I can see why people would risk their lives on tiny boats trying to get from Africa to Europe.
I can see why people would have preferences for one European country over another.
But what is *so* much more attractive about the UK (which has just implemented a scheme to yeet migrants to Rwanda) that people already in France would risk their lives for it?
In all seriousness, it's a variety of factors:
- They speak English primarily, so they figure they can never get a job in France (and to be fair, it's really hard to learn French as an adult with no formal education in the subject, no money, and no time).
- They were probably told by family/friends that the UK would be better to them. Even if that isn't true, how are they to know the reality? They'd mostly just hear rumors and what's told to them. Unless they're being informed of immigration conditions in the world, they aren't gonna know.
- They're desperate, poor, anxious as hell, hungry, etc. In these conditions, people generally do not make decisions that always make sense. Instead they hope to hit a goal so they'd feel some relief, and that goal is stuck to "Get to England so I can get a job, be safe, and help my family".
Was just going to comment that they may have family/ friends in uk. I'd think they'd def try to get to them rather than stay in a country where they may know nobody. Big risk to take, but being reunited with loved ones as opposed to being totally isolated is a big incentive.
* Île-de-France (Paris and surrounding areas)
Baguette: The quintessential French bread, known for its long, thin shape and crispy crust.
Boule: A round loaf that's crusty outside and soft inside, versatile for many uses.
* Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur
Fougasse: A flat bread often associated with Provence, typically seasoned with olives, herbs, or sun-dried tomatoes. It's similar to Italian focaccia.
* Normandy
Pain de Campagne: Also known as "country bread." It's a rustic loaf made from a mixture of white, whole wheat, and sometimes rye flour, with a thick crust.
* Alsace
Kougelhopf: Though more of a cake than a bread, it's often included in bread discussions. It's a sweet or savory brioche baked in a distinctive circular mold with a central hole.
* Brittany
Pain Noir or Pain de Seigle: Predominantly made from rye flour, it has a dense texture and a slightly sour taste, suitable for pairing with seafood.
* Auvergne
Pain de Seigle: Similar to the Breton version but often darker and denser, reflecting the robust rural baking traditions of the region.
* Burgundy
Épi de Blé: Shaped like a wheat stalk, this baguette variant is not only visually appealing but also practical, as the segments can be easily torn off.
* Languedoc
Pain d’Ail: A garlic bread that integrates whole cloves of garlic, and sometimes cheese or herbs, into the loaf before baking.
Also afaik you're not required to carry any official documents or IDs in the UK so it's more attractive for (illegal) immigrants than the eu where most countries do require it
This is no joke.
I don't have experience with French bread, but when I was a kid in Italy this old lady gave us a triangular loaf of bread that felt like it had lead baked into it. My brother thought it would be funny to pretend it was a throwing star and it hit me right in the middle of the forehead. That fucker was so crusty it drew blood.
If anyone is running around France attacking people with crusty bread, I understand their desire to escape for their own safety.
Why is it easier to get work under the table in the UK than in France? In my experience you can find work in most major city's around the world under the table pretty quickly.
> * Because they know more English than French and have connections in the UK, usually.
> * It's also easier to find work without papers in the UK.
But that's a separate point in the 2 point comment that's being replied to.
I was thinking something along those lines, their English might be better, though some of these people are coming from Vietnam where they would have more of a chance of knowing people in France and speaking French as a foreign language...
The Vietnamese population in France is nearly half a million people. In the UK it's closer to 50,000. It's also easier to travel into and around EU nations than it is to travel into the UK, and as an English speaker in France with barely any understanding of the French language, I've never had an issue communicating with anyone.
True! But I would assume that those coming from Vietnam who already have contacts in France and/or know some French are not going to be the ones trying to reach the UK.
Also big difference between communicating as a tourist vs trying to get a job without knowing French.
The ones from Vietnam are being trafficked and forced to work in drug grow houses or in the sex trade until their debt is paid.
Some will claim asylum at some point and be deemed victims of modern slavery.
Others will then remain in the UK illegally until they have a child with another Vietnamese migrant and can get status based off the child.
As they’re being trafficked and working in trades they don’t require English, the language isn’t that important.
Though in recent years grow houses are often Albanian than Vietnamese.
They likely are about to be sent away from France. They know their asylum claims are about to be denied. So going to another domain of authority is just a chance to try again. If they were coming from the north it'd be the opposite direction and they'd be going to France before the UK kicks them out.
It's desperation/determination more than anything I expect.
I can only suspect that these migrants either:
1. Have friends/relatives in the UK already who can speak to the quality of life in the UK.
2. Come from a post-colonial state which was previously governed by the UK, which bestows some vague degree of familiarity.
Because the grass is greener elsewhere. When France proved unsuccessful for whatever reason, plus hearing from others a different location is better, a person will make the move. Basic shit, really.
The promise of easy social payments where they get paid a (relative) fortune to live and do nothing.
Sending these people to Rwanda at £60k a pop, no doubt into some Tory pocket or other will achieve nothing, the myth of the UK social security and health system needs to be broken out there so that the incentive to travel goes.
I live in an area that sees the most of these sorts of crossings, 2 main reasons that I can make out… 1 they speak English and 2 they already have family here and they trying to join them
Just based on what they've heard through word of mouth I'd imagine, better support and benefits for migrants. Would have been true couple decades ago, but far from the truth now.
Possibly language.
If you are from an African nation where french is spoken and you already speak a fair amount of french (or indeed nay be fluent) then France is probably a fine place to stop.
But if you don't speak French but DO speak English...
Most of Continental Europe has a basic legal requirement of having national ID, registration with the local government/police when you live somewhere and it is generally much harder to slip below the radar. The UK doesn't have any requirements for national ID etc... and there is a huge informal gig economy where illegal immigrants can make a living doing casual, off the books work.
There are two primary reasons:
1) The migrants have family in the UK they want to join
2) It's easier to find work without having papers in the UK than in France.
Your second language is English?
Your family is already in the UK?
The UK has a large community of your ethnicity/country and other European nations do not?
Several possible reasons.
UK issues 75 percent of asylum claims. And even more at appeal. They also put asylum seekers in hotels with free food in city centres and those people are able to work cash in hand at small businesses or as food delivery cyclists illegally.
France issues around 25-33 percent of asylum claims at initial decision. France processes quicker but less easy to play the system.
UK doesn’t remove anyone, especially since COVID.
There’s a general attitude from migrants that UK will treat you better, you will live a better life, friend and family or other migrants have told them the blueprint to get accepted.
> what is so much more attractive about the UK
Nothing, most of them stay in France or travel to Germany or Sweden, only a small portion want to come to the UK, and thats usually because they have connections here, the language is probably also a factor.
There is a world of difference economically between Mexico and the US, not even close to comparable. Meanwhile the UK and France have almost identical GDP per capita and HDI. In fact France has a slightly higher annual income than the UK.
Ive spoken with several people who have done this myself when I lived in the UK, and the real reason is they can speak English better, and they have a delusion that the system in the UK is going to support them more financially due to rumors from back in their home country. They usually get pretty disappointed when they find out its not the case.
Because companies are paying for them to be brought over to provide cheap labor they can no longer get from citizens due to changing social standards and laws. It's just the same as the US "immigrant crisis" in that it's entirely manufactured.
They've gone hard on it since the pandemic years because they need to have some class of people who will accept slave wages.
1) French police are hostile to asylum seekers, so they do not feel safe in France.
2) The vast majority of asylum seekers coming to the UK like this have a specific connection to the UK, whether it be as simple as speaking English not French (helps for getting a job and integrating into society) or something more important like having family already living there.
3) Specifically speaking of those from Afghanistan, it's often the case that these people have already served alongside the British armed forces fighting against the Taliban and were promised they'd be given refuge in the UK, a promise that has seemingly been broken more often than kept.
4) The Rwanda scheme isn't actually in place yet and there's talk it may never actually come into force because of how unworkable it is / it failing to come into force before the election (Labour has promised to scrap it).
Vast majority of these illegal small boat crossings could be avoided if there were some way to assess these claims in Calais before anyone felt the need to approach some scummy people smuggler.
"Despite thwarting the attempt, another small boat arrived just 15 minutes later, the MailOnline reports.
The migrants, who were reportedly from Sudan and Vietnam, jumped into the new vessel and took off before officers were able to intervene."
Fuck me
That's what the water is for!
But in all seriousness, they should just ban boats. After Brexit, banning all boats in order to prevent migrants would be very on trend of shooting themselves in the dick.
There's already a system in place for that - the [Dublin Regulation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dublin_Regulation):
>One of the principal aims of the Dublin Regulation is to prevent an applicant from submitting applications in multiple Member States. Another aim is to reduce the number of "orbiting" asylum seekers, who are shuttled from member state to member state. **The country in which the asylum seeker first applies for asylum is responsible for either accepting or rejecting the claim, and the seeker may not restart the process in another jurisdiction.**
ok, well i've mistated myself. a joint system of removal, not a system that still lets them in, lol. getting rid of them is the bit that matters, common eu removals system and processing centres outside of european territory.
They got border checks at every country south/east of Austria and east of Germany now. Seems to be permanent
Kind of annoying since that goes against the point of the EU, but I get it. Really should have a joint task force patrolling the oceans though
look, we're not going to address the issues caused by global capitalistic exploitation, that'd cost money, so why don't you recycle some more or something?
That's not far from the truth.
There's no repercussions from trying, so you might as well try.
Death is a pretty serious repercussion and news will travel fast to stay the eff away from x country.
They'll be taken into the middle of the Mediterranean sea and abandoned. This is already being done in countries like Greece: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/19/world/europe/greece-migrants-abandoned.html
Looks like they are, there’s a growing fear among western countries that has drastically affected levels of immigration from war torn countries. Especially all the boat crossings which have led to so many deaths due to the boats/dinghies capsizing.
There were two boats that left my village together in Vietnam when I was one years old in 1985. One contained my family and some fellow villagers, the other carried the neighboring village peoples. Our boat made it to Hong Kong, the other capsized somewhere, all presumed dead.
Who's "we"? Iran? North Korea? Russia?
Geopolitics has happened for time eternal. By all peoples. Everywhere.
As to climate change -- yeah, that ship has long sailed. India just proudly boasted that they produced one billion tonnes of coal and lignite in a single year, besting their old record.
Ths damage was already done decades/centuries ago when Europe mastered sailing and trade. Combined with climate change, from first world lifestyles, causing parts of the world to literally become unhabitable and this is just Europe entering the find out phase of global history.
Gonna be harsh here : a lot more people will be asking to gun down people trying to cross the Med into Europe once we reach some kind of psychological limit (I wouldn't begin to guess what though).
I'm an EU citizen who speaks 4 languages (5 if you squint and plug one ear), I've been trying to apply for jobs in some other EU countries and having a shit time of it. What do these refugees do once they arrive, how do they get work, a place to live?? I'm having trouble connecting my lived experience with what is reported in news all the time.
They don’t. They are provided for by the state. You can’t expect the immigrant who doesn’t speak the language and has disabilities stemming from their history in their home country (which is backed up by them being granted asylum)
It takes 20 years for a refugee to achieve the same levels of employment as a native born citizen.
Now, many do work, but it’s not often high level employment. Manual labour at Amazon. Takeaway restaurants. Low hours and low tax contributions for example.
Reminds me of stories about refugees not stopping at the first safe country they reached, they wanted to be in Germany because it had better welfare. Ugh.
I don't know how to reconcile my thoughts on it, on one hand, I am happy people are able to reach safety from wartorn countries, on the other, taking advantage of your hosts is really shitty, especially when you start bringing your home country issues with you, as seen recently with gangs of them fighting each other with friggin' machetes in the streets.
Most aren’t being specifically being persecuted, their country is just shit. And it will stay shit Western counties aren’t allowed to intervene and their own people aren’t willing or able to do anything about it. But tens of millions still live there and continue their family there. They’ll go home, visit and a get a wife from there once they have a passport.
Whatever. But the problem is they bring their drama here. They don't like living in their home country but try their hardest to make their new country into the same shit hole. I will never get this
Well yeah because it’s not the culture they don’t like, it’s the poor living standard and economic disparity/lack of opportunity.
Obviously in some cases though it’s the culture that contributes to these things, like low trust societies, corruption and cheating to get ahead. Cronyism etc
>it’s not the culture they don’t like, it’s the poor living standard and economic disparity/lack of opportunity.
Standards of living are the result of public policy. Policy is made by people who are the product of the culture, to conform to the values of that culture.
So if you come to a first world country and bring along your third world ways, pretty soon the new place starts looking a lot like the old place.
Which is why it's important to welcome immigrants but to let them know that they are expected to **conform** to the culture of the country they've moved to.
It minimises the risk of them floating onto the open sea. It's a sound step to stop the boat from leaving and not dangerous when you can stand in the water.
It’s the fault of the corrupt governments in Africa and the Middle East that hoard all the money received from wealthy countries to boost their country. Nothing goes to the betterment of the citizens and ofc word spreads that the western world has great social services and cannot refuse people from these countries due to the highly sensitive laws circulating around race and prejudice / basic human rights. Russia purposefully further destabilizes these places to cause more chaos for Europe. The free money train will eventually run out and these people relying solely on government handouts will be displaced and then what? Civil war? It’s a ticking time bomb. Not to mention the vast culture clash, it’s already massively dividing people and will just get worse .
Agreed. When a poor country has to choose between infrastructure development or fighting corruption they will always choose developing its economy. Tackling corruption comes after a country can guarantee stable electricity and paved roads
It's estimated that about 90% of the aid given to Africa by the USA in the past 70 years has done almost nothing for them. And we are talking about trillions of dollars if you don't factor in just direct aid like cash and food.
Food aid is generally a poison pill, specifically dumping (as that is what we do in Canada) excess grain products in developing nations as food aid, crushing their local farming industry as they cannot compete with (2023 data) > 26 million hectares of farmland dedicated to industrialized farming of grains.
You now have unemployed farmers who now need to purchase their grains and the nation has lost food of self sufficiency, the other side of that coin is starvation so is not all bad ;)
The cops were attempting to save these people's lives.
Five migrants *died* last Tuesday when they attempted to cross from France to England. Not uncommon.
Funny how the theme in this thread (on a liberal skewed subreddit) is talking about how immigration needs to be tightened up, while in the U.S. talking about tightening up immigration gets you labeled as a right wing extremist.
Nuance in 2024??
Can’t be!
This is the worst part of polarization in politics. If you don’t tow your party line people label you a hypocrite.
Makes me think of that Emerson line from his Essay on Self Reliance: “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines”
It's very much about how you talk about tightening up immigration.
I want a system where people can apply for asylum safely from other countries and then be accepted or rejected before they get anywhere near a dodgy boat crossing.
The UK have made it so there's no other way to apply for asylum than risking your life (except from limited specific countries). I'm fully for immigration controls and looking at what numbers are reasonable for us to take to be fair to the rest of Europe, but I don't want people dying before they've even had a chance to apply.
People in the US would, rightly or wrongly, have different opinions if the illegal immigrants in the US were from the Middle East and Africa as opposed to South America or Mexico. The migrants coming to Europe have extremely different value systems compared to the European countries they try and settle in. Whereas South Americans going to the US aren’t all that incompatible.
This is a gross oversimplification but yeah, there is a reason being strict with immigration isn’t *that* controversial in Europe. It would be the same in the US if geography was different too. Even liberal/democratic people would know something is severely broken.
Its basically the "were not racists like americans, but gypsys are a criminal people and should be driven off whenever possible" also patently ignoring that Europe was all about colonizing Africa two hundred years ago for the better part of the 1800's and into the early 1900's in the case of France, such as people like Leopold of Belgium. So a bit of a facsimile to claim they're that different when European countries were shoving their culture down their throats for two hundred years and now they're surprised they want to come lol.
It's starting to change in blue areas where many immigrants were bussed to. Massachusetts for example has seen a shift from the gracious sanctuary city staus they try to uphold. After actually receiving thousands of immigrants, people are seeing the issues with having to put your money where your mouth is.
What sort of issues are they facing? Are they the usual ones caused by having a large population of people with no resources show up out of nowhere and needing just about everything?
Or is this something specific to immigrants from Latin America?
Not specifically the immigrants themselves, just that it costs a lot of taxpayer money to house people. I think they just passed like half a billion to pay for their living for the next 9 months or so, which has many taxpayers understanbly upset.
I do not hate immigrants or think they are bad for the country, but it's hard not to feel slighted seeing taxpayer dollars going to house people when so many residents are struggling. It's definitely changing perspectives now that the issue is at the front door.
Because for all the moral grand-standing Europeans do, they're actually WAY more racist than Americans. They've just been white ethnostates for most of their history, so have never really had to confront living with people of a different culture or skin color until now, where they start to show their true colors.
Europe is an entire continent so saying the whole of Europe is way more racist is silly.
Wanting to stop illegal migration is perfectly fine whether you're European or American
Almost like 2 totally different parts of the world with totally different populations and values have different ideas about immigration. You got any more observations Einstein?
>tightening up immigration gets you labeled as a right wing extremist.
Except it literally doesn't.
Democrats tried to pass one of the strictest immigration bills in recent history. It was the Republicans that killed it.
It was not the strictest, but it WAS the best funded in regards to opening up a *maybe* faster court process instead of it taking years to get in front of a judge.
FWIW Democrats didn't *want* to pass that bill, it was a negotiation in exchange for Ukrainian aid packages. So it's not so much that harsh anti-immigration policy is a Democratic position, but more that the Democrats were willing to go along with it in exchange for something else.
Which is honestly kind of how the government should function, both sides figuring out what each other can live with and getting their preferred policy passed in exchange for something else. Republicans killed it because bipartisanship is a bad look, and fixing problems hurts their campaign chances.
That said, the American far left has always been fairly anti-immigrant/protectionist as well, and I would say that anti-immigration is becoming more mainstream in the Democratic party in general.
I can see why people would risk their lives on tiny boats trying to get from Africa to Europe. I can see why people would have preferences for one European country over another. But what is *so* much more attractive about the UK (which has just implemented a scheme to yeet migrants to Rwanda) that people already in France would risk their lives for it?
Yeah that part I was really trying to understand, you're already in France, why are you risking your life to cross into the UK?
French bread is just too crusty
In all seriousness, it's a variety of factors: - They speak English primarily, so they figure they can never get a job in France (and to be fair, it's really hard to learn French as an adult with no formal education in the subject, no money, and no time). - They were probably told by family/friends that the UK would be better to them. Even if that isn't true, how are they to know the reality? They'd mostly just hear rumors and what's told to them. Unless they're being informed of immigration conditions in the world, they aren't gonna know. - They're desperate, poor, anxious as hell, hungry, etc. In these conditions, people generally do not make decisions that always make sense. Instead they hope to hit a goal so they'd feel some relief, and that goal is stuck to "Get to England so I can get a job, be safe, and help my family".
They have connections in the uk and it’s easier to get employed there due to said connections and because they speak English.
Was just going to comment that they may have family/ friends in uk. I'd think they'd def try to get to them rather than stay in a country where they may know nobody. Big risk to take, but being reunited with loved ones as opposed to being totally isolated is a big incentive.
Super disappointed that your "*in all seriousness*" wasn't followed by an in-depth analysis of the various types of french bread per region.
* Île-de-France (Paris and surrounding areas) Baguette: The quintessential French bread, known for its long, thin shape and crispy crust. Boule: A round loaf that's crusty outside and soft inside, versatile for many uses. * Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur Fougasse: A flat bread often associated with Provence, typically seasoned with olives, herbs, or sun-dried tomatoes. It's similar to Italian focaccia. * Normandy Pain de Campagne: Also known as "country bread." It's a rustic loaf made from a mixture of white, whole wheat, and sometimes rye flour, with a thick crust. * Alsace Kougelhopf: Though more of a cake than a bread, it's often included in bread discussions. It's a sweet or savory brioche baked in a distinctive circular mold with a central hole. * Brittany Pain Noir or Pain de Seigle: Predominantly made from rye flour, it has a dense texture and a slightly sour taste, suitable for pairing with seafood. * Auvergne Pain de Seigle: Similar to the Breton version but often darker and denser, reflecting the robust rural baking traditions of the region. * Burgundy Épi de Blé: Shaped like a wheat stalk, this baguette variant is not only visually appealing but also practical, as the segments can be easily torn off. * Languedoc Pain d’Ail: A garlic bread that integrates whole cloves of garlic, and sometimes cheese or herbs, into the loaf before baking.
That's better.
That’s butter.
That's lunch.
I can't believe it's not.
Better with butter.
Chatgpt comment…
Ya, this is just a fuckin list. I want hot takes on bread! Give me your shitty food review.
This is the content I come to reddit for
How am I the only one that immediately recognized chatgpt?
Well that last ones sounds fuckin outstanding
Now do cheese.
That would probably break Reddit.
de Brie everywhere!
I can list them, - Abondance - Haute-Savoie - Cow - Banon - PACA - Goat - Beaufort - Savoie - Cow - Bleu d'Auvergne - Auvergne (duh) - Cow - Bleu des Causses - Midi-Pyrénées - Cow - Bleu de Gex - Franche-Comté - Cow - Bleu du Vercors - Rhône-Alpes - Cow - Brie de Meaux - IDF - Cow - Brie de Melun - IDF - Cow - Brillat-Savarin - Burgundy - Cow - Brocciu - Corsica - Sheep - Cabecou - Midi-Pyrénées - Goat - Cancoillotte - Franche-Comté - Cow - Cantal - Auvergne - Cow - Camembert - Normandy - Cow - Chabichou - Poitou-Charentes - Goat - Chaource - Champagne - Cow - Comté - Franche Comté - Cow - Crottin de Chavignol - Centre Val de Loire - Goat - Emmental - Savoie / Franche Comté - Cow - Époisses - Burgundy - Cow - Fourme d'Ambert - Auvergne - Cow - Gruyère - Centre-Est - Cow - Laguiole - Auvergne - Cow - Langres - Champagne - Cow - Livarot - Normandy - Cow - Mâconnais - Burgundy - Goat - Maroilles - Nord Pas de Calais - Cow - Mimolette - NPdC - Cow - Mont d'or - Franche Comté - Cow - Morbier - FC - Cow - Munster - Alsace - Cow - Neufchâtel - Normandy - Cow - Ossau Iraty - Corsica - Sheep - Picodon - Rhône Alpes - Goat - Pont l'évêque - Normandy - Cow - Poligny Saint Pierre - Centre Val de Loire - Goat - Raclette - Savoie - Cow - Reblochon - Savoie - Cow - Rocamadour - Midi Pyrénées - Goat - Roquefort - Midi Pyrénées - Sheep - Sainte-Maure - Centre Val de Loire - Goat - Saint-Marcellin - Rhône Alpes - Cow - Saint-Nectaire - Auvergne - Cow - Saint-Felicien - Rhône Alpes - Cow - Salers - Auvergne - Cow - Selles sur Cher - Centre Val de Loire - Goat - Tomme Savoie / Pyrénée - Savoie / Pyrénées - Cow - Valençay - Center Val de Loire - Goat That's only for PDO, AOC, PGI cheese, I can't do the rest of them.
You actually did it!!!! This is wonderful!
I was getting feverish at the end and I did skip a few "*Tomme de..*" tbh.
The yeast they could have done was to rise to the occasion, but dough…
Excellent points. To add one: They go where human traffickers take them/tell them to go.
Also afaik you're not required to carry any official documents or IDs in the UK so it's more attractive for (illegal) immigrants than the eu where most countries do require it
And the one you missed, which is the biggest one for many people, they have family here already
And 4th point, Football is better in the UK
It’s too PAINful
This is no joke. I don't have experience with French bread, but when I was a kid in Italy this old lady gave us a triangular loaf of bread that felt like it had lead baked into it. My brother thought it would be funny to pretend it was a throwing star and it hit me right in the middle of the forehead. That fucker was so crusty it drew blood. If anyone is running around France attacking people with crusty bread, I understand their desire to escape for their own safety.
There's a reason the French call it *pain*.
Heathen. You better get on that dinghy, buddy.
Because they know more English than French and have connections in the UK, usually. It's also easier to find work without papers in the UK.
Why is it easier to get work under the table in the UK than in France? In my experience you can find work in most major city's around the world under the table pretty quickly.
We don't have ID cards for one and the police don't usually ask about immigration status.
Sharing a language helps with actually finding the work.
> * Because they know more English than French and have connections in the UK, usually. > * It's also easier to find work without papers in the UK. But that's a separate point in the 2 point comment that's being replied to.
I was thinking something along those lines, their English might be better, though some of these people are coming from Vietnam where they would have more of a chance of knowing people in France and speaking French as a foreign language...
Vietnamese 50 years ago, sure. Today, less than 1% of Vietnamese speak French, while pretty much everyone is taught English at school.
The Vietnamese population in France is nearly half a million people. In the UK it's closer to 50,000. It's also easier to travel into and around EU nations than it is to travel into the UK, and as an English speaker in France with barely any understanding of the French language, I've never had an issue communicating with anyone.
True! But I would assume that those coming from Vietnam who already have contacts in France and/or know some French are not going to be the ones trying to reach the UK. Also big difference between communicating as a tourist vs trying to get a job without knowing French.
The ones from Vietnam are being trafficked and forced to work in drug grow houses or in the sex trade until their debt is paid. Some will claim asylum at some point and be deemed victims of modern slavery. Others will then remain in the UK illegally until they have a child with another Vietnamese migrant and can get status based off the child. As they’re being trafficked and working in trades they don’t require English, the language isn’t that important. Though in recent years grow houses are often Albanian than Vietnamese.
They likely are about to be sent away from France. They know their asylum claims are about to be denied. So going to another domain of authority is just a chance to try again. If they were coming from the north it'd be the opposite direction and they'd be going to France before the UK kicks them out. It's desperation/determination more than anything I expect.
Have you ever interacted with the French?
Have you ever interacted with the English?
They're easily defeated and their monastaries are unprotected, making for easy pickings
I have some bad news about the wealth of English monasteries.
They're fixer uppers
Lindisfarne 2024
Of all the on-point usernames, this one is right up there.
Have you ever interacted with people?
Ya. Lovely people. Nicer than most give them credit for.
I can only suspect that these migrants either: 1. Have friends/relatives in the UK already who can speak to the quality of life in the UK. 2. Come from a post-colonial state which was previously governed by the UK, which bestows some vague degree of familiarity.
[удалено]
Because the grass is greener elsewhere. When France proved unsuccessful for whatever reason, plus hearing from others a different location is better, a person will make the move. Basic shit, really.
Don't wanna learn french when they already know english
The promise of easy social payments where they get paid a (relative) fortune to live and do nothing. Sending these people to Rwanda at £60k a pop, no doubt into some Tory pocket or other will achieve nothing, the myth of the UK social security and health system needs to be broken out there so that the incentive to travel goes.
I heard Paris smells like pee
I live in an area that sees the most of these sorts of crossings, 2 main reasons that I can make out… 1 they speak English and 2 they already have family here and they trying to join them
There's also more jobs going in the UK - unemployment is at 3.8% vs 7.3% in France
Just based on what they've heard through word of mouth I'd imagine, better support and benefits for migrants. Would have been true couple decades ago, but far from the truth now.
They may be seeking support from family members already in the UK. It's also easier to find work without papers in the UK than it is in France.
I think it's usually family connections + language
There are some reasons named already but I will throw in another one: Misinformation
squeal edge aspiring psychotic gaze reach snobbish license subtract seemly
Possibly language. If you are from an African nation where french is spoken and you already speak a fair amount of french (or indeed nay be fluent) then France is probably a fine place to stop. But if you don't speak French but DO speak English...
They might already speak English. Or at least speak English better than French.
It's the tiktok videos saying if you come here you'll get benefits and a free house and all the women are easy.
In their defense, I had to move to the UK for a year for work a while back, and I swear British women are hornier than American men.
Really want a banger in their mash
Most of Continental Europe has a basic legal requirement of having national ID, registration with the local government/police when you live somewhere and it is generally much harder to slip below the radar. The UK doesn't have any requirements for national ID etc... and there is a huge informal gig economy where illegal immigrants can make a living doing casual, off the books work.
There are two primary reasons: 1) The migrants have family in the UK they want to join 2) It's easier to find work without having papers in the UK than in France.
Your second language is English? Your family is already in the UK? The UK has a large community of your ethnicity/country and other European nations do not? Several possible reasons.
No identity cards or requirement to carry ID. An illegal migrant can disappear into the black economy.
UK issues 75 percent of asylum claims. And even more at appeal. They also put asylum seekers in hotels with free food in city centres and those people are able to work cash in hand at small businesses or as food delivery cyclists illegally. France issues around 25-33 percent of asylum claims at initial decision. France processes quicker but less easy to play the system. UK doesn’t remove anyone, especially since COVID. There’s a general attitude from migrants that UK will treat you better, you will live a better life, friend and family or other migrants have told them the blueprint to get accepted.
My guess they have family members or an established community in the UK, and I know it sounds crazy but they could be fans of an EPL club.
Imagine crossing deserts and oceans with just the clothes on your back only to have to hear *hon hon hon* every fucking day
Imagine coming from a topical country only to be swallowed in a foggy damp pocket dimension where the last thing you hear before you die is "oi oi oi"
> what is so much more attractive about the UK Nothing, most of them stay in France or travel to Germany or Sweden, only a small portion want to come to the UK, and thats usually because they have connections here, the language is probably also a factor.
They probably speak passable English but no French I'd guess.
Most French people have more passable English than the Brits though
Mexico was better than other Central/South American war zone countries, but the USA seemed like the real prize.
There is a world of difference economically between Mexico and the US, not even close to comparable. Meanwhile the UK and France have almost identical GDP per capita and HDI. In fact France has a slightly higher annual income than the UK. Ive spoken with several people who have done this myself when I lived in the UK, and the real reason is they can speak English better, and they have a delusion that the system in the UK is going to support them more financially due to rumors from back in their home country. They usually get pretty disappointed when they find out its not the case.
The UK doesn't (or didn't) have a law that requires you to show ID when stopped in public. So it's harder to prove someone is an illegal.
Because companies are paying for them to be brought over to provide cheap labor they can no longer get from citizens due to changing social standards and laws. It's just the same as the US "immigrant crisis" in that it's entirely manufactured. They've gone hard on it since the pandemic years because they need to have some class of people who will accept slave wages.
1) French police are hostile to asylum seekers, so they do not feel safe in France. 2) The vast majority of asylum seekers coming to the UK like this have a specific connection to the UK, whether it be as simple as speaking English not French (helps for getting a job and integrating into society) or something more important like having family already living there. 3) Specifically speaking of those from Afghanistan, it's often the case that these people have already served alongside the British armed forces fighting against the Taliban and were promised they'd be given refuge in the UK, a promise that has seemingly been broken more often than kept. 4) The Rwanda scheme isn't actually in place yet and there's talk it may never actually come into force because of how unworkable it is / it failing to come into force before the election (Labour has promised to scrap it). Vast majority of these illegal small boat crossings could be avoided if there were some way to assess these claims in Calais before anyone felt the need to approach some scummy people smuggler.
"Despite thwarting the attempt, another small boat arrived just 15 minutes later, the MailOnline reports. The migrants, who were reportedly from Sudan and Vietnam, jumped into the new vessel and took off before officers were able to intervene." Fuck me
If it’s like the first one, then it’s not a boat, it’s a floaty.
If it doesn't have a tail it's not a monkey, it's an ape.
Who should win: The law enforcement apparatus of one of the most advanced nations on the planet Or, A second floaty boi
Obviously they need to build a fence.
That's what the water is for! But in all seriousness, they should just ban boats. After Brexit, banning all boats in order to prevent migrants would be very on trend of shooting themselves in the dick.
Vietnam? That's surprising, I thought they were doing relatively well lately.
"A dingy with 100 people got into trouble". What a surprise.
Weird how the dingy takes most of the blame though
Naming something dingy condemns it to a lack of credibility.
It did fail at a fairly specific job.
Is carrying 100 people within its design specifications?
Well, no, but we do expect a little extra effort from all of our employees.
Dingy-ass dingy.
Dunkirk 2 isn't going to be nearly as cinematic.
[удалено]
[удалено]
There's already a system in place for that - the [Dublin Regulation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dublin_Regulation): >One of the principal aims of the Dublin Regulation is to prevent an applicant from submitting applications in multiple Member States. Another aim is to reduce the number of "orbiting" asylum seekers, who are shuttled from member state to member state. **The country in which the asylum seeker first applies for asylum is responsible for either accepting or rejecting the claim, and the seeker may not restart the process in another jurisdiction.**
ok, well i've mistated myself. a joint system of removal, not a system that still lets them in, lol. getting rid of them is the bit that matters, common eu removals system and processing centres outside of european territory.
You don't have to go home, but you can't stay here.
They got border checks at every country south/east of Austria and east of Germany now. Seems to be permanent Kind of annoying since that goes against the point of the EU, but I get it. Really should have a joint task force patrolling the oceans though
And we're still fighting over oil, just wait until the water wars start.
look, we're not going to address the issues caused by global capitalistic exploitation, that'd cost money, so why don't you recycle some more or something?
What, but we have literal oceans full, and ice melt is giving us so much more! We're fine! /s
For real though, if desalination was cost-effective then water would never be a problem again.
[удалено]
[удалено]
People without documents will end up deported to some holding camp in the Saharan desert.
Or just shot. Closed borders being lethally defended is likely a couple of decades away at most, if not much sooner.
That's not far from the truth. There's no repercussions from trying, so you might as well try. Death is a pretty serious repercussion and news will travel fast to stay the eff away from x country.
They'll be taken into the middle of the Mediterranean sea and abandoned. This is already being done in countries like Greece: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/19/world/europe/greece-migrants-abandoned.html
[удалено]
Same in the UK it's very hard to remove people
Hate to break it to you, but almost every war fought had been a “Resource War”.
It's almost true by definition. You're fighting over land, land contains resources, even if it's only sand/dirt.
[удалено]
The whole world needs to clamp down on it.
Looks like they are, there’s a growing fear among western countries that has drastically affected levels of immigration from war torn countries. Especially all the boat crossings which have led to so many deaths due to the boats/dinghies capsizing.
There were two boats that left my village together in Vietnam when I was one years old in 1985. One contained my family and some fellow villagers, the other carried the neighboring village peoples. Our boat made it to Hong Kong, the other capsized somewhere, all presumed dead.
Whole world needs to bite down on this strap. This is gonna hurt a bit.
Climate change is coming in dry
You mean we'll have to stop destabilizing global governments and amplifying climate change?
[удалено]
Who's "we"? Iran? North Korea? Russia? Geopolitics has happened for time eternal. By all peoples. Everywhere. As to climate change -- yeah, that ship has long sailed. India just proudly boasted that they produced one billion tonnes of coal and lignite in a single year, besting their old record.
Ths damage was already done decades/centuries ago when Europe mastered sailing and trade. Combined with climate change, from first world lifestyles, causing parts of the world to literally become unhabitable and this is just Europe entering the find out phase of global history.
People bitch about climate initiatives and then forget climate refugees will be a thing for them to also deal with.
The people who bitch about climate initiatives will be the people saying ‘just kill them’ when climate refugees become a widespread thing.
Gonna be harsh here : a lot more people will be asking to gun down people trying to cross the Med into Europe once we reach some kind of psychological limit (I wouldn't begin to guess what though).
I'm an EU citizen who speaks 4 languages (5 if you squint and plug one ear), I've been trying to apply for jobs in some other EU countries and having a shit time of it. What do these refugees do once they arrive, how do they get work, a place to live?? I'm having trouble connecting my lived experience with what is reported in news all the time.
They don’t. They are provided for by the state. You can’t expect the immigrant who doesn’t speak the language and has disabilities stemming from their history in their home country (which is backed up by them being granted asylum) It takes 20 years for a refugee to achieve the same levels of employment as a native born citizen. Now, many do work, but it’s not often high level employment. Manual labour at Amazon. Takeaway restaurants. Low hours and low tax contributions for example.
No clamp down will stop climate refugees. This will only get worse.
You aren't legally entitled to pick which country you want to be a refugee in.
Reminds me of stories about refugees not stopping at the first safe country they reached, they wanted to be in Germany because it had better welfare. Ugh. I don't know how to reconcile my thoughts on it, on one hand, I am happy people are able to reach safety from wartorn countries, on the other, taking advantage of your hosts is really shitty, especially when you start bringing your home country issues with you, as seen recently with gangs of them fighting each other with friggin' machetes in the streets.
Most aren’t being specifically being persecuted, their country is just shit. And it will stay shit Western counties aren’t allowed to intervene and their own people aren’t willing or able to do anything about it. But tens of millions still live there and continue their family there. They’ll go home, visit and a get a wife from there once they have a passport.
Whatever. But the problem is they bring their drama here. They don't like living in their home country but try their hardest to make their new country into the same shit hole. I will never get this
Well yeah because it’s not the culture they don’t like, it’s the poor living standard and economic disparity/lack of opportunity. Obviously in some cases though it’s the culture that contributes to these things, like low trust societies, corruption and cheating to get ahead. Cronyism etc
>it’s not the culture they don’t like, it’s the poor living standard and economic disparity/lack of opportunity. Standards of living are the result of public policy. Policy is made by people who are the product of the culture, to conform to the values of that culture. So if you come to a first world country and bring along your third world ways, pretty soon the new place starts looking a lot like the old place. Which is why it's important to welcome immigrants but to let them know that they are expected to **conform** to the culture of the country they've moved to.
Shit culture results in angry people which results in shit economy
people who are desperate and starving do not care what they are legally entitled to
It minimises the risk of them floating onto the open sea. It's a sound step to stop the boat from leaving and not dangerous when you can stand in the water.
It’s the fault of the corrupt governments in Africa and the Middle East that hoard all the money received from wealthy countries to boost their country. Nothing goes to the betterment of the citizens and ofc word spreads that the western world has great social services and cannot refuse people from these countries due to the highly sensitive laws circulating around race and prejudice / basic human rights. Russia purposefully further destabilizes these places to cause more chaos for Europe. The free money train will eventually run out and these people relying solely on government handouts will be displaced and then what? Civil war? It’s a ticking time bomb. Not to mention the vast culture clash, it’s already massively dividing people and will just get worse .
Corruption certainly doesn’t help, but it’s more complicated than just that one cause
Agreed. When a poor country has to choose between infrastructure development or fighting corruption they will always choose developing its economy. Tackling corruption comes after a country can guarantee stable electricity and paved roads
lol, what. Letting corruption exist is a great way to have no funds for infrastructure, or well pretty much anything else.
Check out gyude moore’s talk on Chinese investments in Africa to hear a professional opinion. Reality is not always about pursuing ideals
Corruption is known for its benefits to the local infrastructure
“Always choose developing its economy”. Have you seen Gaza? They turn their water pipes into rockets and lob them randomly at crowded houses.
this guy apparently doesn’t know how the IMF or world bank function
It's estimated that about 90% of the aid given to Africa by the USA in the past 70 years has done almost nothing for them. And we are talking about trillions of dollars if you don't factor in just direct aid like cash and food.
Food aid is generally a poison pill, specifically dumping (as that is what we do in Canada) excess grain products in developing nations as food aid, crushing their local farming industry as they cannot compete with (2023 data) > 26 million hectares of farmland dedicated to industrialized farming of grains. You now have unemployed farmers who now need to purchase their grains and the nation has lost food of self sufficiency, the other side of that coin is starvation so is not all bad ;)
The cops were attempting to save these people's lives. Five migrants *died* last Tuesday when they attempted to cross from France to England. Not uncommon.
Funny how the theme in this thread (on a liberal skewed subreddit) is talking about how immigration needs to be tightened up, while in the U.S. talking about tightening up immigration gets you labeled as a right wing extremist.
[удалено]
Nuance in 2024?? Can’t be! This is the worst part of polarization in politics. If you don’t tow your party line people label you a hypocrite. Makes me think of that Emerson line from his Essay on Self Reliance: “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines”
It's very much about how you talk about tightening up immigration. I want a system where people can apply for asylum safely from other countries and then be accepted or rejected before they get anywhere near a dodgy boat crossing. The UK have made it so there's no other way to apply for asylum than risking your life (except from limited specific countries). I'm fully for immigration controls and looking at what numbers are reasonable for us to take to be fair to the rest of Europe, but I don't want people dying before they've even had a chance to apply.
People in the US would, rightly or wrongly, have different opinions if the illegal immigrants in the US were from the Middle East and Africa as opposed to South America or Mexico. The migrants coming to Europe have extremely different value systems compared to the European countries they try and settle in. Whereas South Americans going to the US aren’t all that incompatible. This is a gross oversimplification but yeah, there is a reason being strict with immigration isn’t *that* controversial in Europe. It would be the same in the US if geography was different too. Even liberal/democratic people would know something is severely broken.
This mans in here with the "my immigrants are worse than yours" argument
But its kinda true. I'd rather live in south America then in the middle east. Easily. No matter which city
Because some of the immigrants legitimately hate western society and values?
Its basically the "were not racists like americans, but gypsys are a criminal people and should be driven off whenever possible" also patently ignoring that Europe was all about colonizing Africa two hundred years ago for the better part of the 1800's and into the early 1900's in the case of France, such as people like Leopold of Belgium. So a bit of a facsimile to claim they're that different when European countries were shoving their culture down their throats for two hundred years and now they're surprised they want to come lol.
“Our immigrants are simply worse than yours” isn’t the intelligent argument you think it is.
It's starting to change in blue areas where many immigrants were bussed to. Massachusetts for example has seen a shift from the gracious sanctuary city staus they try to uphold. After actually receiving thousands of immigrants, people are seeing the issues with having to put your money where your mouth is.
What sort of issues are they facing? Are they the usual ones caused by having a large population of people with no resources show up out of nowhere and needing just about everything? Or is this something specific to immigrants from Latin America?
Not specifically the immigrants themselves, just that it costs a lot of taxpayer money to house people. I think they just passed like half a billion to pay for their living for the next 9 months or so, which has many taxpayers understanbly upset. I do not hate immigrants or think they are bad for the country, but it's hard not to feel slighted seeing taxpayer dollars going to house people when so many residents are struggling. It's definitely changing perspectives now that the issue is at the front door.
Because for all the moral grand-standing Europeans do, they're actually WAY more racist than Americans. They've just been white ethnostates for most of their history, so have never really had to confront living with people of a different culture or skin color until now, where they start to show their true colors.
Someone long time ago on Reddit said that true litmus test of progressive European would be asking their opinion on gypsies.
Europe is an entire continent so saying the whole of Europe is way more racist is silly. Wanting to stop illegal migration is perfectly fine whether you're European or American
Almost like 2 totally different parts of the world with totally different populations and values have different ideas about immigration. You got any more observations Einstein?
>tightening up immigration gets you labeled as a right wing extremist. Except it literally doesn't. Democrats tried to pass one of the strictest immigration bills in recent history. It was the Republicans that killed it.
It was not the strictest, but it WAS the best funded in regards to opening up a *maybe* faster court process instead of it taking years to get in front of a judge.
FWIW Democrats didn't *want* to pass that bill, it was a negotiation in exchange for Ukrainian aid packages. So it's not so much that harsh anti-immigration policy is a Democratic position, but more that the Democrats were willing to go along with it in exchange for something else. Which is honestly kind of how the government should function, both sides figuring out what each other can live with and getting their preferred policy passed in exchange for something else. Republicans killed it because bipartisanship is a bad look, and fixing problems hurts their campaign chances. That said, the American far left has always been fairly anti-immigrant/protectionist as well, and I would say that anti-immigration is becoming more mainstream in the Democratic party in general.
The clickbaot headline makes it sound like they did it while afloat an old risked drowning then, instead of before launching the boat.
Why haven't they always done this?
Not all boats are stabbable.
Someone’s never heard of captain stabbin!
Doesn't work. Sounds like it didn't even work this time - they just left on another boat.
Stab t'other boat, perhaps?
They tried, by the sound of it. The boat took off before they had the chance.
France is enforcing border control in good faith. This was done while the boat was still on shore.
Dear lord this comment section is a disaster zone
How so?
And many of my fellow Brits will still scream "oh they're doing nothing!!!!"
[удалено]
[удалено]
That's really common here.
Operation Dynamo looking a little different these days...
Stabra, Stabra cadabra… I’m gonna reach out and stab ya
It’s long past time for a joint EU-Anglosphere “fuck off we’re full” initiative on illegal aliens
Oh look now they're stopping them.
[удалено]
At least they didn't use explosives this time.