Immigration and Asylum (6 Viewers)

[skybluetony176]

£2.1B is the official figure. If you have a source for a higher figure let’s hear it. That also down a third on the previous financial year.

 

---

[Grendel]

£2.1B is the official figure. If you have a source for a higher figure let’s hear it. That also down a third on the previous financial year.

Where is the source? I can’t find it

 

[skybluetony176]

Where is the source? I can’t find it

I don’t know why, it’s really not that hard to find. Maybe it’s because you’re an idiot. Are you aware of website called google? Just ask it the cost of migrant hotels and you’ll find the official figures on the first page and more news articles than you can count covering it. It’s as hard as you want to make it, which apparently is very.

 

[Grendel]

I don’t know why, it’s really not that hard to find. Maybe it’s because you’re an idiot. Are you aware of website called google? Just ask it the cost of migrant hotels and you’ll find the official figures on the first page and more news articles than you can count covering it. It’s as hard as you want to make it, which apparently is very.

Why won’t you just provide a link?

Actually hold on this isn’t a chat about just migrants hotels is it?

 

[Ccfcisparks]

Why won’t you just provide a link?

Is Google a website? I thought it was a search engine?

Well if we are being pedantic it’s a search engine that’s accessed through its website

 

[Nuskyblue]

Why won’t you just provide a link?

Is Google a website? I thought it was a search engine?

Google AI overview quotes the const migrant hotels to be 2.1B per year. Fuck knows if that is correct or not.

 

[tisza]

Can you share the source of the £2.1 B a year please

Home office figure for illegal immigrant accommodation 2024/25 - so that's not the total cost.

 

[skybluetony176]

Why won’t you just provide a link?

Is Google a website? I thought it was a search engine?

Because I’m not your lap dog and the truth is you already know that is the real cost. You’re just being a prick as usual thinking you’re being clever when the reality is it’s the measure of what an idiot you are.

Your follow up question just proves what a deliberate idiot you are. Of course google is a website, it has a web address. That is the literal definition of a website moron. The purpose of the website is a search engine. I do find it hard to believe you’re a grown “man” at times.

 

[Grendel]

Well if we are being pedantic it’s a search engine that’s accessed through its website

I edited it as I don’t want Tony to get down the easy rabbit hole tbf

Oh he already has

 

[Grendel]

Because I’m not your lap dog and the truth is you already know that is the real cost. You’re just being a prick as usual thinking you’re being clever when the reality is it’s the measure of what an idiot you are.

Your follow up question just proves what a deliberate idiot you are. Of course google is a website, it has a web address. That is the literal definition of a website moron. The purpose of the website is a search engine. I do find it hard to believe you’re a grown “man” at times.

So you made the figure up - fair enough

 

[skybluetony176]

Home office figure for illegal immigrant accommodation 2024/25 - so that's not the total cost.

Correct. The conversation was specifically about asylum hotels, I thought my statement was obvious given the conversation but I forgot I was dealing with man child idiot grendull.

 

[Captain Dart]

Not sure what figures you’re looking at but the cost of dealing with the migrant problem is about £2.1B a year. Oxfam and Tax justice UK estimate that a wealth tax would generate £25B a year, the Greens estimate is more conservative at £15-25B a year. But whichever way you cut it a wealth tax would more than cover it.

£25Bn per year.

 

[PVA]

 

[Grendel]

Not sure what figures you’re looking at but the cost of dealing with the migrant problem is about £2.1B a year. Oxfam and Tax justice UK estimate that a wealth tax would generate £25B a year, the Greens estimate is more conservative at £15-25B a year. But whichever way you cut it a wealth tax would more than cover it.

The cost of dealing with illegal migration is only hotels - and the source is AI?

 

[Grendel]

It’s nice you and Tony are going to bed together. I do worry about SBT though? Be kind yeah?

 

[Grendel]

£25Bn per year.

It’s embarrassing

 

[Grendel]

Home office figure for illegal immigrant accommodation 2024/25 - so that's not the total cost.

Ah that’s blown it

 

[Nuskyblue]

Correct. The conversation was specifically about asylum hotels, I thought my statement was obvious given the conversation but I forgot I was dealing with man child idiot grendull.

Tbf the way the answer was framed did not read like that

 

[Grendel]

Tbf the way the answer was framed did not read like that

Hes backtracking - he also is trying to claim that a wealth tax will generate a £23 billion credit on it. As usual he’s all over the place

 

[chiefdave]

£25Bn per year.

Must be making more Masterchef

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Right, so because asylum applicants can’t be 0, weeks have to put up with tens of thousands per year? It is this logic that demonstrates why immigration policy has got completely out of control.

Operationally, the Royal Navy think they can stop the boats and implement an Australia style policy. The barrier, however, is the HRA and ECHR. Same with Rwanda and likewise, why Mahmood’s policies will fail. It was a complete success for Australia and detoxified this issue. Likewise, the Danish reforms cut asylum claims by 90%.

The contexts of UK and Denmark are completely different but for your talk of ‘integration’… how do you even begin to integrate 300k to 900k people on a yearly basis? You can’t.

The left naively thinking the public’s anger is purely down to ‘inequalities’ shows why they’re losing the argument. Yes, cost of living is a problem, but so to is immigration in its right. People walk through their communities and don’t recognise it anymore or they don’t feel safe. This narrative you and others put forward is refusing to face up to v fundamental failures in our immigration policies.

Again, the more data that gets released, the more the arguments for open borders is undermined.

27-37% of non-EU migrants with ILR are on UC and a v small % of new arrivals are net-tax contributors. So the underlining justifications for mass immigration in 90-00s is being slowly dismantled.

Anyway, I’m sure Zach Polanski’s wealth taxes will solve ‘wealth inequality’ when it barely covers the costs of migrant hotels.

Chief Dave isn’t a lefty any more than you’re a facist

 

[SBAndy]

Anyway, I’m sure Zach Polanski’s wealth taxes will solve ‘wealth inequality’ when it barely covers the costs of migrant hotels.

Actually hold on this isn’t a chat about just migrants hotels is it?

Looks like it m8

 

[Grendel]

Looks like it m8

No as it was said the total cost was then offset by a wealth tax which in reality wouldn’t even cover that cost - which itself isn’t fully declared

 

[SBAndy]

No as it was said the total cost was then offset by a wealth tax which in reality wouldn’t even cover that cost - which itself isn’t fully declared

“it was said”

Who said it then?

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Chief Dave isn’t a lefty any more than you’re a facist

Understand that ‘the left’ is a catch-all phrase. In any case, @chiefdave has expressed admiration for Polanski and iirc, called his winning of the Green Party’s leadership before he was on my radar. So it’s fair to conclude that at the very least, he’s a centre-left. I’m sure he can speak for himself.

On the topic of, I know you weren’t calling a fascist (least I hope), but really don’t like that you’ve mentioned my name alongside fascist.

My political viewpoints are conservative, if you need a label.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Understand that ‘the left’ is a catch-all phrase. In any case, @chiefdave has expressed admiration for Polanski and iirc, called his winning of the Green Party’s leadership before he was on my radar. So it’s fair to conclude that at the very least, he’s a centre-left. I’m sure he can speak for himself.

On the topic of, I know you weren’t calling a fascist (least I hope), but really don’t like that you’ve mentioned my name alongside fascist.

My political viewpoints are conservative, if you need a label.

No I wasn’t for the reason you’ve said you make it easy to listen to you as you speak without resorting to insult

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Looks like it m8

The critique was on the concept of a wealth tax. It promises to reduce ‘wealth inequality’ but in reality, even the most optimistic outcome barely touches public expenditure. The cost of migrant benefits and hotels totals around £13.5bn a year.

Considering the total welfare bill is set to raise to £300bn, this wealth tax raises pennies on the pound.

 

[Grendel]

The critique was on the concept of a wealth tax. It promises to reduce ‘wealth inequality’ but in reality, even the most optimistic outcome barely touches public expenditure. The cost of migrant benefits and hotels totals around £13.5bn a year.

Considering the total welfare bill is set to raise to £300bn, this wealth tax raises pennies on the pound.

Ouch

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

The critique was on the concept of a wealth tax. It promises to reduce ‘wealth inequality’ but in reality, even the most optimistic outcome barely touches public expenditure. The cost of migrant benefits and hotels totals around £13.5bn a year.

Considering the total welfare bill is set to raise to £300bn, this wealth tax raises pennies on the pound.

Inequality is more of an issue than illegal migration

 

[SBAndy]

Ouch

Still not found where it was said then, chap?

The critique was on the concept of a wealth tax. It promises to reduce ‘wealth inequality’ but in reality, even the most optimistic outcome barely touches public expenditure. The cost of migrant benefits and hotels totals around £13.5bn a year.

Considering the total welfare bill is set to raise to £300bn, this wealth tax raises pennies on the pound.

You were the one who brought up the wealth tax; you also seemingly decided that all foreign-born nationals, including those who have ILR, fit into your “migrant hotels” bill.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Inequality is more of an issue than illegal migration

It’s not a binary choice. What’s stopping a government addressing both?

For example, there are 4 million people on UC that have never worked, it’s effectively UBI by the back door. Welfare dependency keeps people in a life of poverty.

Likewise, the tax burden being the highest it’s ever been in peace time deters people from earning more to live comfortably. They’re getting less public services despite paying a greater proportion of tax.

The single biggest driver of income inequality is the ballooning assets such as housing. You actually can’t decouple the immigration and housing crises because the more people that arrive, the steeper the housing deficit gets. 90% of our population growth is driven by net migration and all house building targets that are being missed are premised on migration being 300k, which has been higher than that number since.

To visualise this, building 200-250k houses per year is fine when net migration is 50k, not so good if that figure is 300k, 500k or 900k. This undeniably has an impact on houses prices and the rental market. You can talk about housing associations buying land, professional landlords or whatever… The fundamental issue is that the state cannot build the houses needed to keep up with net migration.

Mass migration deepens the housing crisis - Migration Watch UK

The Home Office has amassed a stock of 16,000 properties for asylum seekers, despite a severe shortage of housing for young professionals and families.

www.migrationwatchuk.org

Still not found where it was said then, chap?




You were the one who brought up the wealth tax; you also seemingly decided that all foreign-born nationals, including those who have ILR, fit into your “migrant hotels” bill.

Well yeah, because asylum seekers get ILR after 5 years… So wouldn’t you include that? Given that 27-37% non-EU migrants () are on UC, that’s actually quite a huge problem and not what the welfare system was designed for. Looking at London, 48% of social housing is occupied by foreign-born people, which includes a significant amount of people who later obtained UK citizenship.

It’s far above the UK national average too so it’s no wonder the conversation around migration has a lot of toxicity around it.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

It’s not a binary choice. What’s stopping a government addressing both?

For example, there are 4 million people on UC that have never worked, it’s effectively UBI by the back door. Welfare dependency keeps people in a life of poverty.

Likewise, the tax burden being the highest it’s ever been in peace time deters people from earning more to live comfortably. They’re getting less public services despite paying a greater proportion of tax.

The single biggest driver of income inequality is the ballooning assets such as housing. You actually can’t decouple the immigration and housing crises because the more people that arrive, the steeper the housing deficit gets. 90% of our population growth is driven by net migration and all house building targets that are being missed are premised on migration being 300k, which has been higher than that number since.

To visualise this, building 200-250k houses per year is fine when net migration is 50k, not so good if that figure is 300k, 500k or 900k. This undeniably has an impact on houses prices and the rental market. You can talk about housing associations buying land, professional landlords or whatever… The fundamental issue is that the state cannot build the houses needed to keep up with net migration.

Mass migration deepens the housing crisis - Migration Watch UK

The Home Office has amassed a stock of 16,000 properties for asylum seekers, despite a severe shortage of housing for young professionals and families.

www.migrationwatchuk.org

Well yeah, because asylum seekers get ILR after 5 years… So wouldn’t you include that? Given that 27-37% non-EU migrants () are on UC, that’s actually quite a huge problem and not what the welfare system was designed for. Looking at London, 48% of social housing is occupied by foreign-born people, which includes a significant amount of people who later obtained UK citizenship.

It’s far above the UK national average too so it’s no wonder the conversation around migration has a lot of toxicity around it.

It’s not binary but one requires more effort than the other

 

[skybluetony176]

The critique was on the concept of a wealth tax. It promises to reduce ‘wealth inequality’ but in reality, even the most optimistic outcome barely touches public expenditure. The cost of migrant benefits and hotels totals around £13.5bn a year.

Considering the total welfare bill is set to raise to £300bn, this wealth tax raises pennies on the pound.

It sounds like you’re now making the argument for tax rises. Are you suggesting that the Greens wealth tax doesn’t go far enough?

It’s funny that you go straight to immigration as an excuse for being a cap doffing boot licking pleb and arguing against a wealth tax when there’s other much larger bills like looking after the elderly ( the state pension is the largest part of the welfare bill, almost half of the total cost), or funding the NHS to everyone’s benefit, or investing in our children’s future by having properly staffed, properly equipped schools that aren’t failing down. There is and always will be more justification for wealth tax than there is for an argument against it (not that you were actually making one, rather just plebbing it up) Unless you’re so stupid that you’ve allowed yourself to become a cap doffing boot licking pleb or part of the 1% it has financial implications for and you certainly aren’t the latter.

For some further context in polling around 75% of the UK public support a wealth tax, even amongst those polled to vote reform about 60% of those support a wealth tax. Even some wealthy people support tax increases for themselves, there’s groups like the patriotic millionaires for example who are actively lobbying for the wealthiest to be taxed more. You seem to be in a minority swallowing absolute bollocks then regurgitating it to the benefit of the smallest minority.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

It sounds like you’re now making the argument for tax rises. Are you suggesting that the Greens wealth tax doesn’t go far enough?

It’s funny that you go straight to immigration as an excuse for being a cap doffing boot licking pleb and arguing against a wealth tax when there’s other much larger bills like looking after the elderly ( the state pension is the largest part of the welfare bill, almost half of the total cost), or funding the NHS to everyone’s benefit, or investing in our children’s future by having properly staffed, properly equipped schools that aren’t failing down. There is and always will be more justification for wealth tax than there is for an argument against it (not that you were actually making one, rather just plebbing it up) Unless you’re so stupid that you’ve allowed yourself to become a cap doffing boot licking pleb or part of the 1% it has financial implications for and you certainly aren’t the latter.

For some further context in polling around 75% of the UK public support a wealth tax, even amongst those polled to vote reform about 60% of those support a wealth tax. Even some wealthy people support tax increases for themselves, there’s groups like the patriotic millionaires for example who are actively lobbying for the wealthiest to be taxed more. You seem to be in a minority swallowing absolute bollocks then regurgitating it to the benefit of the smallest minority.

No, quite the opposite. It is not a serious policy and will almost definitely not raise the sums it claims because assessing wealth is far more complex than assessing income. The countries that have repealed wealth taxes found it administratively burdensome for low tax yields, for example, France raised €4.2 billion in 2017... There are less countries levying wealth taxes today than back in 1990 so wealth taxes are tried and tested and failed.

Frankly, a more obvious solution is to reinstate the 50p tax but the inconvenient truth is that when Osborne reduced the top rate tax, tax receipts went up. The exact same happened with corporation tax. To pick up on your Patriotic Millionaires point, HMRC accepts voluntary donations, only 5 people opted to voluntarily pay more tax so this lobbying group (and others) do not practice what they preach.

At the end of the day, the tax system should be optimised for revenue collection so you want policies that attract more high net-worth individuals and companies because they pay the largest % of tax revenues. Policies that chase away these people/companies cut your nose off to spite your face. Inconveniently for 'tax and spend' governments, there's a point of diminishing returns.

For anyone interested:

Why Wealth Taxes were Repealed in Europe - The Progress and Poverty Institute

A wealth tax is an example of a policy that has a superficial appeal that dissolves when closely examined or when put into practice. Wealth is anything with a positive market value. Net wealth is wealth minus liabilities. Gross wealth does not subtract liabilities. Wealth can be tangible, such...

progressandpovertyinstitute.org

PS. name calling is pathetic, do better.