|
Post by DADDY O on Jun 21, 2017 12:31:31 GMT
|
|
|
Post by granty on Jun 21, 2017 20:04:03 GMT
Look at all these parasites, they just turn up into our country and demand to be moved into £8.5 million mansions. And that's what they're getting. www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40357280 Mind you, all the money in the world will never change the fact that they're losers.
|
|
|
Post by sherri on Jun 21, 2017 21:37:44 GMT
I do think places had to be found for the survivors in the short term. If a lot of people are suddenly left homeless with no possessions, they need rehousing or some type of temporary roof over their head. And that might mean being temporarily placed in motels or upmarket places but I don't believe any welfare recipients should get luxury housing long term.
It is actually quite interesting as surely not all the survivors would have been on welfare. Many may have been renting but would have had jobs and should have had their own contents insurance. I would expect them (after some initial help) to go out there and find another place to rent themselves.
I am just trying to put this in context. Over here a few years back, there were bush fires that destroyed many homes and killed many people. Money was raised by the public to help victims, but basically a lot came down to insurance. People were not given a new home although temporary arrangements were made. But after a time, I imagine those people had to go out and find their own place to rent or buy. I know that in part because my nephew lost his home & all contents but was very well insured.
I also have a friend whose house burnt down-not completely but enough to be dangerous and need rebuilding. She had no insurance. No one stepped in to give her any accommodation, she went and stayed with a daughter who was renting nearby. And she had to save and rebuild herself.
|
|
|
Post by granty on Jun 22, 2017 20:01:52 GMT
I do think places had to be found for the survivors in the short term. If a lot of people are suddenly left homeless with no possessions, they need rehousing or some type of temporary roof over their head. Sherri, do you know they can't even recognise the dead because they weren't born in the UK and they have no dental records etc. These parasites somehow wormed their way here with nothing, they were given everything for free, and they blew it. And they won't even more.
|
|
|
Post by sherri on Jun 22, 2017 22:27:09 GMT
Your country is not in EU now so it probably is time to start writing your own laws.
Don't worry-our laws over here are pretty weak too. They are tough in one way-it isn't easy to migrate to Australia & anyone who does so cannot go on welfare for a couple of years. Basically, you can't get in unless you have enough cash to be self supporting and the skills needed to get a job. Or that's the theory.
In practice of course, refugees are classified differently. They have to be. They often are not allowed to get a job immediately so are given welfare. Unfortunately even when things are sorted, many stay on welfare for years. Not all of course. But if I were in charge of migration, I would be looking at the success rate of various national groups and if it wasn't working out for some, I would be lowering the refugee intake from those groups.
Being able to get a job is a key factor I think in whether a person will be able to settle in.
|
|
|
Post by DADDY O on Jun 22, 2017 22:38:16 GMT
Actually Sherri, Great Britain is still a member of the EU, and will be for several years in the future. No exit agreement has been negotiated yet, as I know of.
|
|
|
Post by sherri on Jun 23, 2017 11:54:11 GMT
You're right, but I thought they had to get out asap. Maybe within 18 months? If I were in power, I would be working towards that and cutting out EU regulations too, if I could. Of course, I am not in power though.
|
|