Asylum seekers should be allowed to work

Former Member

currently they aren't, should they be allowed to?

i say yes, help them get adjusted to a new area, meet new people and will hopefully not get smeared with the stupid sponger label any longer

Former Member

I see no reason why asylum seekers shouldn't be allowed to work. Why such rules still exist to prevent them doing so is beyond me.

Former Member

why not, end of the day people will bring up arguments that they are stealing jobs

but if someone employs a non english speaking worker with no qualifications, what does that say about the local man/woman who lost out on the job

Former Member

stargalaxy wrote:

I see no reason why asylum seekers shouldn't be allowed to work. Why such rules still exist to prevent them doing so is beyond me.

ditto.

Former Member

They should never, ever, get "benefits" nor should anyone else. If you want to steal from me, have the decency to do it yourself, ta.

Other than that it's not a case of "seeking asylum" it's a case of "moving house".

Former Member

klintock wrote:

They should never, ever, get "benefits" nor should anyone else. If you want to steal from me, have the decency to do it yourself, ta.

".

your back in there is only me that matters in this world mode.
for an inteligent man ...it's sad to keep seeing.

Former Member

klintock wrote:

They should never, ever, get "benefits" nor should anyone else. If you want to steal from me, have the decency to do it yourself, ta. Other than that it's not a case of "seeking asylum" it's a case of "moving house".

How can there be such a thing as seeking asylum in another country? Remember Klintock, countries don't exist.

Former Member

your back in there is only me that matters in this world mode.

Care to explain?

for an inteligent man ...it's sad to keep seeing.

You or me?

Former Member

They're not allowed to work because there is a belief that it will make them almost impossible to deport if they are.

Former Member

Kermit wrote:

They're not allowed to work because there is a belief that it will make them almost impossible to deport if they are.

This Government seems incapable of deporting anyone at the moment, so letting them work would make no difference anyway.

Former Member

We are approaching more than a million on unemployment benefit and nearlty 3 million on incapacity benefit, I don't think it's a good idea allowing asylum seekers to work.

Former Member

klintock wrote:

Care to explain?



You or me?

no man is an island ...am i my brothers keeper ...yes.

Former Member

luke88 wrote:

We are approaching more than a million on unemployment benefit and nearlty 3 million on incapacity benefit, I don't think it's a good idea allowing asylum seekers to work.

yeah and the majority of them will be lazy scummers who wont get off their arse im afraid.

ive said it before and i'll say it again, there's work for anyone who wants to work. even in the poorest areas of the country

Former Member

luke88 wrote:

We are approaching more than a million on unemployment benefit and nearly 3 million on incapacity benefit, I don't think it's a good idea allowing asylum seekers to work.

Why? Millions of the people already here don't have jobs simply because they can't be arsed to find any. I am in no doubt that some people genuinely cannot work because of their circumstances. Where that is the case, compassion is called for. But three million incapacitated? I find that hard to believe. There's quite a lot of jobs that need doing.

Former Member

luke88 wrote:

We are approaching more than a million on unemployment benefit and nearlty 3 million on incapacity benefit, I don't think it's a good idea allowing asylum seekers to work.

If nobody worked there would be no jobs. By working they improve the labour in the economy - workers have to fight harder for their jobs, in theory being more productive. More productive workers puts us ahead of Europe, so that japanese business man who wants to open a sweet factory is going to open his factory in the UK instead of the France because people here actually work 9-5 instead of well, never.

So allowing them to work will create more jobs. So thats a bit of a funny argument really, saying we've got unemployment so shouldnt boost our economy. Whether we want them staying in the country for xenophobic reasons is a whole different strand in my eyes.

Economically speaking, asylum seekers / migration / you name it is a good thing. If all the coal miners who lost their jobs went and found new jobs abroad there wouldnt have been a problem!

But anyway, thats economic migrants. Asylum seekers are here for protection, but I dont think that means they should get a free ride. Of course, pregnant mothers etc. we dont want working 40 hour weeks - but healthy young men are able to do manual work whether they're from britain or south east asia.

Former Member

morrocan roll wrote:

no man is an island ...am i my brothers keeper ...yes.

In that case,brother,gimme all your money. I promise to do "good"

Teh_Gerbil

Yes, they should be allowed to work.

IT is just fucking stupid that they aren't.

Former Member

seeker wrote:

In that case,brother,gimme all your money. I promise to do "good"

believe me ...i am already giving it to you and am actualy ...of the belief i shoulkd be giving you more!
i make money ...and i believe in a high tax economy.
the money i make and the comforts it brings ...cannot be enjoyed in the midst of poverty.

Former Member

evryone and everyone should be allowed to work.
it is some kind of insanity to think otherwise.

Former Member

klintock wrote:

They should never, ever, get "benefits" nor should anyone else. If you want to steal from me, have the decency to do it yourself, ta.

Other than that it's not a case of "seeking asylum" it's a case of "moving house".

I wonder if YOU would still have the same opinion if you needed benifits?(Whether it be incapcity benifits or something else)

Former Member

the money i make and the comforts it brings ...cannot be enjoyed in the midst of poverty.

Then why support barriers to trade, robbery and massive inefficency?

evryone and everyone should be allowed to work.

Then why use violence to stop them?

Former Member

I wonder if YOU would still have the same opinion if you needed benifits?(Whether it be incapcity benifits or something else)

Yep, certainly would.

I can see NO circumstances that would lead me to taking benefits, unless I was completely imobilised or something that is.

Former Member

koe_182 wrote:

yeah and the majority of them will be lazy scummers who wont get off their arse im afraid.

Who? The illegal immigrants?

I can see how they'd want to spend their life savings to ride under a truck for three days in order to spend their life above a chip shop in Oldham on £30 a week.

ive said it before and i'll say it again, there's work for anyone who wants to work. even in the poorest areas of the country

But there isn't.

And, even more to the point, a McJob is not enough to be called "employment", and nor is being permanently stuck on a temporary contract which could be cancelled at any time.

Former Member

Sofie wrote:

I wonder if YOU would still have the same opinion if you needed benifits?(Whether it be incapcity benifits or something else)

it's very easy to hold klints views when your warm and safe.
i like to think more and more people are seeing through his simplistic views on life.

Former Member

it's very easy to hold klints views when your warm and safe.

They are always correct Mr. Roll. It's pretty easy to do anything these days, even in our current government created mess.

i like to think more and more people are seeing through his simplistic views on life.

Former Member

You never did get around to explaining why poor people are to blame for poverty though.

Well you did, but its not "weak" to choose food and warmth over stocks and shares.

Former Member

You never did get around to explaining why poor people are to blame for poverty though.

Is this aimed in my direction?

Well you did, but its not "weak" to choose food and warmth over stocks and shares.

Am I right in thinking it's down to the whole delayed gratification example I gave once?

Former Member

klintock wrote:

I can see NO circumstances that would lead me to taking benefits, unless I was completely imobilised or something that is.

ahhh ...so there are circumstances where you will take benefits.
meaning ...the only difference between your beliefs and everyone elses ...don't actualy exist.
you do actualy believe in benfeits.

i find myself almost wishing upon you ...emotional and financial disaster.
big thing for me to wish that on anyone but ...you are pushing me in that direction.
oh to see klint on his knees ...

Former Member

ahhh ...so there are circumstances where you will take benefits.

No, there are circumstances where I would be unable to refuse them.

you do actualy believe in benfeits.

DO some people give pieces of paper to other people and those other people think it means anything?

Sure. They are all mental, but heigh ho.

i find myself almost wishing upon you ...emotional and financial disaster.
big thing for me to wish that on anyone but ...you are pushing me in that direction.
oh to see klint on his knees ...

Why on earth would you wish that?

Former Member

klintock wrote:

Sure. They are all mental, but heigh ho.



Why on earth would you wish that?

cos at the end of the day ...you have to be the most selfish bastard i've come across on these boards.

if you actualy go through life the way you say ...you deserve a wake up call.
your in bad need of an education.
your in even more of a need of some ...real8ty.
your comfort is distorting your view.

Former Member

morrocan roll wrote:

cos at the end of the day ...you have to be the most selfish bastard i've come across on these boards.

if you actualy go through life the way you say ...you deserve a wake up call.
your in bad need of an education.
your in even more of a need of some ...real8ty.
your comfort is distorting your view.

What next? Will Klintock advocate we bring back work houses for the poor?