In my opinion, we should be offering refuge to tens of thousands of asylum seekers, not hundreds.... If we want to be 'Great' Britain again.
Logically, then, perhaps we should be offering refuge to ALL asylum seekers. How many would that be? Millions? Wouldn't that encourage economic migrants too? All they'd have to do is claim that they are from a war-torn area and fear for their lives.
So, let's assume we admit millions (I think, actually, that we already have) and continue to do so for as long as they come. What will happen when the country's population has doubled and all of the people admitted are poor, have nothing and have nothing to offer. Half of our population (or more) would be taking and not giving. Wouldn't that result in the country as a whole becoming much much poorer?
Where would the money needed to support all these asylum seekers come from then?
Actually, I see that WS put it better than I did on a different thread:
"Only trouble is, it won't be the 'rich' part of the nation that suffers from millions of extra mouths to feed. That's likely to be a huge social impact borne of an economic drain. Society and economics are intertwined with each other.
And will the legions of migrants affect this rich country's 1.5 trillion debt?"
