This person is an "epidemiologist and federal disaster medicine team member". Covid really has driven some people completely mad.
@maolesen Some perspective for those who still don't get it: If I were forced to be infected by either HIV or COVID, I would choose HIV without hesitation.
People saying Portugal, well its not fucked, its great compared to the UK...
For the record, the average monthly wage in Portugal stood at €1,180 per month in 2019, compared to around €4,000 in Germany. Many Portuguese earn far less and try to get by on the monthly minimum wage of €741 a month, less than half the levels seen in Germany (€1,584), the UK (€1,600) or the Netherlands (€1,636). Moreover, Portugal is not a cheap country to live in. The cost of housing, energy, food, and many electronic goods is as high if not higher than in other European countries. So, life for many families is very tough indeed....
Since the mid-1990s, productivity growth has stalled as a result of low investment in information technology, labour market rigidities and the allocation of labour and capital to industries partly dominated by state-owned firms or those less open to competition, according to the economist Ricardo Pinheiro Alves.
Lisbon is becoming a bit of a tech hub at the moment, alongside London. It's easy to get staff, and office rents are very low. Infrastructure is not bad either.
It's not perfect (nowhere is), but I'd regard it as significantly more likely to succeed in the medium term than Italy.
The food is fucking dismal, once you get behind sardines, custard tarts, and that saffron rice fish cataplana genre
They do like large dry lumps of pork, I've noticed. It is noticeably worse for food than the poor parts of Spain.
i recently did a Gazette trip to Portugal. At the start the food was apparently delightful, if simple. The sardines, the cataplana thing, the pastel de Nata, some pleasant cheeses and charcuterie. Then I realised that was basically it. And as the trip went on the food got worse and worse until I was being served shit I would have left uneaten in my state school in the 1970s. The worst food I’ve had in Europe that I can remember, apart from a trip to the Rhineland in about 2017
Wine is also, imho, not generally great. Exceptions of course.
Port?
There is no great quality to most Portuguese table wines. In fact, the most-exported table wine is red Douro from the same place as Port.
Having said that, a €2.99 bottle of Portuguese supermarket wine is often more pleasant than the same in France. And 9% Vinho Verde is a lunchtime treat. A half a litre carafe glugged and you are still fully upright for the afternoon's endeavours.
”Over the past year, one in six UK adults has had a pressing [medical] need and been unable to get access… This is the highest figure out of 36 European countries and almost triple the EU average.”
No doubt I get a partial view (as PBers do of the US) but the place seems totally fuckerooed and the prospect is dismal at least according to the BoE.
Envy of the World, the NHS - said no-one who’s ever lived anywhere else.
It’s not just the NHS though, is it.
Judging just by the posts on here, the courts are fucked, immigration and asylum is totally broken, education is a disaster, there’s a new government every five minutes, and of course the economy is buggered.
A good proportion of posts on here are from people with a vested interest in making people believe that everything is fucked.
Here's my assessment of how fucked things are from personal experience:
NHS: fucked. Almost impossible to get appointments. Long waits for referrals. Schools: okay but getting worse. Obviously less resources than a few years ago. Secondary school staff turnover and occasional staff shortages suggests wages too low to retain staff in London. All extra curricular activities need to be paid for. Public transport: okay but getting worse. Bus routes cut, less frequent buses. Tube okay. New Elizabeth Line an obvious improvement. Trains okay, same as ever. Council services: obviously very stretched. Street cleaning way down. Basic services covered, nothing else, impossible to speak to anyone about anything. Fly tipping out of control. Roads: surfaces increasingly poor. Perhaps there is an effort at catch up given amount of works going on, but a lot of that seems to be water related. Frequent burst water mains. Prices of everything massively up. Taxes up. Private sector obviously seeing staff shortages, evident in retail, hospitality and construction. Occasional glimpses of additional border red tape but doesn't affect me much directly. Overall: quality of life is deteriorating.
You can apply all that to Wales under the Welsh labour government (apart from the tube obviously)
Welsh Labour seem less a political proposition than a kind of shitocracy. I presume the Welsh prefer it this way as the Welsh Tories are even worse.
I've never understood the popularity of Mark Drakeford.
He looks like he's escaped from Harold Wilson's cabinet.
Now come on. Harold would never have entertained the idea of Drakeford as a cabinet minister. I don't think there is anything to understand regarding his popularity. People don't really like or dislike him. He's just there. He's not a Tory. He's welsh but not a nationalist. He doesn't cause offence.
Personally I don't think the Conservatives have a hope of overthrowing Labour in Wales so long as the private sector remains anaemic. Scottish Labour collapsed because their voters switched to one specific alternative, the SNP. In Wales the opposition is split between Tory/Plaid/Lib Dem/Reform. None of them individually strong enough and alliance friendly.
Labour's attempts to structurally game the electoral system in the devolved nations so they were permanently in power certainly worked in Wales. They've never been out of it.
Mark Drakeford just looks like - in every way, the way he looks, dressed and talks - like he should be living in 1974.
You think Labour must have gamed Sennedd elections because otherwise they'd be like general elections in which, oh, hold on, Labour is so dominant that CCHQ convinced itself they were cheating there too?
This morning I watched the local news as usual (mostly for the weather) and heard the usual examples of failures of our courts to treat criminals as criminals. For example, a man with a long criminal record, more than 60 arrests, most in California, was released after an attack in downtown Seattle, and, two days, later murdered a couple. Starbucks has closed a number of stores because of the crime problems in Seattle, and other businesses are moving out, or giving up.
And then I read a comment here from Sean_F about how American policemen beat confessions out of suspects. Perhaps he has read too many old American detective stories.
(Do a few American policemen still use the "third degree"? No doubt, but I can honestly say that I haven't heard of many cases in recent decades -- and that is in a country with a population of more than 330 million, and thousands of police forces, with wide variations in their training and practices.)
Incidentally, the voters of Seattle -- which is not a conservative city -- appear to think that too little policing is the problem there, not too much, since they recently elected a Republican as city attorney: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ann_Davison_(politician)
Washington State, home to Seattle, has a murder rate of 3.9 per 100,000 people.
There are places with lower murder rates - such as Massachusetts, Maine, Vermont Idaho and New Hampshire, which are bottom of the table - but Washington is very safe by US standards.
The States with the highest murder rates are all Republican strongholds: Louisiana, Missouri, Arkansas, Mississipi, South Carolina, Alabama, and Tennessee. Indeed, all these places have murder rates 250% or more of Washington State.
rcs1000 - On murder rates in US states: You do, I assume, know about the "ecological fallacy"?
And here's an election example for you from many years ago: In rural Illinois, there was a precinct which included a large "halfway house" for released sex offenders. The precinct voted heavily Democratic.
This morning I watched the local news as usual (mostly for the weather) and heard the usual examples of failures of our courts to treat criminals as criminals. For example, a man with a long criminal record, more than 60 arrests, most in California, was released after an attack in downtown Seattle, and, two days, later murdered a couple. Starbucks has closed a number of stores because of the crime problems in Seattle, and other businesses are moving out, or giving up.
And then I read a comment here from Sean_F about how American policemen beat confessions out of suspects. Perhaps he has read too many old American detective stories.
(Do a few American policemen still use the "third degree"? No doubt, but I can honestly say that I haven't heard of many cases in recent decades -- and that is in a country with a population of more than 330 million, and thousands of police forces, with wide variations in their training and practices.)
Incidentally, the voters of Seattle -- which is not a conservative city -- appear to think that too little policing is the problem there, not too much, since they recently elected a Republican as city attorney: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ann_Davison_(politician)
Washington State, home to Seattle, has a murder rate of 3.9 per 100,000 people.
There are places with lower murder rates - such as Massachusetts, Maine, Vermont Idaho and New Hampshire, which are bottom of the table - but Washington is very safe by US standards.
The States with the highest murder rates are all Republican strongholds: Louisiana, Missouri, Arkansas, Mississipi, South Carolina, Alabama, and Tennessee. Indeed, all these places have murder rates 250% or more of Washington State.
And when Dem candidates point this out they get laughed at because the Fox news Narrative is that Dem Big Cities are crime infested hell holes that burnt to the ground in 2020.
Okay. I’ll engage as thoughtfully I can with the asylum seeker problem, and offer my solutions.
This problem is as bad as it is due entirely to talentless clueless incompetents the Tory’s put in charge of mangling it. There’s no magic bullet, it’s true, though here’s my list of things that will reduce the problem for sure,
1. For starters, The incompetents managing it don’t understand the problem they are dealing with - it’s as simple of that - we know this as fact as they talk about 70% or more are economic migrants, bogus asylum seekers. Back in the real world do you really believe Undocumented economic migrants deliver themselves into the hands of Home Office officials as soon as they reach UK soil? Hence, 4% processing comes from setting up for 70%+ economic migrants, not genuine asylum claims. According the governments own figures, the majority of asylum claims are found to be legitimate Almost two-thirds (64%) of asylum claims end in a grant of protection. Of those rejected that went on to appeal, 48% were successfully overturned. They are clearly tackling the backlog with the wrong mindset and wrong prioritising.
2. Secondly, on basis you now realise how many are genuine asylum claims bogged down in your two year backlog, Set up a Department for International Development (DfID) to strengthen the infrastructures of fragile countries and increase stability there. Where do you want to spend the money, DfID, or 5 star hotels? You do the math.
3. Enable safe, legal routes for resettlement of genuine refugees. Would they even need a long stay in a processing centre on UK soil after dangerous water crossing, if you took safe, legal routes for resettlement more seriously? Take as example the priority given to Ukraine refugees, and how abysmal this home office under this government was at managing Ukrainian processing - sending them here and there, where no one was there to help them. And that’s what we call our gold star fast Lane process. Despite Tories paying lip service to liking safe, legal routes, the number of people resettled under the government’s UK resettlement scheme was 1,171 in the 12 months to September 2021, down by about 45% year on year.
4. This is the idea I like best. Process UK humanitarian visas on French soil, and bring them across on ferries. Genuine asylum seekers in northern France hoping to reach the UK to claim asylum, so happy to place themselves into the hands of our home office, could register their claim with UK officials and then be placed on ferries to be brought to the UK while their claim is processed. You want the Rwanda scheme because you are led to believe it hurts the business model of the people smugglers? The simple MoonRabbits Ferry to Freedom Solution utterly smashes through the business model of the people smugglers does it not?
1. I don't believe a single word of what is coming out of the Home Office on this issue. If 70% of these people are succeeding in their asylum claims, that's a scandal in itself, and hardly surprising that asylum is a chosen route for so many. The Home Secretary doesn't seem to believe it either.
2. The evidence shows that increasing levels of wealth in developing countries leads to more economic migration away from them, not less, as smartphones and the internet open up new possibilities. Stability would be nice, but it's not within our gift. We'll do whatever the US decides; if that includes bombing AN other Middle Eastern country, that's what will happen. And it's maths.
3. Safe, legal routes, YES, but the application, processing, and validation of the asylum claim must be done in situ before they get on that safe legal route. Otherwise it's just inviting a stampede.
4. We want the people traffickers to stop because we want the people to stop. Your solution is like saying we should get the police to stab everyone on sight because it would put all the criminal stabbers out of business. It would, but all it would do is replace freelancers with a taxpayer funded service. What on earth would be the point.
Sorry it took me a while to come back to you, we went to the big game (how to make a Swiss role? Just gently brush one in a contact sport) and I’ve been Christmas shopping.
Do these people coming here in boats across the channel, either for work or asylum, have any legitimacy at all in what they are doing, in your opinion? 😕
From National Weather Service (NWS) Seattle, 12.24 PDT
Atmospheric river hose aimed at the Central and Southern Cascades this morning. 6 hour rain totals ending at noon: Snoqualmie Pass...3.01" [east of Seattle] Paradise (Mt. Rainier)...2.31" [southeast of Seattle] Timberline (Mt. Hood)...1.95" [east of Portland] Stevens Pass...1.23" (northeast of Seattle] Mt Baker...1.02" [just south of Canadian border]
In the rain shadow, Seattle 0.04".
SSI - current weather radar shows Seattle rain shadow is shrinking, now little beyond city (im)proper; reckon will disappear by rush hour.
rcs1000 - On murder rates in US states: You do, I assume, know about the "ecological fallacy"?
And here's an election example for you from many years ago: In rural Illinois, there was a precinct which included a large "halfway house" for released sex offenders. The precinct voted heavily Democratic.
It's not just murder, it is all violent crime. Red states are more violent and crime ridden than blue states.
Okay. I’ll engage as thoughtfully I can with the asylum seeker problem, and offer my solutions.
This problem is as bad as it is due entirely to talentless clueless incompetents the Tory’s put in charge of mangling it. There’s no magic bullet, it’s true, though here’s my list of things that will reduce the problem for sure,
1. For starters, The incompetents managing it don’t understand the problem they are dealing with - it’s as simple of that - we know this as fact as they talk about 70% or more are economic migrants, bogus asylum seekers. Back in the real world do you really believe Undocumented economic migrants deliver themselves into the hands of Home Office officials as soon as they reach UK soil? Hence, 4% processing comes from setting up for 70%+ economic migrants, not genuine asylum claims. According the governments own figures, the majority of asylum claims are found to be legitimate Almost two-thirds (64%) of asylum claims end in a grant of protection. Of those rejected that went on to appeal, 48% were successfully overturned. They are clearly tackling the backlog with the wrong mindset and wrong prioritising.
2. Secondly, on basis you now realise how many are genuine asylum claims bogged down in your two year backlog, Set up a Department for International Development (DfID) to strengthen the infrastructures of fragile countries and increase stability there. Where do you want to spend the money, DfID, or 5 star hotels? You do the math.
3. Enable safe, legal routes for resettlement of genuine refugees. Would they even need a long stay in a processing centre on UK soil after dangerous water crossing, if you took safe, legal routes for resettlement more seriously? Take as example the priority given to Ukraine refugees, and how abysmal this home office under this government was at managing Ukrainian processing - sending them here and there, where no one was there to help them. And that’s what we call our gold star fast Lane process. Despite Tories paying lip service to liking safe, legal routes, the number of people resettled under the government’s UK resettlement scheme was 1,171 in the 12 months to September 2021, down by about 45% year on year.
4. This is the idea I like best. Process UK humanitarian visas on French soil, and bring them across on ferries. Genuine asylum seekers in northern France hoping to reach the UK to claim asylum, so happy to place themselves into the hands of our home office, could register their claim with UK officials and then be placed on ferries to be brought to the UK while their claim is processed. You want the Rwanda scheme because you are led to believe it hurts the business model of the people smugglers? The simple MoonRabbits Ferry to Freedom Solution utterly smashes through the business model of the people smugglers does it not?
Yes, throwing the doors open and charging nothing certainly does smash through the business model of the people smugglers.
Do you even see a difference between economic migrants in search of a job, and genuine refugee’s seeking asylum and safety? Or are you happy to repeatedly blur and box all this together, just as Braverman and Sunak have been doing?
So, assuming Leon's analysis is correct, Armenia should be swarming with children, while Iceland will be uninhabited in a generation or two.
The countries have near-identical birth rates, as it happens. 1.75 or thereabouts
So below replacement
However Iceland is so rich it can import guest workers, despite the climate. Armenian, erm, not so much. Tho they do have the diaspora - which essentially funds Yerevan, which is a vivacious and surprisingly diverting city
The curiosity of Amenia is that it has amongst the most unbalanced sex ratio of babies in the world. It used to be the worse still, .
If we allowed Asylum to be claimed at any British Embassy in the world, how many applicants would there be in the first year? What if we did it just in Europe?
Okay. I’ll engage as thoughtfully I can with the asylum seeker problem, and offer my solutions.
This problem is as bad as it is due entirely to talentless clueless incompetents the Tory’s put in charge of mangling it. There’s no magic bullet, it’s true, though here’s my list of things that will reduce the problem for sure,
1. For starters, The incompetents managing it don’t understand the problem they are dealing with - it’s as simple of that - we know this as fact as they talk about 70% or more are economic migrants, bogus asylum seekers. Back in the real world do you really believe Undocumented economic migrants deliver themselves into the hands of Home Office officials as soon as they reach UK soil? Hence, 4% processing comes from setting up for 70%+ economic migrants, not genuine asylum claims. According the governments own figures, the majority of asylum claims are found to be legitimate Almost two-thirds (64%) of asylum claims end in a grant of protection. Of those rejected that went on to appeal, 48% were successfully overturned. They are clearly tackling the backlog with the wrong mindset and wrong prioritising.
2. Secondly, on basis you now realise how many are genuine asylum claims bogged down in your two year backlog, Set up a Department for International Development (DfID) to strengthen the infrastructures of fragile countries and increase stability there. Where do you want to spend the money, DfID, or 5 star hotels? You do the math.
3. Enable safe, legal routes for resettlement of genuine refugees. Would they even need a long stay in a processing centre on UK soil after dangerous water crossing, if you took safe, legal routes for resettlement more seriously? Take as example the priority given to Ukraine refugees, and how abysmal this home office under this government was at managing Ukrainian processing - sending them here and there, where no one was there to help them. And that’s what we call our gold star fast Lane process. Despite Tories paying lip service to liking safe, legal routes, the number of people resettled under the government’s UK resettlement scheme was 1,171 in the 12 months to September 2021, down by about 45% year on year.
4. This is the idea I like best. Process UK humanitarian visas on French soil, and bring them across on ferries. Genuine asylum seekers in northern France hoping to reach the UK to claim asylum, so happy to place themselves into the hands of our home office, could register their claim with UK officials and then be placed on ferries to be brought to the UK while their claim is processed. You want the Rwanda scheme because you are led to believe it hurts the business model of the people smugglers? The simple MoonRabbits Ferry to Freedom Solution utterly smashes through the business model of the people smugglers does it not?
Yes, throwing the doors open and charging nothing certainly does smash through the business model of the people smugglers.
Do you even see a difference between economic migrants in search of a job, and genuine refugee’s seeking asylum and safety? Or are you happy to repeatedly blur and box all this together, just as Braverman and Sunak have been doing?
I think basically CR believes that none are genuine refugees, even those that our courts rule are.
Okay. I’ll engage as thoughtfully I can with the asylum seeker problem, and offer my solutions.
This problem is as bad as it is due entirely to talentless clueless incompetents the Tory’s put in charge of mangling it. There’s no magic bullet, it’s true, though here’s my list of things that will reduce the problem for sure,
1. For starters, The incompetents managing it don’t understand the problem they are dealing with - it’s as simple of that - we know this as fact as they talk about 70% or more are economic migrants, bogus asylum seekers. Back in the real world do you really believe Undocumented economic migrants deliver themselves into the hands of Home Office officials as soon as they reach UK soil? Hence, 4% processing comes from setting up for 70%+ economic migrants, not genuine asylum claims. According the governments own figures, the majority of asylum claims are found to be legitimate Almost two-thirds (64%) of asylum claims end in a grant of protection. Of those rejected that went on to appeal, 48% were successfully overturned. They are clearly tackling the backlog with the wrong mindset and wrong prioritising.
2. Secondly, on basis you now realise how many are genuine asylum claims bogged down in your two year backlog, Set up a Department for International Development (DfID) to strengthen the infrastructures of fragile countries and increase stability there. Where do you want to spend the money, DfID, or 5 star hotels? You do the math.
3. Enable safe, legal routes for resettlement of genuine refugees. Would they even need a long stay in a processing centre on UK soil after dangerous water crossing, if you took safe, legal routes for resettlement more seriously? Take as example the priority given to Ukraine refugees, and how abysmal this home office under this government was at managing Ukrainian processing - sending them here and there, where no one was there to help them. And that’s what we call our gold star fast Lane process. Despite Tories paying lip service to liking safe, legal routes, the number of people resettled under the government’s UK resettlement scheme was 1,171 in the 12 months to September 2021, down by about 45% year on year.
4. This is the idea I like best. Process UK humanitarian visas on French soil, and bring them across on ferries. Genuine asylum seekers in northern France hoping to reach the UK to claim asylum, so happy to place themselves into the hands of our home office, could register their claim with UK officials and then be placed on ferries to be brought to the UK while their claim is processed. You want the Rwanda scheme because you are led to believe it hurts the business model of the people smugglers? The simple MoonRabbits Ferry to Freedom Solution utterly smashes through the business model of the people smugglers does it not?
Yes, throwing the doors open and charging nothing certainly does smash through the business model of the people smugglers.
Do you even see a difference between economic migrants in search of a job, and genuine refugee’s seeking asylum and safety? Or are you happy to repeatedly blur and box all this together, just as Braverman and Sunak have been doing?
I think basically CR believes that none are genuine refugees, even those that our courts rule are.
CR appears to distrust and fear people from outside Basingstoke, so actual refugees don’t stand a snowball’s with him.
As Starmer is not going to rejoin it is irrelevant
At some point somebody will propose rejoining.
It could be any of the parties!
It would work better if that party were the Conservatives. Having the Sun, Mail and Telegraph on board would be very helpful. It would be electorally beneficial to them in the Blue Wall.
Labour are hamstrung, and wouldn't dare. The RedWall would be apoplectic with rage
As Starmer is not going to rejoin it is irrelevant
At some point somebody will propose rejoining.
It could be any of the parties!
It would work better if that party were the Conservatives. Having the Sun, Mail and Telegraph on board would be very helpful. It would be electorally beneficial to them in the Blue Wall.
Labour are hamstrung, and wouldn't dare. The RedWall would be apoplectic with rage
Labour will probably return to the single market in a second term, possibly following a Tory about turn.
That feels a little whataboutish. Alistair gave stats showing red states have higher violent crime than blue. You replied showing a Democrat city that has high crime. It’s like pointing out a cold snap somewhere to disprove global warming.
Okay. I’ll engage as thoughtfully I can with the asylum seeker problem, and offer my solutions.
This problem is as bad as it is due entirely to talentless clueless incompetents the Tory’s put in charge of mangling it. There’s no magic bullet, it’s true, though here’s my list of things that will reduce the problem for sure,
1. For starters, The incompetents managing it don’t understand the problem they are dealing with - it’s as simple of that - we know this as fact as they talk about 70% or more are economic migrants, bogus asylum seekers. Back in the real world do you really believe Undocumented economic migrants deliver themselves into the hands of Home Office officials as soon as they reach UK soil? Hence, 4% processing comes from setting up for 70%+ economic migrants, not genuine asylum claims. According the governments own figures, the majority of asylum claims are found to be legitimate Almost two-thirds (64%) of asylum claims end in a grant of protection. Of those rejected that went on to appeal, 48% were successfully overturned. They are clearly tackling the backlog with the wrong mindset and wrong prioritising.
2. Secondly, on basis you now realise how many are genuine asylum claims bogged down in your two year backlog, Set up a Department for International Development (DfID) to strengthen the infrastructures of fragile countries and increase stability there. Where do you want to spend the money, DfID, or 5 star hotels? You do the math.
3. Enable safe, legal routes for resettlement of genuine refugees. Would they even need a long stay in a processing centre on UK soil after dangerous water crossing, if you took safe, legal routes for resettlement more seriously? Take as example the priority given to Ukraine refugees, and how abysmal this home office under this government was at managing Ukrainian processing - sending them here and there, where no one was there to help them. And that’s what we call our gold star fast Lane process. Despite Tories paying lip service to liking safe, legal routes, the number of people resettled under the government’s UK resettlement scheme was 1,171 in the 12 months to September 2021, down by about 45% year on year.
4. This is the idea I like best. Process UK humanitarian visas on French soil, and bring them across on ferries. Genuine asylum seekers in northern France hoping to reach the UK to claim asylum, so happy to place themselves into the hands of our home office, could register their claim with UK officials and then be placed on ferries to be brought to the UK while their claim is processed. You want the Rwanda scheme because you are led to believe it hurts the business model of the people smugglers? The simple MoonRabbits Ferry to Freedom Solution utterly smashes through the business model of the people smugglers does it not?
Yes, throwing the doors open and charging nothing certainly does smash through the business model of the people smugglers.
Do you even see a difference between economic migrants in search of a job, and genuine refugee’s seeking asylum and safety? Or are you happy to repeatedly blur and box all this together, just as Braverman and Sunak have been doing?
I think basically CR believes that none are genuine refugees, even those that our courts rule are.
CR appears to distrust and fear people from outside Basingstoke, so actual refugees don’t stand a snowball’s with him.
Interesting choice, Basingstoke. There was a Guardian video report last week that pretty much twinned it with Tirana, such is the economic desolation.
Some of the few times I've given a tory councillor a vote has been when they had a tragic name which led me to think 'bullied at school'. '[Conservative] Mister Bigflabbybottom'. There's probably a % in it if they could persuade people to change their names...
1)Red states have higher crime/murder rates than blue states 2)Democrats are losing some of their advantage in blue states due to their policies on law and order
As Starmer is not going to rejoin it is irrelevant
At some point somebody will propose rejoining.
It could be any of the parties!
It would work better if that party were the Conservatives. Having the Sun, Mail and Telegraph on board would be very helpful. It would be electorally beneficial to them in the Blue Wall.
Labour are hamstrung, and wouldn't dare. The RedWall would be apoplectic with rage
Labour will probably return to the single market in a second term, possibly following a Tory about turn.
The party we need to bring Britain back to the fold is LREM. Macron gets his way and creates a new 2-speed Europe with a tightly politically and fiscally integrated Eurozone and wider looser single market and customs Union stretching from Iceland to Ukraine. And a relieved Britain joins that.
Okay. I’ll engage as thoughtfully I can with the asylum seeker problem, and offer my solutions.
This problem is as bad as it is due entirely to talentless clueless incompetents the Tory’s put in charge of mangling it. There’s no magic bullet, it’s true, though here’s my list of things that will reduce the problem for sure,
1. For starters, The incompetents managing it don’t understand the problem they are dealing with - it’s as simple of that - we know this as fact as they talk about 70% or more are economic migrants, bogus asylum seekers. Back in the real world do you really believe Undocumented economic migrants deliver themselves into the hands of Home Office officials as soon as they reach UK soil? Hence, 4% processing comes from setting up for 70%+ economic migrants, not genuine asylum claims. According the governments own figures, the majority of asylum claims are found to be legitimate Almost two-thirds (64%) of asylum claims end in a grant of protection. Of those rejected that went on to appeal, 48% were successfully overturned. They are clearly tackling the backlog with the wrong mindset and wrong prioritising.
2. Secondly, on basis you now realise how many are genuine asylum claims bogged down in your two year backlog, Set up a Department for International Development (DfID) to strengthen the infrastructures of fragile countries and increase stability there. Where do you want to spend the money, DfID, or 5 star hotels? You do the math.
3. Enable safe, legal routes for resettlement of genuine refugees. Would they even need a long stay in a processing centre on UK soil after dangerous water crossing, if you took safe, legal routes for resettlement more seriously? Take as example the priority given to Ukraine refugees, and how abysmal this home office under this government was at managing Ukrainian processing - sending them here and there, where no one was there to help them. And that’s what we call our gold star fast Lane process. Despite Tories paying lip service to liking safe, legal routes, the number of people resettled under the government’s UK resettlement scheme was 1,171 in the 12 months to September 2021, down by about 45% year on year.
4. This is the idea I like best. Process UK humanitarian visas on French soil, and bring them across on ferries. Genuine asylum seekers in northern France hoping to reach the UK to claim asylum, so happy to place themselves into the hands of our home office, could register their claim with UK officials and then be placed on ferries to be brought to the UK while their claim is processed. You want the Rwanda scheme because you are led to believe it hurts the business model of the people smugglers? The simple MoonRabbits Ferry to Freedom Solution utterly smashes through the business model of the people smugglers does it not?
Yes, throwing the doors open and charging nothing certainly does smash through the business model of the people smugglers.
Do you even see a difference between economic migrants in search of a job, and genuine refugee’s seeking asylum and safety? Or are you happy to repeatedly blur and box all this together, just as Braverman and Sunak have been doing?
I think basically CR believes that none are genuine refugees, even those that our courts rule are.
CR appears to distrust and fear people from outside Basingstoke, so actual refugees don’t stand a snowball’s with him.
Interesting choice, Basingstoke. There was a Guardian video report last week that pretty much twinned it with Tirana, such is the economic desolation.
Okay. I’ll engage as thoughtfully I can with the asylum seeker problem, and offer my solutions.
This problem is as bad as it is due entirely to talentless clueless incompetents the Tory’s put in charge of mangling it. There’s no magic bullet, it’s true, though here’s my list of things that will reduce the problem for sure,
1. For starters, The incompetents managing it don’t understand the problem they are dealing with - it’s as simple of that - we know this as fact as they talk about 70% or more are economic migrants, bogus asylum seekers. Back in the real world do you really believe Undocumented economic migrants deliver themselves into the hands of Home Office officials as soon as they reach UK soil? Hence, 4% processing comes from setting up for 70%+ economic migrants, not genuine asylum claims. According the governments own figures, the majority of asylum claims are found to be legitimate Almost two-thirds (64%) of asylum claims end in a grant of protection. Of those rejected that went on to appeal, 48% were successfully overturned. They are clearly tackling the backlog with the wrong mindset and wrong prioritising.
2. Secondly, on basis you now realise how many are genuine asylum claims bogged down in your two year backlog, Set up a Department for International Development (DfID) to strengthen the infrastructures of fragile countries and increase stability there. Where do you want to spend the money, DfID, or 5 star hotels? You do the math.
3. Enable safe, legal routes for resettlement of genuine refugees. Would they even need a long stay in a processing centre on UK soil after dangerous water crossing, if you took safe, legal routes for resettlement more seriously? Take as example the priority given to Ukraine refugees, and how abysmal this home office under this government was at managing Ukrainian processing - sending them here and there, where no one was there to help them. And that’s what we call our gold star fast Lane process. Despite Tories paying lip service to liking safe, legal routes, the number of people resettled under the government’s UK resettlement scheme was 1,171 in the 12 months to September 2021, down by about 45% year on year.
4. This is the idea I like best. Process UK humanitarian visas on French soil, and bring them across on ferries. Genuine asylum seekers in northern France hoping to reach the UK to claim asylum, so happy to place themselves into the hands of our home office, could register their claim with UK officials and then be placed on ferries to be brought to the UK while their claim is processed. You want the Rwanda scheme because you are led to believe it hurts the business model of the people smugglers? The simple MoonRabbits Ferry to Freedom Solution utterly smashes through the business model of the people smugglers does it not?
Yes, throwing the doors open and charging nothing certainly does smash through the business model of the people smugglers.
Do you even see a difference between economic migrants in search of a job, and genuine refugee’s seeking asylum and safety? Or are you happy to repeatedly blur and box all this together, just as Braverman and Sunak have been doing?
I think basically CR believes that none are genuine refugees, even those that our courts rule are.
I’m not giving up on CR or Lucky. They can be talked round.
People saying Portugal, well its not fucked, its great compared to the UK...
For the record, the average monthly wage in Portugal stood at €1,180 per month in 2019, compared to around €4,000 in Germany. Many Portuguese earn far less and try to get by on the monthly minimum wage of €741 a month, less than half the levels seen in Germany (€1,584), the UK (€1,600) or the Netherlands (€1,636). Moreover, Portugal is not a cheap country to live in. The cost of housing, energy, food, and many electronic goods is as high if not higher than in other European countries. So, life for many families is very tough indeed....
Since the mid-1990s, productivity growth has stalled as a result of low investment in information technology, labour market rigidities and the allocation of labour and capital to industries partly dominated by state-owned firms or those less open to competition, according to the economist Ricardo Pinheiro Alves.
Lisbon is becoming a bit of a tech hub at the moment, alongside London. It's easy to get staff, and office rents are very low. Infrastructure is not bad either.
It's not perfect (nowhere is), but I'd regard it as significantly more likely to succeed in the medium term than Italy.
The food is fucking dismal, once you get behind sardines, custard tarts, and that saffron rice fish cataplana genre
They do like large dry lumps of pork, I've noticed. It is noticeably worse for food than the poor parts of Spain.
i recently did a Gazette trip to Portugal. At the start the food was apparently delightful, if simple. The sardines, the cataplana thing, the pastel de Nata, some pleasant cheeses and charcuterie. Then I realised that was basically it. And as the trip went on the food got worse and worse until I was being served shit I would have left uneaten in my state school in the 1970s. The worst food I’ve had in Europe that I can remember, apart from a trip to the Rhineland in about 2017
I've had lots of good seafood in Portugal: tiny little shellfish, beautifully well cooked whitefish with a simple olive oil based sauce, salt cod, octopus stewed in olive oil with perfect little potatoes, and deep, rich dishes that were halfway between soup and stew.
Apparently, they do very good pork there too. Not as good as in Spain, but still pretty good.
Salt-cod/bacalhau potato dauphinoise is a thing of deep, deep joy.
If we allowed Asylum to be claimed at any British Embassy in the world, how many applicants would there be in the first year? What if we did it just in Europe?
As Starmer is not going to rejoin it is irrelevant
At some point somebody will propose rejoining.
It could be any of the parties!
It would work better if that party were the Conservatives. Having the Sun, Mail and Telegraph on board would be very helpful. It would be electorally beneficial to them in the Blue Wall.
Labour are hamstrung, and wouldn't dare. The RedWall would be apoplectic with rage
Labour will probably return to the single market in a second term, possibly following a Tory about turn.
The party we need to bring Britain back to the fold is LREM. Macron gets his way and creates a new 2-speed Europe with a tightly politically and fiscally integrated Eurozone and wider looser single market and customs Union stretching from Iceland to Ukraine. And a relieved Britain joins that.
I agree with this. I’m not sure if Macron quite does. Regardless, it requires a willingness to invest in the vision (not traditionally a British strength) and the diplomatic muscle to make it happen.
Okay. I’ll engage as thoughtfully I can with the asylum seeker problem, and offer my solutions.
This problem is as bad as it is due entirely to talentless clueless incompetents the Tory’s put in charge of mangling it. There’s no magic bullet, it’s true, though here’s my list of things that will reduce the problem for sure,
1. For starters, The incompetents managing it don’t understand the problem they are dealing with - it’s as simple of that - we know this as fact as they talk about 70% or more are economic migrants, bogus asylum seekers. Back in the real world do you really believe Undocumented economic migrants deliver themselves into the hands of Home Office officials as soon as they reach UK soil? Hence, 4% processing comes from setting up for 70%+ economic migrants, not genuine asylum claims. According the governments own figures, the majority of asylum claims are found to be legitimate Almost two-thirds (64%) of asylum claims end in a grant of protection. Of those rejected that went on to appeal, 48% were successfully overturned. They are clearly tackling the backlog with the wrong mindset and wrong prioritising.
2. Secondly, on basis you now realise how many are genuine asylum claims bogged down in your two year backlog, Set up a Department for International Development (DfID) to strengthen the infrastructures of fragile countries and increase stability there. Where do you want to spend the money, DfID, or 5 star hotels? You do the math.
3. Enable safe, legal routes for resettlement of genuine refugees. Would they even need a long stay in a processing centre on UK soil after dangerous water crossing, if you took safe, legal routes for resettlement more seriously? Take as example the priority given to Ukraine refugees, and how abysmal this home office under this government was at managing Ukrainian processing - sending them here and there, where no one was there to help them. And that’s what we call our gold star fast Lane process. Despite Tories paying lip service to liking safe, legal routes, the number of people resettled under the government’s UK resettlement scheme was 1,171 in the 12 months to September 2021, down by about 45% year on year.
4. This is the idea I like best. Process UK humanitarian visas on French soil, and bring them across on ferries. Genuine asylum seekers in northern France hoping to reach the UK to claim asylum, so happy to place themselves into the hands of our home office, could register their claim with UK officials and then be placed on ferries to be brought to the UK while their claim is processed. You want the Rwanda scheme because you are led to believe it hurts the business model of the people smugglers? The simple MoonRabbits Ferry to Freedom Solution utterly smashes through the business model of the people smugglers does it not?
Yes, throwing the doors open and charging nothing certainly does smash through the business model of the people smugglers.
Do you even see a difference between economic migrants in search of a job, and genuine refugee’s seeking asylum and safety? Or are you happy to repeatedly blur and box all this together, just as Braverman and Sunak have been doing?
I think basically CR believes that none are genuine refugees, even those that our courts rule are.
CR appears to distrust and fear people from outside Basingstoke, so actual refugees don’t stand a snowball’s with him.
rcs1000 - On murder rates in US states: You do, I assume, know about the "ecological fallacy"?
And here's an election example for you from many years ago: In rural Illinois, there was a precinct which included a large "halfway house" for released sex offenders. The precinct voted heavily Democratic.
Rural states have lower murder rates.
Not going to disagree with that.
But Washington state is highly urban. 60% of the State live in Greater Seattle.
Even if we assume that the murder rate outside of Seattle is zero (which it's not), it still has a murder rate well below Alabama, Mississipi, etc.
So, here's the question: why do Republican States have - on average - more murders per person?
I can confirm that it takes only 2 minutes to walk from the new Hanover Square exit of Bond Street to Oxford Circus tube station.
I once walked from the Dean Street exit of Tottenham Court Road to check out the (then) upcoming Hanover Square building (to avoid the bloody Central Line!), and it took me less than 15 minutes.
”Over the past year, one in six UK adults has had a pressing [medical] need and been unable to get access… This is the highest figure out of 36 European countries and almost triple the EU average.”
No doubt I get a partial view (as PBers do of the US) but the place seems totally fuckerooed and the prospect is dismal at least according to the BoE.
Envy of the World, the NHS - said no-one who’s ever lived anywhere else.
It’s not just the NHS though, is it.
Judging just by the posts on here, the courts are fucked, immigration and asylum is totally broken, education is a disaster, there’s a new government every five minutes, and of course the economy is buggered.
A good proportion of posts on here are from people with a vested interest in making people believe that everything is fucked.
Here's my assessment of how fucked things are from personal experience:
NHS: fucked. Almost impossible to get appointments. Long waits for referrals. Schools: okay but getting worse. Obviously less resources than a few years ago. Secondary school staff turnover and occasional staff shortages suggests wages too low to retain staff in London. All extra curricular activities need to be paid for. Public transport: okay but getting worse. Bus routes cut, less frequent buses. Tube okay. New Elizabeth Line an obvious improvement. Trains okay, same as ever. Council services: obviously very stretched. Street cleaning way down. Basic services covered, nothing else, impossible to speak to anyone about anything. Fly tipping out of control. Roads: surfaces increasingly poor. Perhaps there is an effort at catch up given amount of works going on, but a lot of that seems to be water related. Frequent burst water mains. Prices of everything massively up. Taxes up. Private sector obviously seeing staff shortages, evident in retail, hospitality and construction. Occasional glimpses of additional border red tape but doesn't affect me much directly. Overall: quality of life is deteriorating.
You can apply all that to Wales under the Welsh labour government (apart from the tube obviously)
Welsh Labour seem less a political proposition than a kind of shitocracy. I presume the Welsh prefer it this way as the Welsh Tories are even worse.
I've never understood the popularity of Mark Drakeford.
He looks like he's escaped from Harold Wilson's cabinet.
Now come on. Harold would never have entertained the idea of Drakeford as a cabinet minister. I don't think there is anything to understand regarding his popularity. People don't really like or dislike him. He's just there. He's not a Tory. He's welsh but not a nationalist. He doesn't cause offence.
Personally I don't think the Conservatives have a hope of overthrowing Labour in Wales so long as the private sector remains anaemic. Scottish Labour collapsed because their voters switched to one specific alternative, the SNP. In Wales the opposition is split between Tory/Plaid/Lib Dem/Reform. None of them individually strong enough and alliance friendly.
Labour's attempts to structurally game the electoral system in the devolved nations so they were permanently in power certainly worked in Wales. They've never been out of it.
Mark Drakeford just looks like - in every way, the way he looks, dressed and talks - like he should be living in 1974.
You think Labour must have gamed Sennedd elections because otherwise they'd be like general elections in which, oh, hold on, Labour is so dominant that CCHQ convinced itself they were cheating there too?
The party that won the Senedd elections in 2021 is the same party that won the elections in 1999, 2003, 2007, 2011 and 2016.
It is the Don't Vote party.
Turnout is abysmal, from 38 % in 2003 to 46.6 % in 2021.
Compare with the Scottish elections -- the turnout was 63.5 % in 2021. There is something to vote for in Scotland.
Llafur got 39 % of the vote. So, let's do the math, 0.39 * 0.466 = 0.179, so Llafur was supported by 18 people in every hundred entitled to vote in Wales.
It is not the case that 70% of asylum claims, on average, are accepted. The number is (in most years) between 30 and 45%. And the number from Albania is going to be close to zero.
However, there will have been a massive spike in accepted asylum applications in 2021, because with the withdrawal from Afghanistan, the UK accepted a great many people who had helped British and American forces there. Those people were in imminent danger of being killed by the Taliban, and we were at least partially responsible for their plight.
But in most years, only 1-in-3 asylum claims will be accepted.
One or two getting over-excited or hyper-ventilating about the EU once again. IF 2024 is the "Remainer's Revenge" it will simply be a victory over those elements in the Conservative Party which were most prominent in the LEAVE campaign and especially whose who have spent the last eight years going on about they won and the "metropolitan liberal elite" (whatever that is) lost.
If said elite achieves its revenge through the ballot box having failed to achieve it through parliament, the irony will be lost on no one.
As to "re-joining" the EU, the process will be much slower than that. The initial stage will be to begin negotiations to seek terms as to any possible joining (or re-joining) of the EU. Given status quo ante is probably not an option and equally given being forced to accept the Euro, Schengen and Freedom of Movement is also probably a non-starter, that doesn't leave much to talk about in truth.
Until or unless we see major shifts in policy or opinion on one or both sides, the whole argument is moot. The majority of the British population will never accept the Euro or Freedom of Movement so the Single Market is out - yes, we can have closer regulatory agreement I'm sure but many won't care too much about that.
That doesn't mean those who voted REMAIN won't gain a lot of pleasure should the likes of JRM, Gove and other prominent anti-EU figures get electorally eviscerated and sent to the political margins.
One of the more interesting questions if the Conservative Party is going to be in Opposition for an extended period is how it will adapt to the inevitable evolution of the UK-EU relationship and especially if Labour moves to a closer regulatory relationship.
It is not the case that 70% of asylum claims, on average, are accepted. The number is (in most years) between 30 and 45%. And the number from Albania is going to be close to zero.
However, there will have been a massive spike in accepted asylum applications in 2021, because with the withdrawal from Afghanistan, the UK accepted a great many people who had helped British and American forces there. Those people were in imminent danger of being killed by the Taliban, and we were at least partially responsible for their plight.
But in most years, only 1-in-3 asylum claims will be accepted.
Does your 30-45% asylum figure include those successful on appeal and those getting exceptional leave to remain?
None of them, to my knowledge, have Republican mayors.
Do you understand the ecological fallacy? (American journalists often fall into that trap in just the way you apparently have.)
Cities have higher homicide rates than rural areas.
That is true in the UK. In the US. And - I suspect - pretty much everywhere else.
But - nevertheless - Republican States seem to have (on average) higher rates of crime. Despite the fact that they are - on average - more rural.
The other piece of the puzzle is that big cities don't tend to have Republican mayors. Where they do, as in Jacksonville, they look like other big cities.
One or two getting over-excited or hyper-ventilating about the EU once again. IF 2024 is the "Remainer's Revenge" it will simply be a victory over those elements in the Conservative Party which were most prominent in the LEAVE campaign and especially whose who have spent the last eight years going on about they won and the "metropolitan liberal elite" (whatever that is) lost.
If said elite achieves its revenge through the ballot box having failed to achieve it through parliament, the irony will be lost on no one.
As to "re-joining" the EU, the process will be much slower than that. The initial stage will be to begin negotiations to seek terms as to any possible joining (or re-joining) of the EU. Given status quo ante is probably not an option and equally given being forced to accept the Euro, Schengen and Freedom of Movement is also probably a non-starter, that doesn't leave much to talk about in truth.
Until or unless we see major shifts in policy or opinion on one or both sides, the whole argument is moot. The majority of the British population will never accept the Euro or Freedom of Movement so the Single Market is out - yes, we can have closer regulatory agreement I'm sure but many won't care too much about that.
That doesn't mean those who voted REMAIN won't gain a lot of pleasure should the likes of JRM, Gove and other prominent anti-EU figures get electorally eviscerated and sent to the political margins.
One of the more interesting questions if the Conservative Party is going to be in Opposition for an extended period is how it will adapt to the inevitable evolution of the UK-EU relationship and especially if Labour moves to a closer regulatory relationship.
I think it not impossible that a routed Conservative party after the next election works its way back to electoral success by reverting to its pre 2016 pro-business, pro-EU position.
It is not the case that 70% of asylum claims, on average, are accepted. The number is (in most years) between 30 and 45%. And the number from Albania is going to be close to zero.
However, there will have been a massive spike in accepted asylum applications in 2021, because with the withdrawal from Afghanistan, the UK accepted a great many people who had helped British and American forces there. Those people were in imminent danger of being killed by the Taliban, and we were at least partially responsible for their plight.
But in most years, only 1-in-3 asylum claims will be accepted.
Does your 30-45% asylum figure include those successful on appeal and those getting exceptional leave to remain?
With such a large backlog, you would have to imagine a number will have good grounds to stay even when refused: being the father of a child born here, for example, or some other Right to Family Life grounds.
Does anyone have a good handle on the Iran situation? Were it not for ukraine/truss it would be the biggest story at the moment. I'd love some pointers.
It is not the case that 70% of asylum claims, on average, are accepted. The number is (in most years) between 30 and 45%. And the number from Albania is going to be close to zero.
However, there will have been a massive spike in accepted asylum applications in 2021, because with the withdrawal from Afghanistan, the UK accepted a great many people who had helped British and American forces there. Those people were in imminent danger of being killed by the Taliban, and we were at least partially responsible for their plight.
But in most years, only 1-in-3 asylum claims will be accepted.
It is not the case that 70% of asylum claims, on average, are accepted. The number is (in most years) between 30 and 45%. And the number from Albania is going to be close to zero.
However, there will have been a massive spike in accepted asylum applications in 2021, because with the withdrawal from Afghanistan, the UK accepted a great many people who had helped British and American forces there. Those people were in imminent danger of being killed by the Taliban, and we were at least partially responsible for their plight.
But in most years, only 1-in-3 asylum claims will be accepted.
Does your 30-45% asylum figure include those successful on appeal and those getting exceptional leave to remain?
With such a large backlog, you would have to imagine a number will have good grounds to stay even when refused: being the father of a child born here, for example, or some other Right to Family Life grounds.
In practice too, deportation to places like Afghanistan, Eritrea, Iran, and Zimbabwe are impossible, even if the asylum application is unsuccessful. They get stuck in limbo, though some leve voluntarily to try their luck elsewhere.
rcs1000 asked: "So, here's the question: why do Republican States have - on average - more murders per person?"
First, that's the wrong question. Here's a better question: What kind of people are most likely to be murdered in the United States?
And the answer, of course, is young black men. And, to a lesser extent, young black women. Who are likely to live in places that are run by Democratic politicians, and, if they are involved in politics at all, are likely to be Democrats.
From that you should be able to guess what kind of people are especially likely to be murderers. (Hint: Bernie Madoff preyed mostly on fellow Jews.)
It is important to understand what Seraphine Warren was trying to explain to our elected officials, when she walked from Sweetwater, Arizona to DC:
Does anyone have a good handle on the Iran situation? Were it not for ukraine/truss it would be the biggest story at the moment. I'd love some pointers.
International Communist Tendency's analysis here. It's the best and, indeed, only analysis you need.
It is not the case that 70% of asylum claims, on average, are accepted. The number is (in most years) between 30 and 45%. And the number from Albania is going to be close to zero.
However, there will have been a massive spike in accepted asylum applications in 2021, because with the withdrawal from Afghanistan, the UK accepted a great many people who had helped British and American forces there. Those people were in imminent danger of being killed by the Taliban, and we were at least partially responsible for their plight.
But in most years, only 1-in-3 asylum claims will be accepted.
Does your 30-45% asylum figure include those successful on appeal and those getting exceptional leave to remain?
With such a large backlog, you would have to imagine a number will have good grounds to stay even when refused: being the father of a child born here, for example, or some other Right to Family Life grounds.
In practice too, deportation to places like Afghanistan, Eritrea, Iran, and Zimbabwe are impossible, even if the asylum application is unsuccessful. They get stuck in limbo, though some leve voluntarily to try their luck elsewhere.
From migration observatory:
"In 2021, there were around 9,500 returns, comprising both enforced and voluntary returns, though this number will increase due to initial undercounting of voluntary returns. This is down from a peak of around 47,000 in 2013"
Covid has impacted the last couple of years but the downward trend started in 2012, so under the succession of Tory Home Secretaries from May onwards. It does rather look as if austerity budgets impacted Home Office capabilities.
One or two getting over-excited or hyper-ventilating about the EU once again. IF 2024 is the "Remainer's Revenge" it will simply be a victory over those elements in the Conservative Party which were most prominent in the LEAVE campaign and especially whose who have spent the last eight years going on about they won and the "metropolitan liberal elite" (whatever that is) lost.
If said elite achieves its revenge through the ballot box having failed to achieve it through parliament, the irony will be lost on no one.
As to "re-joining" the EU, the process will be much slower than that. The initial stage will be to begin negotiations to seek terms as to any possible joining (or re-joining) of the EU. Given status quo ante is probably not an option and equally given being forced to accept the Euro, Schengen and Freedom of Movement is also probably a non-starter, that doesn't leave much to talk about in truth.
Until or unless we see major shifts in policy or opinion on one or both sides, the whole argument is moot. The majority of the British population will never accept the Euro or Freedom of Movement so the Single Market is out - yes, we can have closer regulatory agreement I'm sure but many won't care too much about that.
That doesn't mean those who voted REMAIN won't gain a lot of pleasure should the likes of JRM, Gove and other prominent anti-EU figures get electorally eviscerated and sent to the political margins.
One of the more interesting questions if the Conservative Party is going to be in Opposition for an extended period is how it will adapt to the inevitable evolution of the UK-EU relationship and especially if Labour moves to a closer regulatory relationship.
Labour spend the next decade drawing into closer alignment with the EU.
Future Conservatives get outraged at not being in charge of the bally thing. Hence Conservatives we haven't heard of yet campaign for Taking Our Proper Seat at the European Table.
(As for the Britain will never vote for X, perhaps. But it may look different once the Boomer Brexit Bulge generation have gone to a place where there are no referenda. Might not, of course. But the date of birth splits on anything Euro are incredible.)
People saying Portugal, well its not fucked, its great compared to the UK...
For the record, the average monthly wage in Portugal stood at €1,180 per month in 2019, compared to around €4,000 in Germany. Many Portuguese earn far less and try to get by on the monthly minimum wage of €741 a month, less than half the levels seen in Germany (€1,584), the UK (€1,600) or the Netherlands (€1,636). Moreover, Portugal is not a cheap country to live in. The cost of housing, energy, food, and many electronic goods is as high if not higher than in other European countries. So, life for many families is very tough indeed....
Since the mid-1990s, productivity growth has stalled as a result of low investment in information technology, labour market rigidities and the allocation of labour and capital to industries partly dominated by state-owned firms or those less open to competition, according to the economist Ricardo Pinheiro Alves.
Portugal has been doing quite well lately. Booming digital economy in Lisbon, for example.
Of course it is poorer than the rest of Western Europe, always has been, but it’s catching up.
Covid response was also notably coherent, belying stereotypes.
I don’t recognise Leon’s judgement that it is “fucked”. It seems to my eyes that it is slowly but surely de-fucking.
In your view Britain is and must be fucked because of Brexit and nowhere else can be as bad.
It's as simple as that.
Perhaps if you lived here and extracted your head from your arse you'd realise things here actually aren't that bad.
What an odd comment. I guess it is pissed-and-dyspeptic o’clock at yours.
At the end of the day, despite sleeping with a Union Jack bedspread, most of your political positions are actively harmful to the country you love.
Take responsibility instead of randomly dishing out insults.
That really is the pot calling the kettle black.
I suppose you could always go back and live in New Xi-Land, which is too busy sucking on CCP cock to do anything about standing up for Western values x
Sleeplessness + Alcohol + Jingoistic Mental Retardation is a hell of a combo.
Tell you what, when you start living here again, and you learn again what the fuck you're talking about, then I'll start listening about your views on what life is like in the UK.
Until then either shut the fuck up or fuck the fuck off.
Haven’t you got an refugee centre to firebomb or something?
It is not the case that 70% of asylum claims, on average, are accepted. The number is (in most years) between 30 and 45%. And the number from Albania is going to be close to zero.
However, there will have been a massive spike in accepted asylum applications in 2021, because with the withdrawal from Afghanistan, the UK accepted a great many people who had helped British and American forces there. Those people were in imminent danger of being killed by the Taliban, and we were at least partially responsible for their plight.
But in most years, only 1-in-3 asylum claims will be accepted.
Thanks for the explanation.
Allow me to be the Angel on your other shoulder Lucky and give you alternate factual picture to consider.
@rcs1000 Firstly, you appear to be arguing the governments own figures, the majority of asylum claims are found to be legitimate Almost two-thirds (64%) of asylum claims end in a grant of protection. Of those rejected that went on to appeal, 48% were successfully overturned are inflated by a 2021 spike of afghans. Do you though accept regarding safe, legal routes, the number of people resettled under the government’s UK resettlement scheme was 1,171 in the 12 months to September 2021, down by about 45% year on year.
And of those recently processed by this government of Iranians, Eritreans and Sudanese, seeking asylum allowed to stay, what figures do you have - my research came in at 87%.
Finally, do you believe it moral and ethical for UK to outsource its asylum processing and granting obligations to a third party?
I think it not impossible that a routed Conservative party after the next election works its way back to electoral success by reverting to its pre 2016 pro-business, pro-EU position.
Perhaps over a 15-20 year period in the wilderness that will be the case but it will need a herculean cleaning of the stables to clear out the influence of the anti-EU viewpoint in the party.
It's almost impossible to conceive of the next manifestation of conservatism - I agree it will be a reversion to a more classic one nation approach possibly (I'd argue) tinged with a very strong environmentalist nuance by which I don't mean eco-authoritarianism or State related eco-interventionism but more about how individuals and business can continue to improve environment credentials via innovation and technology.
By the mid to late 2030s the implications of climate change will be that bit more obvious and that bit more alarming.
The slogan might be the "Green Light of Technology" (with apologies to Harold Wilson).
I think it not impossible that a routed Conservative party after the next election works its way back to electoral success by reverting to its pre 2016 pro-business, pro-EU position.
Perhaps over a 15-20 year period in the wilderness that will be the case but it will need a herculean cleaning of the stables to clear out the influence of the anti-EU viewpoint in the party.
It's almost impossible to conceive of the next manifestation of conservatism - I agree it will be a reversion to a more classic one nation approach possibly (I'd argue) tinged with a very strong environmentalist nuance by which I don't mean eco-authoritarianism or State related eco-interventionism but more about how individuals and business can continue to improve environment credentials via innovation and technology.
By the mid to late 2030s the implications of climate change will be that bit more obvious and that bit more alarming.
The slogan might be the "Green Light of Technology" (with apologies to Harold Wilson).
Yes, I am not expecting us to Rejoin this decade. The 2030's is very possible, perhaps via a revitalised pro-Single Market Thatcherite Conservative Party.
I have yet to hear a credible policy on dealing with the asylum claims issue. Makes me think that the best thing for now would be to throw more resources at it to speed up dealing with the claims which might reduce the attractiveness to the chancers.
rcs1000 asked: "So, here's the question: why do Republican States have - on average - more murders per person?"
First, that's the wrong question. Here's a better question: What kind of people are most likely to be murdered in the United States?
And the answer, of course, is young black men. And, to a lesser extent, young black women. Who are likely to live in places that are run by Democratic politicians, and, if they are involved in politics at all, are likely to be Democrats.
From that you should be able to guess what kind of people are especially likely to be murderers. (Hint: Bernie Madoff preyed mostly on fellow Jews.)
It is important to understand what Seraphine Warren was trying to explain to our elected officials, when she walked from Sweetwater, Arizona to DC:
No, that's you attempting to change the question to the get the answer you want.
Most crime is committed by poor people, to poor people. That's true in the US. That's true in the UK. That's true everywhere.
And most movements in crime rates are the consequence of external factors: a move from the drug of choice going from crack to heroin; or gentrification pushing criminals to a different area.
What stops crime?
Is it harsher punishments?
Sadly, there's no evidence at all that is the case. Murder rates are worse in States with the death penalty. And there is no evidence of murder rates moving up with abolition, or down with reintroduction. Three strikes laws too have basically been a failure: they mean that on third convictions, every criminal chooses trial (gumming up the system), and they mean juries are unwilling to convict if the punishment seems too severe for the crime.
Is it more spending on policing?
It's not even clear that helps.
The best way to stop crime is to improve economic outcomes for people. And that means investing in education and social support.
I have yet to hear a credible policy on dealing with the asylum claims issue. Makes me think that the best thing for now would be to throw more resources at it to speed up dealing with the claims which might reduce the attractiveness to the chancers.
IIRC, asylum seekers are only barred from payed work for the first year. With this backlog, the ability to work legally is a pull. Probably still true that it's not the first choice for boat arrivals though - that is not to get caught in the first place.
I think it not impossible that a routed Conservative party after the next election works its way back to electoral success by reverting to its pre 2016 pro-business, pro-EU position.
Perhaps over a 15-20 year period in the wilderness that will be the case but it will need a herculean cleaning of the stables to clear out the influence of the anti-EU viewpoint in the party.
It's almost impossible to conceive of the next manifestation of conservatism - I agree it will be a reversion to a more classic one nation approach possibly (I'd argue) tinged with a very strong environmentalist nuance by which I don't mean eco-authoritarianism or State related eco-interventionism but more about how individuals and business can continue to improve environment credentials via innovation and technology.
By the mid to late 2030s the implications of climate change will be that bit more obvious and that bit more alarming.
The slogan might be the "Green Light of Technology" (with apologies to Harold Wilson).
Yes, I am not expecting us to Rejoin this decade. The 2030's is very possible, perhaps via a revitalised pro-Single Market Thatcherite Conservative Party.
I am interested - if the UK were everything that you wanted; open, fair, prosperous, well-organised, tolerant, left-leaning, and able to afford a significant public sector, would you still want to rejoin the EU? I am just trying to work out whether there's an ideological issue with the concept of the UK as an independent nation or whether you feel rejoining would be the solution to perceived deficiencies.
'…of course, in football, people will be judged on trophies & medals & success, but probably somewhere in between all of that is where you'd like to be.'
On #Brexit:'My kids see themselves as much European as they do see themselves English, they can't really understand #Brexit'
That disgusting National Rally MP in France, Grégoire de Fournas, is using a homophone defence.
"The official account of the session recorded his off-microphone remark as Qu'il retourne en Afrique - 'he should go back to Africa' - but the plural Qu'ils retournent en Afrique sounds exactly the same."
The sounds made by the words "Drop dead, racist scum" are fortunately less ambiguous.
I have yet to hear a credible policy on dealing with the asylum claims issue. Makes me think that the best thing for now would be to throw more resources at it to speed up dealing with the claims which might reduce the attractiveness to the chancers.
My formula is internment camps with legal and medical facilities, with rapid assessment of cases, and continued internment of unsuccessful cases until deported or voluntarily returned. In 2013 under the same legal system we could return 4 times as many as the current system.
Yes, it requires spending money, but would be far more effective than the current system of 4 star hotels, failure to assess applications and non-existant deportations to Rwanda.
I have yet to hear a credible policy on dealing with the asylum claims issue. Makes me think that the best thing for now would be to throw more resources at it to speed up dealing with the claims which might reduce the attractiveness to the chancers.
If Britain can't cope administratively or financially without exposing the people to overcrowding, diphtheria (and whatever diseases come next), and child rape, then seek assistance from the UNHCR.
In 2015, he defeated incumbent Democrat Alvin Brown. And then was re-elected easily in 2019. (It is not unusual in the US for Republican politicians to defeat Democrats, even incumbents, by promising to do more to control crime. For example, that was one of the reasons that George W. Bush defeated Ann Richards for governor of Texas in 1994.)
So, to put it simply, rather than elected Republicans --> increased crime, the causality often runs in the oppositedirection: increased crime --> elected Republicans.
I think it not impossible that a routed Conservative party after the next election works its way back to electoral success by reverting to its pre 2016 pro-business, pro-EU position.
Perhaps over a 15-20 year period in the wilderness that will be the case but it will need a herculean cleaning of the stables to clear out the influence of the anti-EU viewpoint in the party.
It's almost impossible to conceive of the next manifestation of conservatism - I agree it will be a reversion to a more classic one nation approach possibly (I'd argue) tinged with a very strong environmentalist nuance by which I don't mean eco-authoritarianism or State related eco-interventionism but more about how individuals and business can continue to improve environment credentials via innovation and technology.
By the mid to late 2030s the implications of climate change will be that bit more obvious and that bit more alarming.
The slogan might be the "Green Light of Technology" (with apologies to Harold Wilson).
Yes, I am not expecting us to Rejoin this decade. The 2030's is very possible, perhaps via a revitalised pro-Single Market Thatcherite Conservative Party.
I am interested - if the UK were everything that you wanted; open, fair, prosperous, well-organised, tolerant, left-leaning, and able to afford a significant public sector, would you still want to rejoin the EU? I am just trying to work out whether there's an ideological issue with the concept of the UK as an independent nation or whether you feel rejoining would be the solution to perceived deficiencies.
The UK has always been an independent country, but I do believe that we have a long and glorious history of founding and joining international bodies to tackle international issues: NATO, UN, IMF, WB, EU, GATT etc etc. All these impact on sovereignty, but we gain more by pooling it than we lose.
I have yet to hear a credible policy on dealing with the asylum claims issue. Makes me think that the best thing for now would be to throw more resources at it to speed up dealing with the claims which might reduce the attractiveness to the chancers.
I have to agree - I've been giving it some thought and I can't see an easy answer either.
Part of me thinks we are cursed by the success of the English language which is the lingua franca of business and the gateway to Canada, America and Australia (to name but three).
I'm also of the view we are dealing with the symptoms here not the cause (so to speak). The degree to which we could "level up" (yes, I know) other economies to make economic migration less attractive is one to ponder perhaps.
We have seen how the initial wave of Polish and Baltic migration ended when the economies of those countries improved and the attraction of UK wages wasn't the same..
I keep coming back to technology, prosperity and capitalism - it's a bit boring I know but if we can enrich others we'll be doing ourselves a favour (not quite trickle-down but more than foreign aid)
I think it not impossible that a routed Conservative party after the next election works its way back to electoral success by reverting to its pre 2016 pro-business, pro-EU position.
Perhaps over a 15-20 year period in the wilderness that will be the case but it will need a herculean cleaning of the stables to clear out the influence of the anti-EU viewpoint in the party.
It's almost impossible to conceive of the next manifestation of conservatism - I agree it will be a reversion to a more classic one nation approach possibly (I'd argue) tinged with a very strong environmentalist nuance by which I don't mean eco-authoritarianism or State related eco-interventionism but more about how individuals and business can continue to improve environment credentials via innovation and technology.
By the mid to late 2030s the implications of climate change will be that bit more obvious and that bit more alarming.
The slogan might be the "Green Light of Technology" (with apologies to Harold Wilson).
Yes, I am not expecting us to Rejoin this decade. The 2030's is very possible, perhaps via a revitalised pro-Single Market Thatcherite Conservative Party.
I am interested - if the UK were everything that you wanted; open, fair, prosperous, well-organised, tolerant, left-leaning, and able to afford a significant public sector, would you still want to rejoin the EU? I am just trying to work out whether there's an ideological issue with the concept of the UK as an independent nation or whether you feel rejoining would be the solution to perceived deficiencies.
The UK has always been an independent country, but I do believe that we have a long and glorious history of founding and joining international bodies to tackle international issues: NATO, UN, IMF, WB, EU, GATT etc etc. All these impact on sovereignty, but we gain more by pooling it than we lose.
So it's just a general preference for being in things. Ok.
I have yet to hear a credible policy on dealing with the asylum claims issue. Makes me think that the best thing for now would be to throw more resources at it to speed up dealing with the claims which might reduce the attractiveness to the chancers.
IIRC, asylum seekers are only barred from payed work for the first year. With this backlog, the ability to work legally is a pull. Probably still true that it's not the first choice for boat arrivals though - that is not to get caught in the first place.
Not quite true, the asylum application has to have been more than 12 months through no fault of the seeker, and the work permit has to be in a national shortage occupation:
I have yet to hear a credible policy on dealing with the asylum claims issue. Makes me think that the best thing for now would be to throw more resources at it to speed up dealing with the claims which might reduce the attractiveness to the chancers.
It depends what the problem is. I don’t think there is agreement on what is the problem.
I am happy to process asylum claims and grant asylum to legitimate asylum seekers, I think my five solutions do help, though my solutions based on there being legitimacy to the claims of people who made it across the channel now caught up in the processing backlog, so sorting out the problems with the volume, trafficking gangs, the dangerous method of arrival and problems processing backlog, is what my solutions are trying to do.
if people just want the boat invasion to stop my solutions I shared here are utterly useless, to the problem as they see it. they can rightly hate my solutions and what they are trying to achieve, granting right to stay to some who came across in the boats, as it’s accepting asylum claims here and honouring international obligations could actually make the invasion worse, just as the Rwanda policy is the complete opposite to that, basically outsourcing UK asylum claims in hope the boat invasion dries up.
1. those managing to understand the problem they are dealing with - they talk about 70% or more economic migrants, bogus asylum seekers. do you really believe Undocumented economic migrants deliver themselves into the hands of Home Office officials Maybe 4% processing comes from setting up for 70%+ economic migrants, not genuine asylum claims? the governments own figures, the majority of asylum claims are found to be legitimate two-thirds (64%) of asylum claims end in grant of protection. those rejected, 48% successfully overturned on appeal.
2. on basis you now realise many are genuine asylum claims Set up a Department for International Development (DfID) to strengthen the infrastructures of fragile countries and increase stability there. Where do you want to spend the money in future, DfID, or 5 star hotels?
3. Enable safe legal routes for resettlement of genuine refugees. Would they even need a long stay in a processing centre on UK soil after dangerous water crossing, if you took safe, legal routes for resettlement more seriously? the number of people resettled under the government’s UK resettlement scheme was 1,171 in the 12 months to September 2021, down by about 45% year on year.
4. Process UK humanitarian visas on French soil, and bring them across on ferries. Genuine asylum seekers in northern France hoping to reach the UK to claim asylum, so happy to place themselves into the hands of our home office, could register their claim with UK officials and then be placed on ferries to be brought to the UK while their claim is processed. This would hurt the business model of the people smugglers and the criminal gangs working the camps.
I don’t think I could be more fairer or helpful discussing this thorny issue.
Does anyone have a good handle on the Iran situation? Were it not for ukraine/truss it would be the biggest story at the moment. I'd love some pointers.
International Communist Tendency's analysis here. It's the best and, indeed, only analysis you need.
Thanks. It's nice to know what the other side is thinking be it mullahs or the idiot left. Mr Saadati of the Communist Workers Organisation may be a perfectly nice chap but his description of the war 'between Nato and Russia on the territory of Ukraine' is remarkably insulting towards the hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian soldiers risking their lives on the frontline.
I think it not impossible that a routed Conservative party after the next election works its way back to electoral success by reverting to its pre 2016 pro-business, pro-EU position.
Perhaps over a 15-20 year period in the wilderness that will be the case but it will need a herculean cleaning of the stables to clear out the influence of the anti-EU viewpoint in the party.
It's almost impossible to conceive of the next manifestation of conservatism - I agree it will be a reversion to a more classic one nation approach possibly (I'd argue) tinged with a very strong environmentalist nuance by which I don't mean eco-authoritarianism or State related eco-interventionism but more about how individuals and business can continue to improve environment credentials via innovation and technology.
By the mid to late 2030s the implications of climate change will be that bit more obvious and that bit more alarming.
The slogan might be the "Green Light of Technology" (with apologies to Harold Wilson).
Yes, I am not expecting us to Rejoin this decade. The 2030's is very possible, perhaps via a revitalised pro-Single Market Thatcherite Conservative Party.
I am interested - if the UK were everything that you wanted; open, fair, prosperous, well-organised, tolerant, left-leaning, and able to afford a significant public sector, would you still want to rejoin the EU? I am just trying to work out whether there's an ideological issue with the concept of the UK as an independent nation or whether you feel rejoining would be the solution to perceived deficiencies.
The UK has always been an independent country, but I do believe that we have a long and glorious history of founding and joining international bodies to tackle international issues: NATO, UN, IMF, WB, EU, GATT etc etc. All these impact on sovereignty, but we gain more by pooling it than we lose.
So it's just a general preference for being in things. Ok.
Yes, I believe in international co-operation as most problems benefit from international solutions. On top of that we as individuals had lots of reciprocal rights that Brexit ended. Brexit wasn't freedom, it was a loss of freedoms.
In 2015, he defeated incumbent Democrat Alvin Brown. And then was re-elected easily in 2019. (It is not unusual in the US for Republican politicians to defeat Democrats, even incumbents, by promising to do more to control crime. For example, that was one of the reasons that George W. Bush defeated Ann Richards for governor of Texas in 1994.)
So, to put it simply, rather than elected Republicans --> increased crime, the causality often runs in the oppositedirection: increased crime --> elected Republicans.
To put it even more simply, he appears to have done absolutely nothing to reduce crime in his city. Meanwhile, states like Arkansas with no particularly large cities top the league tables for crime.
'…of course, in football, people will be judged on trophies & medals & success, but probably somewhere in between all of that is where you'd like to be.'
On #Brexit:'My kids see themselves as much European as they do see themselves English, they can't really understand #Brexit'
4. Process UK humanitarian visas on French soil, and bring them across on ferries. Genuine asylum seekers in northern France hoping to reach the UK to claim asylum, so happy to place themselves into the hands of our home office, could register their claim with UK officials and then be placed on ferries to be brought to the UK while their claim is processed. This would hurt the business model of the people smugglers and the criminal gangs working the camps.
Could you imagine the optics of this? Political suicide. That cumstain Patrick Christys would gouge his own eyes out live on GB News as the first ferry full of Balkan Bodybuilders came alongside at Dover.
I think it not impossible that a routed Conservative party after the next election works its way back to electoral success by reverting to its pre 2016 pro-business, pro-EU position.
Perhaps over a 15-20 year period in the wilderness that will be the case but it will need a herculean cleaning of the stables to clear out the influence of the anti-EU viewpoint in the party.
It's almost impossible to conceive of the next manifestation of conservatism - I agree it will be a reversion to a more classic one nation approach possibly (I'd argue) tinged with a very strong environmentalist nuance by which I don't mean eco-authoritarianism or State related eco-interventionism but more about how individuals and business can continue to improve environment credentials via innovation and technology.
By the mid to late 2030s the implications of climate change will be that bit more obvious and that bit more alarming.
The slogan might be the "Green Light of Technology" (with apologies to Harold Wilson).
Yes, I am not expecting us to Rejoin this decade. The 2030's is very possible, perhaps via a revitalised pro-Single Market Thatcherite Conservative Party.
I am interested - if the UK were everything that you wanted; open, fair, prosperous, well-organised, tolerant, left-leaning, and able to afford a significant public sector, would you still want to rejoin the EU? I am just trying to work out whether there's an ideological issue with the concept of the UK as an independent nation or whether you feel rejoining would be the solution to perceived deficiencies.
The UK has always been an independent country, but I do believe that we have a long and glorious history of founding and joining international bodies to tackle international issues: NATO, UN, IMF, WB, EU, GATT etc etc. All these impact on sovereignty, but we gain more by pooling it than we lose.
So it's just a general preference for being in things. Ok.
Yes, I believe in international co-operation as most problems benefit from international solutions. On top of that we as individuals had lots of reciprocal rights that Brexit ended. Brexit wasn't freedom, it was a loss of freedoms.
The idea that Bush - son of the president - won in Texas - trending Republican - in 1994 - the year of Gingrich - due to CRIME, is a case where an overdetermined outcome actually helps to exclude some possible causes.
I have yet to hear a credible policy on dealing with the asylum claims issue. Makes me think that the best thing for now would be to throw more resources at it to speed up dealing with the claims which might reduce the attractiveness to the chancers.
IIRC, asylum seekers are only barred from payed work for the first year. With this backlog, the ability to work legally is a pull. Probably still true that it's not the first choice for boat arrivals though - that is not to get caught in the first place.
The pull of working here. And it’s input in “THE INVASION’
When it comes to protecting British interests and economic migration, what makes us attractive and dangerous so that boat crossings not a show stopper? People can try to spin us the vast majority of people coming across on boats are Albanian, are nothing but gang members and drug runners, but we all know the more nuanced truth, UK would also be the pull of well paying skilled work they know they can do, and they know it here for them. For the example of some Albanians trying to get in right now, many may be doing so becuase of the opportunities they know are here in our construction industry. They are not without skills, as they built most of the Balkans and are highly skilled builders. And don’t we have shortage of building workers in the UK? and subcontractors in our building industry would be keen to use such skills ASAP.
I’m not saying it’s caused by Brexit. It is not the fault of Brexit our building industry is struggling for these skills, because our government has always had that power to grant visa or similar to support industrys with such skill shortages. So why then is the governments philosophy not to use that power of work visa to help industry and UK business? by not doing so, the government actually adding fuel to the migrant boat problem?
one thing fuelling problem of migrant boats packed to the “rafters” could be actually be our current governments policy resistance to grant visas, to allow industry and business to fill skill gaps. Are you certain if Sunak allowed building industry and businesses more visas to hire skilled workers, this would not at all lower the numbers making illegal crossings?
The nuance here is harder the line on legitimate work visas, the greater the invasion from the channel. The governments dogmatic position on work visas creating the invasion.
In 2015, he defeated incumbent Democrat Alvin Brown. And then was re-elected easily in 2019. (It is not unusual in the US for Republican politicians to defeat Democrats, even incumbents, by promising to do more to control crime. For example, that was one of the reasons that George W. Bush defeated Ann Richards for governor of Texas in 1994.)
So, to put it simply, rather than elected Republicans --> increased crime, the causality often runs in the oppositedirection: increased crime --> elected Republicans.
To put it even more simply, he appears to have done absolutely nothing to reduce crime in his city. Meanwhile, states like Arkansas with no particularly large cities top the league tables for crime.
In a way though that's irrelevant.
Many voters in the US clearly think that progressive Democrat policies have led to greater crime. I'm sure you might think they are wrong but that is their thinking.
If they are electing Republicans, even if crime rates are high, it's because they think Republicans can protect them better i.e. that a Democrat would be worse for the problem.
Blaming the voters for their ignorance is not going to work.
4. Process UK humanitarian visas on French soil, and bring them across on ferries. Genuine asylum seekers in northern France hoping to reach the UK to claim asylum, so happy to place themselves into the hands of our home office, could register their claim with UK officials and then be placed on ferries to be brought to the UK while their claim is processed. This would hurt the business model of the people smugglers and the criminal gangs working the camps.
Could you imagine the optics of this? Political suicide. That cumstain Patrick Christys would gouge his own eyes out live on GB News as the first ferry full of Balkan Bodybuilders came alongside at Dover.
None of them, to my knowledge, have Republican mayors.
Do you understand the ecological fallacy? (American journalists often fall into that trap in just the way you apparently have.)
Cities have higher homicide rates than rural areas.
That is true in the UK. In the US. And - I suspect - pretty much everywhere else.
But - nevertheless - Republican States seem to have (on average) higher rates of crime. Despite the fact that they are - on average - more rural.
Is it the case that Republican states are on average poorer? And crime is correlated with poverty? i.e. voting republican and high crime are both things we should expect where people are poorer?
Okay. I’ll engage as thoughtfully I can with the asylum seeker problem, and offer my solutions.
This problem is as bad as it is due entirely to talentless clueless incompetents the Tory’s put in charge of mangling it. There’s no magic bullet, it’s true, though here’s my list of things that will reduce the problem for sure,
1. For starters, The incompetents managing it don’t understand the problem they are dealing with - it’s as simple of that - we know this as fact as they talk about 70% or more are economic migrants, bogus asylum seekers. Back in the real world do you really believe Undocumented economic migrants deliver themselves into the hands of Home Office officials as soon as they reach UK soil? Hence, 4% processing comes from setting up for 70%+ economic migrants, not genuine asylum claims. According the governments own figures, the majority of asylum claims are found to be legitimate Almost two-thirds (64%) of asylum claims end in a grant of protection. Of those rejected that went on to appeal, 48% were successfully overturned. They are clearly tackling the backlog with the wrong mindset and wrong prioritising.
2. Secondly, on basis you now realise how many are genuine asylum claims bogged down in your two year backlog, Set up a Department for International Development (DfID) to strengthen the infrastructures of fragile countries and increase stability there. Where do you want to spend the money, DfID, or 5 star hotels? You do the math.
3. Enable safe, legal routes for resettlement of genuine refugees. Would they even need a long stay in a processing centre on UK soil after dangerous water crossing, if you took safe, legal routes for resettlement more seriously? Take as example the priority given to Ukraine refugees, and how abysmal this home office under this government was at managing Ukrainian processing - sending them here and there, where no one was there to help them. And that’s what we call our gold star fast Lane process. Despite Tories paying lip service to liking safe, legal routes, the number of people resettled under the government’s UK resettlement scheme was 1,171 in the 12 months to September 2021, down by about 45% year on year.
4. This is the idea I like best. Process UK humanitarian visas on French soil, and bring them across on ferries. Genuine asylum seekers in northern France hoping to reach the UK to claim asylum, so happy to place themselves into the hands of our home office, could register their claim with UK officials and then be placed on ferries to be brought to the UK while their claim is processed. You want the Rwanda scheme because you are led to believe it hurts the business model of the people smugglers? The simple MoonRabbits Ferry to Freedom Solution utterly smashes through the business model of the people smugglers does it not?
Yes, throwing the doors open and charging nothing certainly does smash through the business model of the people smugglers.
Do you even see a difference between economic migrants in search of a job, and genuine refugee’s seeking asylum and safety? Or are you happy to repeatedly blur and box all this together, just as Braverman and Sunak have been doing?
I think basically CR believes that none are genuine refugees, even those that our courts rule are.
I don't think that's fair. CR simply has a different definition of what level of victimisation by a country would be required to qualify as a refugee.
So, for example, I think he'd accept that someone like Navalny, who is a political prisoner in Russia who narrowly survived an attempted assassination by the Russian regime, would qualify as a refugee.
But he doesn't accept that a homosexual from Uganda would qualify as a refugee, due to the lack of gay rights in Uganda. He might point out that, at the time the UN Convention on Refugees was signed (1951, I think), one could still be imprisoned or chemically castrated in the UK for homosexual "crimes". Analogously, what about an American citizen at risk of prosecution over abortion - would they qualify as a refugee?
I think we can disagree on what constitutes the definition of a refugee without being nasty about it.
4. Process UK humanitarian visas on French soil, and bring them across on ferries. Genuine asylum seekers in northern France hoping to reach the UK to claim asylum, so happy to place themselves into the hands of our home office, could register their claim with UK officials and then be placed on ferries to be brought to the UK while their claim is processed. This would hurt the business model of the people smugglers and the criminal gangs working the camps.
Could you imagine the optics of this? Political suicide. That cumstain Patrick Christys would gouge his own eyes out live on GB News as the first ferry full of Balkan Bodybuilders came alongside at Dover.
Does that make it wrong? 😟
You've yet to suggest anything that would make it right.
People saying Portugal, well its not fucked, its great compared to the UK...
For the record, the average monthly wage in Portugal stood at €1,180 per month in 2019, compared to around €4,000 in Germany. Many Portuguese earn far less and try to get by on the monthly minimum wage of €741 a month, less than half the levels seen in Germany (€1,584), the UK (€1,600) or the Netherlands (€1,636). Moreover, Portugal is not a cheap country to live in. The cost of housing, energy, food, and many electronic goods is as high if not higher than in other European countries. So, life for many families is very tough indeed....
Since the mid-1990s, productivity growth has stalled as a result of low investment in information technology, labour market rigidities and the allocation of labour and capital to industries partly dominated by state-owned firms or those less open to competition, according to the economist Ricardo Pinheiro Alves.
Portugal has been doing quite well lately. Booming digital economy in Lisbon, for example.
Of course it is poorer than the rest of Western Europe, always has been, but it’s catching up.
Covid response was also notably coherent, belying stereotypes.
I don’t recognise Leon’s judgement that it is “fucked”. It seems to my eyes that it is slowly but surely de-fucking.
Er, my table - as I explicitly say - went from Most Fucked - Armenia - to Least Fucked - Iceland
Portugal is towards the Least Fucked end, because I agree with all of this. It’s a poor country by Western European standards, but it is safe, sunny, and doing really quite well in solving some of its problems
Iceland? What a financial crash can lead to! I liked the stories about the private jets all whooshing out one evening as the super-cars got blown up for the insurance.
The recovery in the Icelandic economy is phenomenal. Not just after the GFC but also Covid (tourism is their biggest earner)
Yet here we are, in Reykjavik, and it is full of happy drunken people, eating pretty good food (at absurd prices: but they can afford them). There is impressive construction everywhere. The new housing looks notably high quality
And it is no illusion. In GDP per capita they are just behind the USA and ahead of Australia, not far off Singapore
The idea that Bush - son of the president - won in Texas - trending Republican - in 1994 - the year of Gingrich - due to CRIME, is a case where an overdetermined outcome actually helps to exclude some possible causes.
None of them, to my knowledge, have Republican mayors.
Do you understand the ecological fallacy? (American journalists often fall into that trap in just the way you apparently have.)
Cities have higher homicide rates than rural areas.
That is true in the UK. In the US. And - I suspect - pretty much everywhere else.
But - nevertheless - Republican States seem to have (on average) higher rates of crime. Despite the fact that they are - on average - more rural.
Is it the case that Republican states are on average poorer? And crime is correlated with poverty? i.e. voting republican and high crime are both things we should expect where people are poorer?
If we look at states by Median Income, Republican States are lower, with a few exceptions, such as Utah and Alaska:
People saying Portugal, well its not fucked, its great compared to the UK...
For the record, the average monthly wage in Portugal stood at €1,180 per month in 2019, compared to around €4,000 in Germany. Many Portuguese earn far less and try to get by on the monthly minimum wage of €741 a month, less than half the levels seen in Germany (€1,584), the UK (€1,600) or the Netherlands (€1,636). Moreover, Portugal is not a cheap country to live in. The cost of housing, energy, food, and many electronic goods is as high if not higher than in other European countries. So, life for many families is very tough indeed....
Since the mid-1990s, productivity growth has stalled as a result of low investment in information technology, labour market rigidities and the allocation of labour and capital to industries partly dominated by state-owned firms or those less open to competition, according to the economist Ricardo Pinheiro Alves.
Portugal has been doing quite well lately. Booming digital economy in Lisbon, for example.
Of course it is poorer than the rest of Western Europe, always has been, but it’s catching up.
Covid response was also notably coherent, belying stereotypes.
I don’t recognise Leon’s judgement that it is “fucked”. It seems to my eyes that it is slowly but surely de-fucking.
Er, my table - as I explicitly say - went from Most Fucked - Armenia - to Least Fucked - Iceland
Portugal is towards the Least Fucked end, because I agree with all of this. It’s a poor country by Western European standards, but it is safe, sunny, and doing really quite well in solving some of its problems
Iceland? What a financial crash can lead to! I liked the stories about the private jets all whooshing out one evening as the super-cars got blown up for the insurance.
The recovery in the Icelandic economy is phenomenal. Not just after the GFC but also Covid (tourism is their biggest earner)
Yet here we are, in Reykjavik, and it is full of happy drunken people, eating pretty good food (at absurd prices: but they can afford them). There is impressive construction everywhere. The new housing looks notably high quality
And it is no illusion. In GDP per capita they are just behind the USA and ahead of Australia, not far off Singapore
One wonders then why our Government (after the brief Truss interregnum when plentiful domestic supply was spoken of) is determined to make energy scarce and expensive.
4. Process UK humanitarian visas on French soil, and bring them across on ferries. Genuine asylum seekers in northern France hoping to reach the UK to claim asylum, so happy to place themselves into the hands of our home office, could register their claim with UK officials and then be placed on ferries to be brought to the UK while their claim is processed. This would hurt the business model of the people smugglers and the criminal gangs working the camps.
Could you imagine the optics of this? Political suicide. That cumstain Patrick Christys would gouge his own eyes out live on GB News as the first ferry full of Balkan Bodybuilders came alongside at Dover.
Does that make it wrong? 😟
You've yet to suggest anything that would make it right.
“We want the people traffickers to stop because we want the people to stop. Your solution is like saying we should get the police to stab everyone on sight because it would put all the criminal stabbers out of business. It would, but all it would do is replace freelancers with a taxpayer funded service. What on earth would be the point.”
“because we want the people to stop”
You would be happy with us accepting no asylum claims?
People saying Portugal, well its not fucked, its great compared to the UK...
For the record, the average monthly wage in Portugal stood at €1,180 per month in 2019, compared to around €4,000 in Germany. Many Portuguese earn far less and try to get by on the monthly minimum wage of €741 a month, less than half the levels seen in Germany (€1,584), the UK (€1,600) or the Netherlands (€1,636). Moreover, Portugal is not a cheap country to live in. The cost of housing, energy, food, and many electronic goods is as high if not higher than in other European countries. So, life for many families is very tough indeed....
Since the mid-1990s, productivity growth has stalled as a result of low investment in information technology, labour market rigidities and the allocation of labour and capital to industries partly dominated by state-owned firms or those less open to competition, according to the economist Ricardo Pinheiro Alves.
Portugal has been doing quite well lately. Booming digital economy in Lisbon, for example.
Of course it is poorer than the rest of Western Europe, always has been, but it’s catching up.
Covid response was also notably coherent, belying stereotypes.
I don’t recognise Leon’s judgement that it is “fucked”. It seems to my eyes that it is slowly but surely de-fucking.
Er, my table - as I explicitly say - went from Most Fucked - Armenia - to Least Fucked - Iceland
Portugal is towards the Least Fucked end, because I agree with all of this. It’s a poor country by Western European standards, but it is safe, sunny, and doing really quite well in solving some of its problems
Iceland? What a financial crash can lead to! I liked the stories about the private jets all whooshing out one evening as the super-cars got blown up for the insurance.
The recovery in the Icelandic economy is phenomenal. Not just after the GFC but also Covid (tourism is their biggest earner)
Yet here we are, in Reykjavik, and it is full of happy drunken people, eating pretty good food (at absurd prices: but they can afford them). There is impressive construction everywhere. The new housing looks notably high quality
And it is no illusion. In GDP per capita they are just behind the USA and ahead of Australia, not far off Singapore
One wonders then why our Government (after the brief Truss interregnum when plentiful domestic supply was spoken of) is determined to make energy scarce and expensive.
We come back to what I said earlier - our entire governing class is cursed with appalling judgment.
The sheriff of Jacksonville, Florida, claims that the city has had recent success in reducing crime: 'JACKSONVILLE, Fla — New numbers just released by the Jacksonville Sheriff's Office show a 23% decline in the city's murder rate last year compared to 2020, and the homicide clearance rate jumped to 78% in 2021 from 43% the year before.
In 2015, he defeated incumbent Democrat Alvin Brown. And then was re-elected easily in 2019. (It is not unusual in the US for Republican politicians to defeat Democrats, even incumbents, by promising to do more to control crime. For example, that was one of the reasons that George W. Bush defeated Ann Richards for governor of Texas in 1994.)
So, to put it simply, rather than elected Republicans --> increased crime, the causality often runs in the oppositedirection: increased crime --> elected Republicans.
To put it even more simply, he appears to have done absolutely nothing to reduce crime in his city. Meanwhile, states like Arkansas with no particularly large cities top the league tables for crime.
In a way though that's irrelevant.
Many voters in the US clearly think that progressive Democrat policies have led to greater crime. I'm sure you might think they are wrong but that is their thinking.
If they are electing Republicans, even if crime rates are high, it's because they think Republicans can protect them better i.e. that a Democrat would be worse for the problem.
Blaming the voters for their ignorance is not going to work.
On the contrary, educating voters out of ignorance is the only thing that works, if you remain a democracy that is.
Have we had a discussion on Strictly betting? SCD is huge in our house as the Ukrainians are obsessed with it. They tell me that Dianne Buswell is the best 'pro' and they should know as they have both been competitive dancers. So maybe Tyler West is value at 11/1? #teamtydi
A team called “tydi” is bound to clean up, is it not ?
Okay. I’ll engage as thoughtfully I can with the asylum seeker problem, and offer my solutions.
This problem is as bad as it is due entirely to talentless clueless incompetents the Tory’s put in charge of mangling it. There’s no magic bullet, it’s true, though here’s my list of things that will reduce the problem for sure,
1. For starters, The incompetents managing it don’t understand the problem they are dealing with - it’s as simple of that - we know this as fact as they talk about 70% or more are economic migrants, bogus asylum seekers. Back in the real world do you really believe Undocumented economic migrants deliver themselves into the hands of Home Office officials as soon as they reach UK soil? Hence, 4% processing comes from setting up for 70%+ economic migrants, not genuine asylum claims. According the governments own figures, the majority of asylum claims are found to be legitimate Almost two-thirds (64%) of asylum claims end in a grant of protection. Of those rejected that went on to appeal, 48% were successfully overturned. They are clearly tackling the backlog with the wrong mindset and wrong prioritising.
2. Secondly, on basis you now realise how many are genuine asylum claims bogged down in your two year backlog, Set up a Department for International Development (DfID) to strengthen the infrastructures of fragile countries and increase stability there. Where do you want to spend the money, DfID, or 5 star hotels? You do the math.
3. Enable safe, legal routes for resettlement of genuine refugees. Would they even need a long stay in a processing centre on UK soil after dangerous water crossing, if you took safe, legal routes for resettlement more seriously? Take as example the priority given to Ukraine refugees, and how abysmal this home office under this government was at managing Ukrainian processing - sending them here and there, where no one was there to help them. And that’s what we call our gold star fast Lane process. Despite Tories paying lip service to liking safe, legal routes, the number of people resettled under the government’s UK resettlement scheme was 1,171 in the 12 months to September 2021, down by about 45% year on year.
4. This is the idea I like best. Process UK humanitarian visas on French soil, and bring them across on ferries. Genuine asylum seekers in northern France hoping to reach the UK to claim asylum, so happy to place themselves into the hands of our home office, could register their claim with UK officials and then be placed on ferries to be brought to the UK while their claim is processed. You want the Rwanda scheme because you are led to believe it hurts the business model of the people smugglers? The simple MoonRabbits Ferry to Freedom Solution utterly smashes through the business model of the people smugglers does it not?
Yes, throwing the doors open and charging nothing certainly does smash through the business model of the people smugglers.
Do you even see a difference between economic migrants in search of a job, and genuine refugee’s seeking asylum and safety? Or are you happy to repeatedly blur and box all this together, just as Braverman and Sunak have been doing?
I think basically CR believes that none are genuine refugees, even those that our courts rule are.
I don't think that's fair. CR simply has a different definition of what level of victimisation by a country would be required to qualify as a refugee.
So, for example, I think he'd accept that someone like Navalny, who is a political prisoner in Russia who narrowly survived an attempted assassination by the Russian regime, would qualify as a refugee.
But he doesn't accept that a homosexual from Uganda would qualify as a refugee, due to the lack of gay rights in Uganda. He might point out that, at the time the UN Convention on Refugees was signed (1951, I think), one could still be imprisoned or chemically castrated in the UK for homosexual "crimes". Analogously, what about an American citizen at risk of prosecution over abortion - would they qualify as a refugee?
I think we can disagree on what constitutes the definition of a refugee without being nasty about it.
I am not being nasty, but clearly CR doesn't believe that our courts are right in granting asylum to so many. It sounds as if you agree.
People saying Portugal, well its not fucked, its great compared to the UK...
For the record, the average monthly wage in Portugal stood at €1,180 per month in 2019, compared to around €4,000 in Germany. Many Portuguese earn far less and try to get by on the monthly minimum wage of €741 a month, less than half the levels seen in Germany (€1,584), the UK (€1,600) or the Netherlands (€1,636). Moreover, Portugal is not a cheap country to live in. The cost of housing, energy, food, and many electronic goods is as high if not higher than in other European countries. So, life for many families is very tough indeed....
Since the mid-1990s, productivity growth has stalled as a result of low investment in information technology, labour market rigidities and the allocation of labour and capital to industries partly dominated by state-owned firms or those less open to competition, according to the economist Ricardo Pinheiro Alves.
Portugal has been doing quite well lately. Booming digital economy in Lisbon, for example.
Of course it is poorer than the rest of Western Europe, always has been, but it’s catching up.
Covid response was also notably coherent, belying stereotypes.
I don’t recognise Leon’s judgement that it is “fucked”. It seems to my eyes that it is slowly but surely de-fucking.
Er, my table - as I explicitly say - went from Most Fucked - Armenia - to Least Fucked - Iceland
Portugal is towards the Least Fucked end, because I agree with all of this. It’s a poor country by Western European standards, but it is safe, sunny, and doing really quite well in solving some of its problems
Iceland? What a financial crash can lead to! I liked the stories about the private jets all whooshing out one evening as the super-cars got blown up for the insurance.
The recovery in the Icelandic economy is phenomenal. Not just after the GFC but also Covid (tourism is their biggest earner)
Yet here we are, in Reykjavik, and it is full of happy drunken people, eating pretty good food (at absurd prices: but they can afford them). There is impressive construction everywhere. The new housing looks notably high quality
And it is no illusion. In GDP per capita they are just behind the USA and ahead of Australia, not far off Singapore
One wonders then why our Government (after the brief Truss interregnum when plentiful domestic supply was spoken of) is determined to make energy scarce and expensive.
We come back to what I said earlier - our entire governing class is cursed with appalling judgment.
Not cursed with. Trained in. Appalling judgement somehow wins elections more often.
The sheriff of Jacksonville, Florida, claims that the city has had recent success in reducing crime: 'JACKSONVILLE, Fla — New numbers just released by the Jacksonville Sheriff's Office show a 23% decline in the city's murder rate last year compared to 2020, and the homicide clearance rate jumped to 78% in 2021 from 43% the year before.
It is great to hear that the Republicans have reduced crime from 2020 when the city had endured five years of misrule by - checks notes - the Republican Party.
Comments
Having said that, a €2.99 bottle of Portuguese supermarket wine is often more pleasant than the same in France. And 9% Vinho Verde is a lunchtime treat. A half a litre carafe glugged and you are still fully upright for the afternoon's endeavours.
There are places with lower murder rates - such as Massachusetts, Maine, Vermont Idaho and New Hampshire, which are bottom of the table - but Washington is very safe by US standards.
The States with the highest murder rates are all Republican strongholds: Louisiana, Missouri, Arkansas, Mississipi, South Carolina, Alabama, and Tennessee. Indeed, all these places have murder rates 250% or more of Washington State.
I can confirm that it takes only 2 minutes to walk from the new Hanover Square exit of Bond Street to Oxford Circus tube station.
And here's an election example for you from many years ago: In rural Illinois, there was a precinct which included a large "halfway house" for released sex offenders. The precinct voted heavily Democratic.
And when Dem candidates point this out they get laughed at because the Fox news Narrative is that Dem Big Cities are crime infested hell holes that burnt to the ground in 2020.
Do these people coming here in boats across the channel, either for work or asylum, have any legitimacy at all in what they are doing, in your opinion? 😕
Atmospheric river hose aimed at the Central and Southern Cascades this morning. 6 hour rain totals ending at noon:
Snoqualmie Pass...3.01" [east of Seattle]
Paradise (Mt. Rainier)...2.31" [southeast of Seattle]
Timberline (Mt. Hood)...1.95" [east of Portland]
Stevens Pass...1.23" (northeast of Seattle]
Mt Baker...1.02" [just south of Canadian border]
In the rain shadow, Seattle 0.04".
SSI - current weather radar shows Seattle rain shadow is shrinking, now little beyond city (im)proper; reckon will disappear by rush hour.
If we allowed Asylum to be claimed at any British Embassy in the world, how many applicants would there be in the first year? What if we did it just in Europe?
My guesses: 5 million and 250000 respectively.
(Chicago has not had a Republican mayor since William Hale Thompson, who left office in 1931: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Hale_Thompson )
Labour are hamstrung, and wouldn't dare. The RedWall would be apoplectic with rage
Either the statistic is right or it’s wrong.
And do you have any guesses as to why that is so?
1)Red states have higher crime/murder rates than blue states
2)Democrats are losing some of their advantage in blue states due to their policies on law and order
I’m not sure if Macron quite does.
Regardless, it requires a willingness to invest in the vision (not traditionally a British strength) and the diplomatic muscle to make it happen.
A change in government is a vital pre-requisite.
None of them, to my knowledge, have Republican mayors.
Do you understand the ecological fallacy? (American journalists often fall into that trap in just the way you apparently have.)
Not going to disagree with that.
But Washington state is highly urban. 60% of the State live in Greater Seattle.
Even if we assume that the murder rate outside of Seattle is zero (which it's not), it still has a murder rate well below Alabama, Mississipi, etc.
So, here's the question: why do Republican States have - on average - more murders per person?
It is the Don't Vote party.
Turnout is abysmal, from 38 % in 2003 to 46.6 % in 2021.
Compare with the Scottish elections -- the turnout was 63.5 % in 2021. There is something to vote for in Scotland.
Llafur got 39 % of the vote. So, let's do the math, 0.39 * 0.466 = 0.179, so Llafur was supported by 18 people in every hundred entitled to vote in Wales.
It is not the case that 70% of asylum claims, on average, are accepted. The number is (in most years) between 30 and 45%. And the number from Albania is going to be close to zero.
However, there will have been a massive spike in accepted asylum applications in 2021, because with the withdrawal from Afghanistan, the UK accepted a great many people who had helped British and American forces there. Those people were in imminent danger of being killed by the Taliban, and we were at least partially responsible for their plight.
But in most years, only 1-in-3 asylum claims will be accepted.
That is true in the UK. In the US. And - I suspect - pretty much everywhere else.
But - nevertheless - Republican States seem to have (on average) higher rates of crime. Despite the fact that they are - on average - more rural.
One or two getting over-excited or hyper-ventilating about the EU once again. IF 2024 is the "Remainer's Revenge" it will simply be a victory over those elements in the Conservative Party which were most prominent in the LEAVE campaign and especially whose who have spent the last eight years going on about they won and the "metropolitan liberal elite" (whatever that is) lost.
If said elite achieves its revenge through the ballot box having failed to achieve it through parliament, the irony will be lost on no one.
As to "re-joining" the EU, the process will be much slower than that. The initial stage will be to begin negotiations to seek terms as to any possible joining (or re-joining) of the EU. Given status quo ante is probably not an option and equally given being forced to accept the Euro, Schengen and Freedom of Movement is also probably a non-starter, that doesn't leave much to talk about in truth.
Until or unless we see major shifts in policy or opinion on one or both sides, the whole argument is moot. The majority of the British population will never accept the Euro or Freedom of Movement so the Single Market is out - yes, we can have closer regulatory agreement I'm sure but many won't care too much about that.
That doesn't mean those who voted REMAIN won't gain a lot of pleasure should the likes of JRM, Gove and other prominent anti-EU figures get electorally eviscerated and sent to the political margins.
One of the more interesting questions if the Conservative Party is going to be in Opposition for an extended period is how it will adapt to the inevitable evolution of the UK-EU relationship and especially if Labour moves to a closer regulatory relationship.
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/crime/2022/05/06/jacksonville-homicides-2022-deaths-race-gender-who-dying-where/7382008001/
Jacksonville FL. Republican Mayor. One of the worst murder rates in the country. Above a 50 per 100k.
https://www.police1.com/patrol-issues/articles/city-of-fort-worth-sees-27-year-high-homicide-toll-vyQn7nEnKs1xlqcr/
Fort Worth RX. Republican Mayor. Worst murder rate in 27 years.
First, that's the wrong question. Here's a better question: What kind of people are most likely to be murdered in the United States?
And the answer, of course, is young black men. And, to a lesser extent, young black women. Who are likely to live in places that are run by Democratic politicians, and, if they are involved in politics at all, are likely to be Democrats.
From that you should be able to guess what kind of people are especially likely to be murderers. (Hint: Bernie Madoff preyed mostly on fellow Jews.)
It is important to understand what Seraphine Warren was trying to explain to our elected officials, when she walked from Sweetwater, Arizona to DC:
https://www.leftcom.org/en/articles/2022-11-02/iran-imperialist-rivalries-and-the-protest-movement-of-woman-life-freedom
Also, Jacobin but they are ideologically weak and still believe in democracy.
https://jacobin.com/2022/10/iran-protests-women-islamic-republic-imperialism
"In 2021, there were around 9,500 returns, comprising both enforced and voluntary returns, though this number will increase due to initial undercounting of voluntary returns. This is down from a peak of around 47,000 in 2013"
https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/deportation-and-voluntary-departure-from-the-uk/
Covid has impacted the last couple of years but the downward trend started in 2012, so under the
succession of Tory Home Secretaries from May onwards. It does rather look as if austerity budgets impacted Home Office capabilities.
Future Conservatives get outraged at not being in charge of the bally thing. Hence Conservatives we haven't heard of yet campaign for Taking Our Proper Seat at the European Table.
(As for the Britain will never vote for X, perhaps. But it may look different once the Boomer Brexit Bulge generation have gone to a place where there are no referenda. Might not, of course. But the date of birth splits on anything Euro are incredible.)
It should be "... a refugee centre ..."
@rcs1000 Firstly, you appear to be arguing the governments own figures, the majority of asylum claims are found to be legitimate Almost two-thirds (64%) of asylum claims end in a grant of protection. Of those rejected that went on to appeal, 48% were successfully overturned are inflated by a 2021 spike of afghans. Do you though accept regarding safe, legal routes, the number of people resettled under the government’s UK resettlement scheme was 1,171 in the 12 months to September 2021, down by about 45% year on year.
And of those recently processed by this government of Iranians, Eritreans and Sudanese, seeking asylum allowed to stay, what figures do you have - my research came in at 87%.
Finally, do you believe it moral and ethical for UK to outsource its asylum processing and granting obligations to a third party?
It's almost impossible to conceive of the next manifestation of conservatism - I agree it will be a reversion to a more classic one nation approach possibly (I'd argue) tinged with a very strong environmentalist nuance by which I don't mean eco-authoritarianism or State related eco-interventionism but more about how individuals and business can continue to improve environment credentials via innovation and technology.
By the mid to late 2030s the implications of climate change will be that bit more obvious and that bit more alarming.
The slogan might be the "Green Light of Technology" (with apologies to Harold Wilson).
Most crime is committed by poor people, to poor people. That's true in the US. That's true in the UK. That's true everywhere.
And most movements in crime rates are the consequence of external factors: a move from the drug of choice going from crack to heroin; or gentrification pushing criminals to a different area.
What stops crime?
Is it harsher punishments?
Sadly, there's no evidence at all that is the case. Murder rates are worse in States with the death penalty. And there is no evidence of murder rates moving up with abolition, or down with reintroduction. Three strikes laws too have basically been a failure: they mean that on third convictions, every criminal chooses trial (gumming up the system), and they mean juries are unwilling to convict if the punishment seems too severe for the crime.
Is it more spending on policing?
It's not even clear that helps.
The best way to stop crime is to improve economic outcomes for people. And that means investing in education and social support.
'…of course, in football, people will be judged on trophies & medals & success, but probably somewhere in between all of that is where you'd like to be.'
On #Brexit:'My kids see themselves as much European as they do see themselves English, they can't really understand #Brexit'
https://twitter.com/StefanieBolzen/status/1588631903137333248
"The official account of the session recorded his off-microphone remark as Qu'il retourne en Afrique - 'he should go back to Africa' - but the plural Qu'ils retournent en Afrique sounds exactly the same."
The sounds made by the words "Drop dead, racist scum" are fortunately less ambiguous.
Yes, it requires spending money, but would be far more effective than the current system of 4 star hotels, failure to assess applications and non-existant deportations to Rwanda.
In 2015, he defeated incumbent Democrat Alvin Brown. And then was re-elected easily in 2019. (It is not unusual in the US for Republican politicians to defeat Democrats, even incumbents, by promising to do more to control crime. For example, that was one of the reasons that George W. Bush defeated Ann Richards for governor of Texas in 1994.)
So, to put it simply, rather than elected Republicans --> increased crime, the causality often runs in the oppositedirection: increased crime --> elected Republicans.
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-news/hbo-cancels-westworld-1235255955/
Part of me thinks we are cursed by the success of the English language which is the lingua franca of business and the gateway to Canada, America and Australia (to name but three).
I'm also of the view we are dealing with the symptoms here not the cause (so to speak). The degree to which we could "level up" (yes, I know) other economies to make economic migration less attractive is one to ponder perhaps.
We have seen how the initial wave of Polish and Baltic migration ended when the economies of those countries improved and the attraction of UK wages wasn't the same..
I keep coming back to technology, prosperity and capitalism - it's a bit boring I know but if we can enrich others we'll be doing ourselves a favour (not quite trickle-down but more than foreign aid)
https://righttoremain.org.uk/guide-to-work-permission-for-asylum-seekers-by-migration-justice-project/#:~:text=Legal Updates,-News&text=However, the immigration rules allow,no fault of your own”.
The list of eligible employment is here:
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/immigration-rules/immigration-rules-appendix-shortage-occupation-list
Most require prior experience or significant qualifications, such as medical degrees.
I have mentored an asylum seeking Doctor through the process. It took years, but now he is a successful Consultant Pathologist.
I am happy to process asylum claims and grant asylum to legitimate asylum seekers, I think my five solutions do help, though my solutions based on there being legitimacy to the claims of people who made it across the channel now caught up in the processing backlog, so sorting out the problems with the volume, trafficking gangs, the dangerous method of arrival and problems processing backlog, is what my solutions are trying to do.
if people just want the boat invasion to stop my solutions I shared here are utterly useless, to the problem as they see it. they can rightly hate my solutions and what they are trying to achieve, granting right to stay to some who came across in the boats, as it’s accepting asylum claims here and honouring international obligations could actually make the invasion worse, just as the Rwanda policy is the complete opposite to that, basically outsourcing UK asylum claims in hope the boat invasion dries up.
1. those managing to understand the problem they are dealing with - they talk about 70% or more economic migrants, bogus asylum seekers. do you really believe Undocumented economic migrants deliver themselves into the hands of Home Office officials Maybe 4% processing comes from setting up for 70%+ economic migrants, not genuine asylum claims? the governments own figures, the majority of asylum claims are found to be legitimate two-thirds (64%) of asylum claims end in grant of protection. those rejected, 48% successfully overturned on appeal.
2. on basis you now realise many are genuine asylum claims Set up a Department for International Development (DfID) to strengthen the infrastructures of fragile countries and increase stability there. Where do you want to spend the money in future, DfID, or 5 star hotels?
3. Enable safe legal routes for resettlement of genuine refugees. Would they even need a long stay in a processing centre on UK soil after dangerous water crossing, if you took safe, legal routes for resettlement more seriously? the number of people resettled under the government’s UK resettlement scheme was 1,171 in the 12 months to September 2021, down by about 45% year on year.
4. Process UK humanitarian visas on French soil, and bring them across on ferries. Genuine asylum seekers in northern France hoping to reach the UK to claim asylum, so happy to place themselves into the hands of our home office, could register their claim with UK officials and then be placed on ferries to be brought to the UK while their claim is processed. This would hurt the business model of the people smugglers and the criminal gangs working the camps.
I don’t think I could be more fairer or helpful discussing this thorny issue.
When it comes to protecting British interests and economic migration, what makes us attractive and dangerous so that boat crossings not a show stopper? People can try to spin us the vast majority of people coming across on boats are Albanian, are nothing but gang members and drug runners, but we all know the more nuanced truth, UK would also be the pull of well paying skilled work they know they can do, and they know it here for them. For the example of some Albanians trying to get in right now, many may be doing so becuase of the opportunities they know are here in our construction industry. They are not without skills, as they built most of the Balkans and are highly skilled builders. And don’t we have shortage of building workers in the UK? and subcontractors in our building industry would be keen to use such skills ASAP.
I’m not saying it’s caused by Brexit. It is not the fault of Brexit our building industry is struggling for these skills, because our government has always had that power to grant visa or similar to support industrys with such skill shortages. So why then is the governments philosophy not to use that power of work visa to help industry and UK business? by not doing so, the government actually adding fuel to the migrant boat problem?
one thing fuelling problem of migrant boats packed to the “rafters” could be actually be our current governments policy resistance to grant visas, to allow industry and business to fill skill gaps.
Are you certain if Sunak allowed building industry and businesses more visas to hire skilled workers, this would not at all lower the numbers making illegal crossings?
The nuance here is harder the line on legitimate work visas, the greater the invasion from the channel. The governments dogmatic position on work visas creating the invasion.
Your thoughts?
Many voters in the US clearly think that progressive Democrat policies have led to greater crime. I'm sure you might think they are wrong but that is their thinking.
If they are electing Republicans, even if crime rates are high, it's because they think Republicans can protect them better i.e. that a Democrat would be worse for the problem.
Blaming the voters for their ignorance is not going to work.
i.e. voting republican and high crime are both things we should expect where people are poorer?
It's not even clear that helps [reduce crime]."
Seraphine Warren disagrees with you.
And, to go back to my original example, when Seattle cut funding for police, crime rates rose.
Here's UK question for you: When modern police were first introduced in the UK -- by Robert Peel, as I understand it -- did they reduce crime?
So, for example, I think he'd accept that someone like Navalny, who is a political prisoner in Russia who narrowly survived an attempted assassination by the Russian regime, would qualify as a refugee.
But he doesn't accept that a homosexual from Uganda would qualify as a refugee, due to the lack of gay rights in Uganda. He might point out that, at the time the UN Convention on Refugees was signed (1951, I think), one could still be imprisoned or chemically castrated in the UK for homosexual "crimes". Analogously, what about an American citizen at risk of prosecution over abortion - would they qualify as a refugee?
I think we can disagree on what constitutes the definition of a refugee without being nasty about it.
Now that really *is* news...
“because we want the people to stop”
You would be happy with us accepting no asylum claims?
“This is what we have been wanting to see,” Sheriff Mike Williams said. “This is not a victory lap, but in 2021 we had some success. And so, we think it's a good trend, and we want to continue on that.”'
source: https://www.firstcoastnews.com/article/news/local/murder-rate-in-jacksonville-dropped-23-in-2021-compared-to-2020-according-to-sheriff/77-c3924393-a7b5-41b6-9938-f9e1f0029ed1
In fairness about 1 time in 10 a so called stealth tax may actually be stealthy.
Edit: Also, people are still whinging about a fictional programme being incorrect/mean?