With the ironic exception of being unable to choose the circumstances of our birth (and often death) in this world, human beings aren't equal. To even think about the misery and inequality on Earth is rather sorrowful and burdening (unless you're fairly selfish or a sociopath); however, some parts of the world managed to secure a higher quality of life for their people sooner than others.
While we aren't granted the choice of time, place and family to welcome us into this upside down, inbred (pun intended) sandwich of culture and values we call society, each and every human being should be offered the freedom to better the circumstances they were thrown into by default, provided the means to achieve this are morally acceptable. No one has the right to deny this choice to another human being, or any other choice for that matter.
By extension, within reasonable restrictions, no institution or authority should seek to deprive anyone of this - not even England, in its teeny tiny cloud of delusion and xenophobia raining tabloid headlines over Drowning Street.
Tonight's rant sums up four issues:
1. Freedom of movement and a sense of security in your country of residence are basic human rights.
2. There will always be people with bent moral standards who can and will cheat to get free money. Duh.
Tonight's rant sums up four issues:
1. Freedom of movement and a sense of security in your country of residence are basic human rights.
2. There will always be people with bent moral standards who can and will cheat to get free money. Duh.
3. Doing a basic amount of research will reveal it's almost impossible to live on any benefits as an EU/overseas national who's lived in the UK for less than five years, isn't disabled and has no children.
4. Given the consequences of a lenient benefit system, who is responsible for the damage - the claimant applying for benefit, or the ones who granted them it?
4. Given the consequences of a lenient benefit system, who is responsible for the damage - the claimant applying for benefit, or the ones who granted them it?
Britain's "migration problem" roots in the incompetence of those who couldn't identify the scroungers in an endless backlog of applications for financial support, years and years ago. It roots in the incompetence of authorities who issued British passports to people who can't even speak the language (many of whom are native UK citizens).
While it's true the benefit system used to be too generous long before it became a concern, many abusers have easily gone unnoticed until today. Dear Britain, these are neither the Poles, nor the Romanians and Bulgarians or the Pakistani. The benefit scroungers of the most foul sort are your own kin, feasting on precious taxpayer money right under your nose. They are the teenage English mums with infinite clusters of progenies whom they use as meal tickets, and who like to eat £1,000 home cinema tellies from Asda seasoned with the latest gadgets from the budget chain store iBenefit.
The feared "migrant crisis" is a product of our government's own incompetence. Migrants haven't stolen, but earned their jobs - the jobs other people are too lazy, arrogant or stupid to do. They pay hundreds of pounds in tax for the poor English mums to clear the outstanding bills, coz dat flatscreen ain't gonna feed on air.
The foreign job stealers cook our food, mop up our messes, treat our ill, lead our scientific research and look after our elderly. There is no real migrant crisis. There's xenophobia and people fickle enough to swallow everything they read on toilet paper, including the ingrained fallacious assumption that Tories accurately reflect the views of the average Englishman with regard to this matter.
If more of us pulled our heads out of our arses then maybe we'd come to realise that most countries with an open-door policy to migration and cultural diversity, like Germany and Canada, aren't doing too bad. I hear they've not turned the Brandenburg Gate into a mosque yet.
