Reply to post:

Looming US immigration crackdown aims to weed out pre-crime of poverty. And that may be bad news for techie families

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Personally I'd rather treat people than have someone who contracts a treatable but contagious communicable disease walking around untreated.....else you up the risk of pandemics, loss of productivity due to others getting sick from person A and associated costs due to this.

Its called being decent human beings. Unlike the last few governments who to save a poorly estimated £1.3 billion over 5 years cut support to the disabled under the heading of "focusing support" while then giving 5 times that amount in aid to Africa, which likely will end up funding warlords etc given that there are numerous instances of money not getting where it was intended and no oversight of it.

I'd support a "charity begins at home" act, which bars ANY foreigh aid (or any other weasel term for it) until such time that there are no homeless people, the NHS A&E wait time is sub 60 minutes consistently, treatment begins consistently in under a week, disability support exceeds UN rights of the disabled, no child lives in poverty (And a ban on shifting the goalposts), carer's allowance raised to match minimum wage (your expected to do 35+ hours of care a week for the equivalent of £1.90 or less an hour and you have worse restrictions than an employer could slap on you - not permitted to study without permission, not permitted to take on any work without permission, strict limitations on weekly earnings, required to immediately notify DWP of every day or part day you or the person you care for is an inpatient in hospital or face criminal sanctions (with no discretion given)

No chance it would happen though as politicians love their photo ops and the chance to "save the world", get a good jolly somewhere and too many vested interest groups would go ballistic "but we have a colonial legacy," etc, UK has just as bad a pork barrel program problem as the USA, in some ways worse tbh....particularly with the quite blatant agenda of the BBC - pro -rad feminism, pro extreme environmentalism, pro-religion, anti-sex, pro-authoritarianism, anti-technology, anti-disabled and anti-poor and often with writing worse than the gutter press, claiming one wing nut "expert" opinion is worth as much or more than the a pile of others, writing stories taken from rabble rousing groups on facebook etc - "should we stop washing our clothes", quick google turns up it came from a very science averse green group - "synthetic clothing creates microfibres which attract vast toxic DDT and BPA concentrations in the oceans, we must ban them now!" (I'm sorry as far as I knew DDT was banned in many places DECADES ago - its the kind of anti-science hysteria thats down right frightening and out of touch with reality, yet the BBC publishes it as fact and uses public money to push its agenda money collected via menaces and intimidation)

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019