@kibcol1049 Don't keep us in suspense! Was it pro- or anti-immigration?
@h4890 Against illegal immigration and in particular the small boat crossings it seems. Apart from the extreme dangers of these, to the people on the boats and the rescuers, it occurred to me that the total cost to the UK must be huge. In order to pay for it I suppose some deserving UK citizen doesn’t get some help they need. That's just my opinion though.
@kibcol1049 The only two solutions I can think of are...
1. Sink the boats. Once immigrants realize this, they will go to the EU instead of risking this.
2. Deduct the money it costs to patrol and handle immigrants from foreign aid, and if that is not enough, play hardball and add the cost to exports to the country or region the immigrant comes from.
A 3 can of course be to lower the cost of handling them. That is, water and bread, no hotels, immediate shipment to rwanda,
@h4890 @kibcol1049 interesting proposals. Could you elaborate on proposal 1?
@Disputatore @kibcol1049 Easy! Imagine that someone breaks into your home. In some countries you have the right to shoot them, or defend yourself.
This creates a psychological situation where people refrain from randomly breking into peoples homes, because they risk getting shot.
I say, let's do the same with the boats, after implementing a grace period. Boats that cannot identigy themselves and with a legal purpose, will be sunk.
Immigrants will be sent to rwanda. I bet this will
@Disputatore @sam @kibcol1049 They do represent some cost, I assume they are not paddling to the UK? Surely they have motors.
And as I said... repeated sinking and shipment to rwanda creates disincentives for both smugglers and immigrants. Naturally, if a smuggler is identified, he will go to jail in rwanda.
Add to that the termination of foreign aid, and potentially exit taxes, and the country of origin will also be affected economically to clean up their own mess.