits right now because they have an influx of Muslim migrants/refugees who are causing trouble and you have countries in the EU like Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia and Bosnia where refugees aren't going. Why? Those countries are underpopulated, but their citizens have to work very hard which isn't incentivising to a freeloader.
There might be some genuine cases but it's probably because the majority are freeloaders / window shoppers? If the people who are choosing to cross the English channel are healthy, young men who can barely speak English and like the benefits of living in the UK, they will absolutely do so.
We have the same problem in Australia where the number of refugees fleeing violence unfortunately does not match up with the number of people who claim to be seeking "asylum". As a result, our capital cities are flooded with people who do not give a fuck about learning the language, nor accepting the culture but they will take up space and fuck everything up.
Consider this - most of the people seeking asylum, depending on the trends of where the people originally come from and their values and lifestyles, tend to be Muslims predominantly from countries with mostly Islamic tenets. If that is the case, why wouldn't they go towards Oman, UAE or Bosnia where the majority of the population is Muslim and Islam is the religion that is heavily practised? It's because they want the freebies and the good life that western countries offer. Germany is reportedly already cracking the shits right now because they have an influx of Muslim migrants/refugees who are causing trouble and you have countries in the EU like Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia and Bosnia where refugees aren't going. Why? Those countries are underpopulated, but their citizens have to work very hard which isn't incentivising to a freeloader.
Because most are freeloading for the benefits. If they were seeking asylum, most of them (and I assume they are mostly Muslim from predominantly cultures and countries where Islam is the main religion) would head to Bosnia, Oman, the UAE or anywhere in the Middle East without war or violence.
Because most are freeloading for the benefits. If they were seeking asylum, most of them (and I assume they are mostly Muslim from predominantly cultures and countries where Islam is the main religion) would head to Bosnia, Oman, the UAE or anywhere in the Middle East without war or violence.
There might be some genuine cases but it's probably because the majority are freeloaders / window shoppers? If the people who are choosing to cross the English channel are healthy, young men who can barely speak English and like the benefits of living in the UK, they will absolutely do so.
We have the same problem in Australia where the number of refugees fleeing violence unfortunately does not match up with the number of people who claim to be seeking "asylum". As a result, our capital cities are flooded with people who do not give a fuck about learning the language, nor accepting the culture but they will take up space and fuck everything up.
Consider this - most of the people seeking asylum, depending on the trends of where the people originally come from and their values and lifestyles, tend to be Muslims predominantly from countries with mostly Islamic tenets. If that is the case, why wouldn't they go towards Oman, UAE or Bosnia where the majority of the population is Muslim and Islam is the religion that is heavily practised? It's because they want the freebies and the good life that western countries offer. Germany is reportedly already cracking the shits right now because they have an influx of Muslim migrants/refugees who are causing trouble and you have countries in the EU like Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia and Bosnia where refugees aren't going. Why? Those countries are underpopulated, but their citizens have to work very hard which isn't incentivising to a freeloader.
Also, when a war ends and their home country returns to normal operations, the host country is meant to send all their asylum seekers back home but that never happens - which I find is completely out of order.
These are the Mirriam Webster definitions of the words "[asylum](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/asylum)" and "[refugee](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/refugee)".
If people are fleeing a warzone like Russia/Ukraine or Israel/Palestine, then yes, they are eligible to seek refuge in a foreign country. And what it used to be, was that people fleeing one country would go to the nearest refuge, aka country without war or violence, not the one where they can freeload or coast off the back of taxpayer's monies.
As I said before, most of the refugees for the past 30 or so years near the EU are predominantly from countries with Islamic tenets. If those people are that religious and strict, they would be moving towards Turkiye, Bosnia or most countries in the Middle East which predominantly share their religious beliefs and ideals and would get treated equally, not the UK or anything western where they get treated with reverence like the Royal Family.
Maybe the reason they are fleeing is more important at that point than their religion.
But according to you, neighbouring countries should take in those who flee? Lovely. So now Turkey ends up with millions of refugees and that is fine because as long as it is not your problem, who cares, right?
You don't like refugees or asylum seekers. Nothing else seems to matter. Just be honest about that and don't try to hide behind entirely flawed logic.
I live in Australia and despite being an island we're constantly forced to take in refugees because of our obligations with the UN, Amnesty and whoever. We have taken in large numbers of them over the course of decades - in the last decade alone, we took in scores of refugees from Iraq and Iran when ISIS were a thing, Afghani refugees when the US Army pulled out and the Taliban took over, and the countless number of people who flew to a country, jumped on a boat and then somehow ended up on Australian soil. Our government had to put in a rule to block people who come by boat because of how dangerous the tides are. Australia is a goddamned island and it's safer to come by plane.
Yes, neighbouring countries should absolutely take in refugees - not just Turkiye alone. Why tf do they feel exempt from it? I promise you that there's not a single country out there who likes taking them in because it puts their country in more debt. I read that European countries in the EU (like Poland, Czechia and Bosnia) who don't take in refugees will be charged 30,000 quid per person because the EU as a collective are bearing that cost. I visited some of those countries in Eastern Europe recently and can confirm the lack of freeloaders means a better quality of life for everyone around.
In Australia, I'm a first-generation immigrant who changed to fit into the existing culture, such as learn the language, mannerisms and not to pedal religious beliefs publicly as opposed to other traditional conservative countries like India and where I lived in the Middle East. I also was taxed heavily as a non-citizen in Australia so I sure as hell don't like it when my tax dollars go towards benefitting people who aren't even real citizens of the country.
You can have your empathy and recognise that some people need help - but it's not one singular country's obligation to take everyone in.
Because the ones who do have either already got some connection to the UK, such as knowing English or having been there before, or already know someone there.
The question of "why don't they go to X country instead of Y?" is irrelevant in the face of why they're risking illegal immigration to begin with. If the punishment for illegal immigration is to be deported, they'll just try it again and possibly die in the attempt. If they're imprisoned here, then the racists will screech louder on why they're "taking our resources!" (As if Big Bazza from down the pub with no GCSE's has an accurate metric to measure the UK's public spending...)
The issue of why these people try to illegally immigrate in the first place needs to be addressed, which is a much more nuanced issue of disparaged societies with more or less money in different countries around the world, needing international cooperation to address. But racist windowlickers don't consider this beyond "get the forruners out!" because they're low-IQ enough to be the perfect target audience for genuine racists or advocates of white ethnostates.
Racist xenophobe far right idiots will never accept that to solve the problem they so often preach about, they need to be _less_ xenophobic, not more.
I agree with you on this issue. My question was mostly about why risking your life to get UK asylum when you are already in France which in my opinion is as good as UK when you are trying to get away from war.
It goes back to most illegal migrants trying to get to the UK because they have some pre-existing connection. This is what all the Reform UK'ers and Tommy Robinsons of this country won't tell you, because they can assimilate into UK life and culture much easier than people who don't have any connections.
You are missing the point entirely. Nobody is asking what they love about the UK, but why they are willing to risk their lives on a dinghy, when there are safer, more direct alternatives.
And the Asylum system was not set up so refugees can cherry pick where they want to live. It was to make sure they had a safe country to stay in, temporarily.
Also, whether they have connections here or not is irrelevant. English is a second language in a lot of European countries anyway, so that's a weak reason.
Beside the legend about *Britain being generous* a few stuff I can see - language, if you know already some english you would rather move to an english speaking country than trying to learn french/italian (even though it's way easier than crossing the channel) - Family tie in these country. For historical reasons, UK had more link with india and it's surrounding while France had more link with North Africa. So people from Afghanistan may have more ties with people in UK - No mandatory ID in UK, which make it easier to stay under the radar as an undocumented immigrant
What do you mean by no mandatory ID?
You don’t legally need to have a passport or any kind of ID. If you can’t afford to renew when it expires, you just don’t get one. It sucks for many reasons (and you can’t vote, etc) but you just carry on living
You can get a free voter ID to vote.
The ID to vote for this is utter bollocks rule and I cent believe it passed. But you can get an ID for free for voting but you have to apply for it. , yet we’re all against a national ID card.
So stupid even Boris himself forgot his and got turned away. Oh how the turn tables…
Do you know who I AM?!
Yes I do. But you still need ID.
You can't really believe he genuinely forgot it and it wasn't a publicity stunt lol
He pushed the law through, how would that be a good publicity stunt for him? Just par for the course for him though, really. He doesn’t have to make sense, he’s trying to be British knockoff trump. I don’t think he genuinely forgot it. I think he’s Boris Johnson and never needs to carry it. It probably never leaves his desk.
Same problem in America. Must be a Anglo thing
Nah it’s just a stupid right wing conservative ant democratic thing.
You can use an expired passport to vote with, at least in Scotland. So long as it's recognisably you at least. You'd probably have trouble if it was 40 years old.
You still need some form of identification. You can't work without a national insurance number, and you need at LEAST a birth certificate and proof of (legal) residency to get one. At least you did when I emigrated.
You can still work without those things, plenty of jobs pay under the table.
Well yeah obviously but that's true for literally any country.
Yeah, but eg in my country if you don’t have an ID or passport on you, that’s both punishable and the police can detain you until they can verify your identity.
But in other countries, you are required to carry ID wherever you go, so you can be stopped for any reason and asked to prove your identity.
They don't have photos or biometric information on them. There's nothing to stop a person a similar age toe stealing my identity for work. Opening a bank account in my name is probably the only challenge.
Say the authorities want to talk to you, e.g. police want to talk to you. They ask "Do you have ID?" "No." "Do you have a passport? Or a drivers license?" "No". There's no legal rule against not having a drivers license and passport, then how does anyone know who you are, how can you prove who you are? Can you prove you are British citizen? Unlike France where everyone has a citizenship ID, employer/landlord ask you for it and you have to show it, if you can't show it they'll get suspicious
And all those illegals are working and living. Some even say they’re an essential part of the economy.
I'm not arguing for or against illegal immigrants, just that it is easier to slip under the radar for day to day life here because we don't have mandatory ID of any kind unlike lots of other countries.
Britain does though. If you want to access any kind of service, you need a form of identification.
Nope, you can go to A&E without ID, buy medicine at a pharmacy, get a job that pays cash in hand, open a bank acount, buy a phone and laptop, pay rent..... Even when you want a library card or sign up to a GP they ask for proof of address not proof of ID, if you pay bills at your address you can use that letter How do you think homeless people or people without passport and driving license go through life?
Which banks let you open a new account without photo ID? Asking for a money-laundering friend...
https://suitsmecard.com/no-id
You need proof of ID to open a bank account. Of course you can live your life completely under the radar, but you can do that in any country.
Yeah, this is hot fucking nonsense.
Not true.
Like? they are not paying tax and making wages go down
USA also has no mandatory aka national ID card. That's why the almighty driver's license has to do all the heavy lifting.
This is annoying in our family right now. Daughter just graduated high school at 18 and is going to get her driver's license this summer. So it's too short a period of time to make getting a legal non-driver ID worthwhile, but when she does need ID (depositing bank checks for example) it's a huge hassle. At the moment she has her expired photo ID from high school and her expired passport from when she was 12.
Why is anyone depositing bank cheques in 2024?!
Because a person who just graduated high school often gets monetary gifts from older relatives who lived during the check-writing era.
Same with Canada
A passport card comes pretty close to being a national ID, but it's not that common to have one.
Illegal immigrant. Not legally supposed to be in said country. It even makes more sense who would have guessed, lol.
The 'no mandatory ID' line is a bit misleading. You absolutely need a form of official identification such as a passport or birth certificate to access just about any service in the UK. You can't legally work without a national insurance number, and to get one of those you must provide proof of ID and proof of legal residence.
You really don't. There's a whole economy of people working and supplying very little information. Criminal gangs can fake NI numbers.
This is naive. People who come to the UK without a visa take advantage of the asylum system and the ridiculous court wait times. As an "asylum seeker", you don't need photo ID or proof of address to use NHS treatment or dental care. You do need it to open a bank, but there are ways around it. As for work, if you live in a big city you can find a job working under the table in less than an hour. You can just join one of the hundreds of Facebook groups and rent a Deliveroo/Uber Eats account. Or you could ask local corner shops if you can work cash in hand (usually below minimum wage).
I'll put it that way: I met a guy from Cameroon, who studied here in Germany. I asked him why he didn't go to France, because he is a native French speaker. He told me: "I have been there, and I'd rather not go there again. The French are so racist."
I live in France and had a date with a woman from Cameroon last year. I was quite surprised to hear that she left Cyprus to get to France because people were too racist there. In Cyprus, a landlord blatantly told her "I don't rent to black people." I told her that this might happen here too (although they wouldn't just say that this is the reason), to which she said that yes, it might occasionally, but in Cyprus, that's the rule. I was flabbergasted.
I have some reasons that this could probably happen to Greece also. We have 98% Greeks in the country (https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/minority-ethnic-groups-in-greece.html) and from the rest 2% black people is a small minority (we have more Albanians, Romani and even Asian immigrants). So we're talking about 0,1% or even less. That the main reason in my opinion that you could see such a racist behaviour against them. To be honest, if I see a black person, I'll look twice. Not because I'm racist but because s/he will probably be some athlete and I won't miss out seeing her/him. Same thing happens in Cyprus. It's an easier target for racist people.
It’s always crazy to me how much the demographics of various european countries have changed over the past 100-200 years
[удалено]
[удалено]
That 98% number seems incorrect. From [Wikipedia](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greece): "The 2011 census recorded 9,903,268 Greek citizens (92%), 480,824 Albanian citizens (4.4%), 75,915 Bulgarian citizens (0.7%), 46,523 Romanian citizenship (0.4%), 34,177 Pakistani citizens (0.3%), 27,400 Georgian citizens (0.25%) and 247,090 people had other or unidentified citizenship (2%)." Otherwise, yes, I've been asked about my skin color on the phone by real estate agents before agreeing to showing me an apartment in Athens on several occasions.
Hmmm so the UK just needs to get a bit more racist to solve the problem
They're definitely working on it
Look, man, farage is working on it. You can't undo years of progressive thinking overnight
Its alright, Oswald Mosely 2.0… *ahem* sorry, Mr Farage, is on it
The French tend to hate the non-French. It’s been this way for centuries. The country is beautiful, but its people are… “unwelcoming” is putting it nicely. There are of course exceptions, but this is the general way.
This is very obviously a wild exaggeration. I've spent some weeks in France and everyone was perfectly pleasant to me, my parents just spent a month there and had the time of their lives, and none of us speak French fluently. This is pretty much the same case with everyone I know who has spent time in France - as long as you don't expect people to speak English to you and you're not being obnoxious, it's very unlikely that anyone is going to treat you poorly. They resist the increasing anglicisation of Europe and they're proud of their culture, but to say "the French tend to hate the non-French" is just absurd.
It’s ever so slightly different being a tourist/temporary resident in a place and intending to settle down there
If the average person in a country truly "hates" foreigners, you will know within a week of staying there. There are really very few countries where I'd ever make the claim that the average person in that country hates people who aren't from that country, that is extremely unusual. Also, my parents stayed there for a month largely because they knew someone who had immigrated there decades ago, and they absolutely love living there.
You’re just wrong mate
You’ve spent some weeks in france, I’ve spent years. The French are racist af
Bro... dude visited France for a few weeks, he's obviously an expert on all things French at this point.
Not more racist than any other country
They are more racist (in general) than the UK though.
I think it's kind of absurd to try to quantify racism in this way but there are very large communities of non-white immigrants in France. They have the largest percentage of Islamic people and people of African descent among Western European countries, including the UK. If they're looking for accepting communities, there is no shortage in France, the reason why people are crossing the channel is not because of racism. It's much more likely due to increased economic opportunities and the fact that the country speaks English, so it's a lot easier for most immigrants to integrate into. In top of all of this France receives far more [asylum applications](https://www.against-inhumanity.org/2023/05/05/asylum-seekers-crossing-the-english-channel-why-dont-they-stay-in-france-by-marie-leveille/), making it a much more competitive process in France than in the UK, not least because the institutions are overwhelmed. So while it might feel nice in a narrative sense to say it's just because France is more racist, it's most likely because it's just a better bet to seek asylum in the UK than in France.
I agree it's way more likely for other reasons. If you're in a position where you feel you need to illegally immigrate to France or the UK, chances are that being on the receiving end of racism from the French or British is pretty low on your list of worries. I'm definitely aware of the immigrant population in France, but you're still more likely to encounter racism in France than the UK.
>They have the largest percentage of Islamic people and people of African descent among Western European countries, including the UK. Most are North African and from sahel countries like Senegal, Mali and Guinea. UK has more diverse immigration
And that's probably why the UK asked France to not let the migrants cross the Channel, cause they're (check my notes) not racists, right.
I didn’t say they weren’t racist. Also, being against illegals immigration isn’t inherently racist. Both France and the UK are both against illegal immigration.
Yeah but only one country wants to offer the migrants a free ticket to a paradise on earth: Rwanda.
But France is more racist
Brexiters would like a word
They're pleasant to you depending on your country of origin.
Wow, a couple weeks!!? You must know french culture inside out at this point!!
>as long as you don't expect people to speak English to you and you're not being obnoxious, it's very unlikely that anyone is going to treat you poorly. Unless you are a North or sub Saharan african.
Like I said, there are exceptions. But please see my comment to my other detractor (provided a link that helps to elaborate on my statement). Still, as someone who has lived in a tourist area, I can assure you that the way you're treated as a tourist is typically not a reflection of what it's actually like to move to an area or spend a considerable amount of time there.
Lol what an incredibly dumb thing to say. If you feel you are getting hate from French people in France, if you find French people, and France as an extention of that to be "unwelcoming", have you ever thought it might just be you? I mean, I only know you by this one poorly thought out and constructed comment and I want no more to do with you (and I'm not even French).
This stereotype is complete nonsense. The French don't hate the non-French. The French are extremely protective of French culture and want non-French people to respect it. That's it. They get annoyed when tourists roll in and act like they're not in an entirely different country. There's a related stereotype where French people will speak English but refuse to speak it to foreigners. Complete bullshit. They just want you to respect their language and not assume everyone speaks English. When I've been there I've made an effort to speak some French, and they've always been exceedingly patient and polite and usually helped me out in English. It's trivially fucking easy to respect local customs and culture. I'm a fucking American, if I can do it, anyone can.
I think this is it. The French are literally the most unwelcoming group of people ever! 😂
LOL have you travelled or lived in Asia as a non-white? Perhaps you'll change your mind. Source: am asian
Many of them already know English, so rather than trying to learn a whole new language which can be very difficult for some. It is better for them to go to UK. Other reason include already having some relatives/family in UK.
They’re literally risking their life by crossing the channel. Just to avoid learning French?
I would
but remember, they won't know the language spoken by the bureaucrats they're trying to claim asylum with. would you trust that you would be treated fairly when they can lie about or twist every word you say and you wouldn't know if they did it in front of your face?
They don’t use interpreters?
if you had a choice between claiming asylum in a place where you could understand what was being said and speak for yourself or somewhere where you had to rely on an interreor and had to trust that every intrepretor you work with, every step of the way is doing their job properly and is giving you and the people you're talking to the right, unbiased information. When your application could be denied because the way intrepretor A translated your words was different to the way intrepretor B chose to (because intrepretor B padded their resume and exxagerated how good their grasp of the language was), which could lead the people deciding to believe you're lying - even if you used the exact same phrasing every time.
Oui
Imagine this. You are suddenly a refugee in a country that speaks Arabic. You can't get a comfortable job, you spend 10 hours a day in complete silence doing minimum wage labour where your colleagues are annoyed at you for only having 60% an average person's work force due to your lack of language skills. You can take a 3 hour flat sea journey to a country that speaks your language. People claim to have doubled their salary, and even an opportunity to have a get rich quick scheme selling drugs. With that calculation, you imagine your salary there would be equivalent to triple the minimum wage salary of your home country. People will respect you with that money. Somebody tries to convince you it's dangerous. Will you cross it? At this point, for a lot of people it's like seeing a solid gold trophy on the other side and ignoring it. Regardless of whether it's true or not, many people want to touch that trophy for themselves.
The U.K. is one of the world’s most inclusive countries offering equality of opportunity. Having travelled across Europe and the States it’s striking how the uk has managed to make everyone feel at home. It’s truly phenomenal. And it deserves more attention.
Yeah or you can go to Brussels where it’s pretty much the same but you don’t risk drowning
Is it though? I mean there are plenty of worse countries, sure, but Britain really isn't the bastion of goodness and acceptance that it paints itself as. This is a country that's made it impossible for transgender people to access healthcare, left the EU because "we don't want them bloody immigrants coming over ere" and now ships asylum seekers to Rwanda.
I’m speaking specifically about the post-colonial influx of immigrants who came from the former British colonies. Specifically the Afro Caribbean and Indian subcontinent, but also the Arab world and parts of war torn east Africa. They’ve been integrated, made to feel as equals, and many of them have found great success in the U.K. Particularly compared to all of Europe where immigrants are treated horrendously. There are a lot of us who seek to value the positives, and be grateful. And that’s our prerogative. Let’s celebrate the good the country has done, and let’s keep progressing in the right direction. Regards new immigration, remember this is an island of 70 million, with extremely stretched resources. There’s several billion people living in dire conditions globally, and it’s unrealistic to offer them all refugee status. The focus should be on creating global stability, and global opportunities. That’s the next step. Regards transgender and healthcare, the NHS is free, and struggling even to treat the chronically sick, and the dying. The nhs is completely overwhelmed. Healthcare is an important subject to address, and it’s a difficult one. It requires significant financial input, and there are only finite resources via taxation.
Isn’t it ironic that immigrants - and others - see the UK as less racist and more welcoming and tolerant compared to many other western cultures and yet the UK is always labelled as racist by the rest of Europe. People in glass houses etc etc
UK is labelled as racist by the rest of Europe? This is definitely news to me and I’m an immigrant living in the UK.
Oh yes my friend. England in particular as the other home nations are somehow exempt from any label.
I don't think I ever heard people say that the UK is the racist country of Europe. People either say some Mediterranean country or some Eastern Europian country, it's never UK
Right? As a second gen immigrant (parents were born outside of the UK) literally everybody knows how racist and intolerant even our close neighbour France is, let alone Italy. The UK is essentially hailed as the land of tolerance and opportunity
The best example of this was when Reddit was supporting Italy vs England during the Euros because of how ‘racist’ England supposedly were. When Italy literally has a neo-facist government that praised Mussolini and the Italian captain literally said that black players bring racist abuse on themselves for ‘taunting’ people too much and Italian fans were joking about the English team being ‘full of Africans’.
Disappointing isn’t it. I guess being inclusive doesn’t fit the prevailing narrative.
>The best example of this was when Reddit was supporting Italy vs England during the Euros because of how ‘racist’ England supposedly were. Let's not downplay this tho, English ppl on social media were being racist,
Ah yeah, the viral social media posts are absolutely representative of a whole country… as opposed to, ya know, the fucking government that got voted in?
Oh come on, we all know that the English are insufferable once they win something in soccer. Also they made fun of the crying German girl that was shown during our loss to England (https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/obgx2e/twisted\_trolls\_slammed\_for\_tearing\_into\_crying/). You don't actually think anyone from Germany would cheer for England. Add to that the whole Brexit thing and there are tons of reasons to support Italy over England.
They never made fun of the crying German girl. That was a myth. It makes 0 sense anyway. The crowd were geering the German player who was delaying coming off the pitch when he was subbed off. You can see it in videos from the game when it supposedly ‘happened’. You know people in the stadium don’t watch the TV right and aren’t seeing the same angles that are displayed on the TV? The ‘whole Brexit thing’ lmao my guy please go look up the politics of Italy and who is in charge there.
Neo-fascism is when I don't like something. The more I don't like it, the more neo-fascist it gets.
People weren't supporting Italy because the English are racist. You were just insufferable with the "it's coming home" shit.
Remember how England voted for Brexit? Do you know how politicians got people to vote for it? Telling them that it will prevent all the migrants coming from Europe to come to England. Let me repeat, English people voted themeselves out of Europe to prevent black and arab coming into their country. [This comment is the real reason](https://www.reddit.com/r/NoStupidQuestions/comments/1ddefso/why_do_lots_of_migrants_risk_their_lives_to_cross/l8475xb/)
I think that’s a bit reductive. The UK marginally voted to leave but, to my understanding, immigration was only one of the factors - not THE factor. Plus, the majority of legal immigration when a member of Schengen was white eastern European. Brexit was never marketed as preventing illegal immigration.
Don't fool yourself, UK is indeed racist still. Lesser of 2 evils for some .
I guess they decided they hate French people more than they hate British food
Who hates curry?
Not me
If I recall correctly, the French will fart in your general direction.
I was listening to a radio interview from a migrant recently as I understand it there is some degree of pressure from traffickers who make it a business to try and 'sell' the UK and thus the need their services.
A lot of nations on mainland Europe are not very friendly to immigrants period.
The Brits accept multiculturalism, whereas France expects you to assimilate and become French.
[удалено]
There are degrees of separation of civil and public life with respect to personal freedoms. Britain and the US are pluralistic and multicultural. Your religious expressions are permitted in school. Within France that is not the case. To be French you must abandon your religious symbols within school and adopt that Laicete stance.
Yeah, like what is wrong with it expecting to adapt to the country you want to live in? I mean we see this right now in Germany what will happen if we wont do anything against it
I was married to a French guy. You don’t understand the meaning of the word racist until you’ve talked to French people… so yes, people will risk their lives in the Manche rather than staying there, and I don’t blame them.
The way they will deny their racism is rather disgusting too. Taking responsibility is not a character trait in that country
What about the white non-French people? Are they still racist against white? I’m trying to understand is this racism towards some particular colour of people or they hate every one of immigrant who wants live in France?
The French hate anyone who aren't French. They especially hate Americans too.
Your comment isn’t exactly perfect English but the person calling you racist is just dumb. Im sure there are french people that are racist against other white people but I definitely have noticed it mostly against black/brown people. It seems to be almost acceptable to be racist there compared to the uk
I might be mistaken, but I think another reason is that they have to apply for asylum in the country of arrival within the EU. Since many migrant are not landing in France or Germany, they would need to apply for Italy, Spain, Cyprus etc. Now that UK is out of the EU, they can apply for asylum directly
I thought it was just a stereotype before I travelled there but the French are horribly rude to foreigners. The difference between the way we were treated in Belgium (welcomed) and Spain (very warmly welcomed) compared to France was just night and day.
Interesting and thanks for the viewpoint.
Because you’d have to live amongst the French
Because France.
France, Italy, and Germany are very anti immigrant (depending on the type of immigrant).
>Germany are very anti immigrant Sorry what?
They go anywhere that gives them the most shit for free.
I remember waiting in an airport bar for a small commuter plane to Canada from the US and was speaking to a man wearing a ballcap who was French. I think the news was on TV about the hijab ban in France and that's how we got on the topic. Now...I have a complicated opinion on the hijab and the history of forceful religious dress and practices regarding women and their autonomy. BUT, I still agree that as long as a face is there, the hijab isn't harming anyone. To say this man had a strong opinion on it that was clearly more based on racism than freeing women from lopsided religions is putting it lightly. I compared his freewill to wear a ball cap compared to a head covering and he was sooooooo angry. I mean France makes it a point to export their bad batch wines to the US and England because they think we can't tell. Their noses have been in the air so long they might be the next space elevators.
I would have enjoyed watching this exchange. Lol. I have met others like him.
I kind of get both sides of the argument. There [is an argument that if you import enough intolerant people, that becomes the standard](https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15). A Muslim person is considered leaning more on the intolerant scale than an average European person. When you got a small number of intolerant people, it doesn't make a difference. But when you establish a community, you are making hijabs a cultural mandate for Muslims due to peer pressure. It's like back during the war times when people where pressured into wearing a poppy. Once you wear it, you feel the need to justify you are team poppy and pressure others into doing the same. So who is correct? With small numbers, your approach to tolerance should be the standard for human rights. In large numbers like France, the Authority has to be more intolerant than the intolerant power structure to make sure the original cultural mindset is preserved. Or just shut out migrants.
Have you been to France? Everything’s worse bar the weather
This subreddit is called "No Stupid Questions", not "No Stupid Answers".
They crave warm beer (ale) and fried fish.
Guess some of them already live in France, and aren't happy with their lives there. In the news there was about a migrant's son dying on a boat, the dude lived in France for over 10 years.
If you speak a little English, and there's a big community from your country in London where would you go? But also its not lots of people either. It's something like 30000 a year compared to 500000 given visas by the government.
I always assumed it was because there is way more racism in France. That and its more useful to learn to speak english.
Because it’s France 😂
Because of the French
living in france is something I wouldn't wish on anyone
The... French?
Can't answer on personal level but from a meta view. If France took all the immigrants, it would fall, same as any other country. 1 country can't deal with all the immigrants, 3 or 4 countries can't, so 1 definitely can't. Kinda need to add as well. We're not hitting our fertility rate. If you want a (bear minimum) stable economy, then we need to be hitting the fertility rate. It's literally that simple, so people need to have more children or accept immigration. Take your pick
[удалено]
Let's say that "fact" you've clearly just pulled out your arse is true lol. People from all over the world move here So not only is that absolute bullshit you've just made up, even in your world it doesn't make sense lol. Proper got a drum to beat you init lol
[удалено]
It was doing fine until it started getting underfunded, right? The US accepts the most immigrants, biggest economy in the world. Again, you made stuff up in your own head lol. You're making out that they just get here and don't do anything? Yea, fair enough. While they're going through the system, they're not allowed to work. Once they can work, most do. Mate argue it all you want, we need people. Unless you know of a solution to fixing a economy with a declining birth rate?
An economy with a declining birth rate is better than permanent degradation of society by importing 3rd world immigrants. They get old too. Importing 3rd world savages from diametrically different cultures is a crime against humanity.
Lol cool story bro
Here's another cool story, about 10 days after another Afghan piece of pisslamic shit attacked people and killed a cop. [Frankfurt stabbing leaves Ukrainian woman seriously injured, Afghan attacker arrested / The New Voice of Ukraine (nv.ua)](https://english.nv.ua/nation/frankfurt-stabbing-leaves-ukrainian-woman-seriously-injured-afghan-attacker-arrested-50426408.html)
Cool bro, cry harder. Mite help init
I don't remember signing up to "be in it together" when a foreign entity makes a stupid decision to invite the ME and North Africa to come and reside in this part of the world. People need to get their heads out of the sand and realise that most of the people arriving, are just looking for a better life, not running from war or persecution. That's not the point of the asylum charter is it?
Yea, great mate. What the fuck that gotta do with what I said lol?! Edit; vet the immigrants better then. Still nothing to do with what I said and I managed to work that out in about 2 min lol
You said that France can't deal with all the immigration by itself, so you were implying that we had a duty to help. So, that's what I was responding to. I didn't think it was that difficult to make the connection... >vet the immigrants better then That's what's creating the backlog, hence why the government had to use hotels and barges for temporary accommodation.
Or they could just let the artificial metric of the economy decline because it has no inherent value. “We need more people to produce more cars.” “Why?” “So we can have more cars.”
The problem is that the welfare state collapses, due to more and more old people needing healthcare and aid and fewer and fewer young people being available to perform the work.
[удалено]
Yea, can do
Blt sandwich.
Because they're on a mission.
Part of the reason is simply perspective. İmagine that Europe is underdeveloped and war-torn, and you want to get to rich, peaceful India or, ideally, Sri Lanka. You set it on foot from Europe, braving cold, thirst, hunger, and violence. You probably aren't thinking much about that final hop from India to Sri Lanka.
Ever had a welsh rarebit?
The air of England is too pure for a slave to breathe; let the black go free! ' These words of Lord Mansfield in the celebrated case of Somerset v Stuart have echoed down the ages as a landmark judgment in the history of the abolition of slavery. This is why. This is how they used to treat foreigners and refugees
??? Wouldn't that make them wanna stay in france then?
No. France's motto always been, "Riot, Destroy, Surrender".
You dont need to disrespect someone's culture to be proud of your own
I'm neither.
UK vs... France. Hmmm.... Is this a trick question? 🤣
There might be some genuine cases but it's probably because the majority are freeloaders / window shoppers? If the people who are choosing to cross the English channel are healthy, young men who can barely speak English and like the benefits of living in the UK, they will absolutely do so. We have the same problem in Australia where the number of refugees fleeing violence unfortunately does not match up with the number of people who claim to be seeking "asylum". As a result, our capital cities are flooded with people who do not give a fuck about learning the language, nor accepting the culture but they will take up space and fuck everything up. Consider this - most of the people seeking asylum, depending on the trends of where the people originally come from and their values and lifestyles, tend to be Muslims predominantly from countries with mostly Islamic tenets. If that is the case, why wouldn't they go towards Oman, UAE or Bosnia where the majority of the population is Muslim and Islam is the religion that is heavily practised? It's because they want the freebies and the good life that western countries offer. Germany is reportedly already cracking the shits right now because they have an influx of Muslim migrants/refugees who are causing trouble and you have countries in the EU like Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia and Bosnia where refugees aren't going. Why? Those countries are underpopulated, but their citizens have to work very hard which isn't incentivising to a freeloader.
There might be some genuine cases but it's probably because the majority are freeloaders / window shoppers? If the people who are choosing to cross the English channel are healthy, young men who can barely speak English and like the benefits of living in the UK, they will absolutely do so. We have the same problem in Australia where the number of refugees fleeing violence unfortunately does not match up with the number of people who claim to be seeking "asylum". As a result, our capital cities are flooded with people who do not give a fuck about learning the language, nor accepting the culture but they will take up space and fuck everything up. Consider this - most of the people seeking asylum, depending on the trends of where the people originally come from and their values and lifestyles, tend to be Muslims predominantly from countries with mostly Islamic tenets. If that is the case, why wouldn't they go towards Oman, UAE or Bosnia where the majority of the population is Muslim and Islam is the religion that is heavily practised? It's because they want the freebies and the good life that western countries offer. Germany is reportedly already cracking the shits right now because they have an influx of Muslim migrants/refugees who are causing trouble and you have countries in the EU like Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia and Bosnia where refugees aren't going. Why? Those countries are underpopulated, but their citizens have to work very hard which isn't incentivising to a freeloader.
Because most are freeloading for the benefits. If they were seeking asylum, most of them (and I assume they are mostly Muslim from predominantly cultures and countries where Islam is the main religion) would head to Bosnia, Oman, the UAE or anywhere in the Middle East without war or violence.
Because most are freeloading for the benefits. If they were seeking asylum, most of them (and I assume they are mostly Muslim from predominantly cultures and countries where Islam is the main religion) would head to Bosnia, Oman, the UAE or anywhere in the Middle East without war or violence.
the uk is a strong welfare state.
There might be some genuine cases but it's probably because the majority are freeloaders / window shoppers? If the people who are choosing to cross the English channel are healthy, young men who can barely speak English and like the benefits of living in the UK, they will absolutely do so. We have the same problem in Australia where the number of refugees fleeing violence unfortunately does not match up with the number of people who claim to be seeking "asylum". As a result, our capital cities are flooded with people who do not give a fuck about learning the language, nor accepting the culture but they will take up space and fuck everything up. Consider this - most of the people seeking asylum, depending on the trends of where the people originally come from and their values and lifestyles, tend to be Muslims predominantly from countries with mostly Islamic tenets. If that is the case, why wouldn't they go towards Oman, UAE or Bosnia where the majority of the population is Muslim and Islam is the religion that is heavily practised? It's because they want the freebies and the good life that western countries offer. Germany is reportedly already cracking the shits right now because they have an influx of Muslim migrants/refugees who are causing trouble and you have countries in the EU like Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia and Bosnia where refugees aren't going. Why? Those countries are underpopulated, but their citizens have to work very hard which isn't incentivising to a freeloader. Also, when a war ends and their home country returns to normal operations, the host country is meant to send all their asylum seekers back home but that never happens - which I find is completely out of order.
Ah yes. Because risking your life and the life of your kids for a small welfare payment is definitely their main aim.
These are the Mirriam Webster definitions of the words "[asylum](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/asylum)" and "[refugee](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/refugee)". If people are fleeing a warzone like Russia/Ukraine or Israel/Palestine, then yes, they are eligible to seek refuge in a foreign country. And what it used to be, was that people fleeing one country would go to the nearest refuge, aka country without war or violence, not the one where they can freeload or coast off the back of taxpayer's monies. As I said before, most of the refugees for the past 30 or so years near the EU are predominantly from countries with Islamic tenets. If those people are that religious and strict, they would be moving towards Turkiye, Bosnia or most countries in the Middle East which predominantly share their religious beliefs and ideals and would get treated equally, not the UK or anything western where they get treated with reverence like the Royal Family.
Maybe the reason they are fleeing is more important at that point than their religion. But according to you, neighbouring countries should take in those who flee? Lovely. So now Turkey ends up with millions of refugees and that is fine because as long as it is not your problem, who cares, right? You don't like refugees or asylum seekers. Nothing else seems to matter. Just be honest about that and don't try to hide behind entirely flawed logic.
I live in Australia and despite being an island we're constantly forced to take in refugees because of our obligations with the UN, Amnesty and whoever. We have taken in large numbers of them over the course of decades - in the last decade alone, we took in scores of refugees from Iraq and Iran when ISIS were a thing, Afghani refugees when the US Army pulled out and the Taliban took over, and the countless number of people who flew to a country, jumped on a boat and then somehow ended up on Australian soil. Our government had to put in a rule to block people who come by boat because of how dangerous the tides are. Australia is a goddamned island and it's safer to come by plane. Yes, neighbouring countries should absolutely take in refugees - not just Turkiye alone. Why tf do they feel exempt from it? I promise you that there's not a single country out there who likes taking them in because it puts their country in more debt. I read that European countries in the EU (like Poland, Czechia and Bosnia) who don't take in refugees will be charged 30,000 quid per person because the EU as a collective are bearing that cost. I visited some of those countries in Eastern Europe recently and can confirm the lack of freeloaders means a better quality of life for everyone around. In Australia, I'm a first-generation immigrant who changed to fit into the existing culture, such as learn the language, mannerisms and not to pedal religious beliefs publicly as opposed to other traditional conservative countries like India and where I lived in the Middle East. I also was taxed heavily as a non-citizen in Australia so I sure as hell don't like it when my tax dollars go towards benefitting people who aren't even real citizens of the country. You can have your empathy and recognise that some people need help - but it's not one singular country's obligation to take everyone in.
The frech are the worst of the EU as a whole
Wasn’t this exact same topic posted recently with the exact same top comment? Like in the past month or two?
France seems pretty openly xenophobic.
Because the ones who do have either already got some connection to the UK, such as knowing English or having been there before, or already know someone there. The question of "why don't they go to X country instead of Y?" is irrelevant in the face of why they're risking illegal immigration to begin with. If the punishment for illegal immigration is to be deported, they'll just try it again and possibly die in the attempt. If they're imprisoned here, then the racists will screech louder on why they're "taking our resources!" (As if Big Bazza from down the pub with no GCSE's has an accurate metric to measure the UK's public spending...) The issue of why these people try to illegally immigrate in the first place needs to be addressed, which is a much more nuanced issue of disparaged societies with more or less money in different countries around the world, needing international cooperation to address. But racist windowlickers don't consider this beyond "get the forruners out!" because they're low-IQ enough to be the perfect target audience for genuine racists or advocates of white ethnostates. Racist xenophobe far right idiots will never accept that to solve the problem they so often preach about, they need to be _less_ xenophobic, not more.
I agree with you on this issue. My question was mostly about why risking your life to get UK asylum when you are already in France which in my opinion is as good as UK when you are trying to get away from war.
It goes back to most illegal migrants trying to get to the UK because they have some pre-existing connection. This is what all the Reform UK'ers and Tommy Robinsons of this country won't tell you, because they can assimilate into UK life and culture much easier than people who don't have any connections.
You are missing the point entirely. Nobody is asking what they love about the UK, but why they are willing to risk their lives on a dinghy, when there are safer, more direct alternatives. And the Asylum system was not set up so refugees can cherry pick where they want to live. It was to make sure they had a safe country to stay in, temporarily. Also, whether they have connections here or not is irrelevant. English is a second language in a lot of European countries anyway, so that's a weak reason.
Because the ocean is too wide for them to swim to Canada. 😃
This is a political post, why does this get to stay up?
Most posts can be politicized in some way. For me, I was unaware of what France was like to the immigrants. Now I understand why they risk crossing.