Unless it's changed radically, many are hopeless alcoholics or drug addicts. Most of whom have either resisted or failed at any and all attempts to detox them. They choose to live on the streets most of the time because any and all money they get their hands on goes down their neck on in their veins.
Say there was one house available and you had to make a choice between the homeless couple you speak of or an equally deserving couple that had just arrived in the country.Who would take priority?
Not the ones I talk to. That's a huge, huge generalisation. Kinda like saying that all British immigrants... err I mean ex-pats in Spain don't integrate and are just lager louts looking for a Sunday dinner, English breakfast and a pub called the Queen's Head. You should try actually talking to some homeless people and finding out their back stories and where they are from and what has happened to them. Personally I consider myself extremely fortunate to have never suffered any abuse from my parents/family, never been sexually assaulted, to have always had support from my parents whenever I needed it, to have gotten the care I needed when diagnosed with a mental illness and the support needed to help me pay my bills when 1st coping with it, and that I've never suffered from an addiction or mental breakdown. I'm very lucky, it's just a shame that not everyone is so lucky...
I'm just going by what I used to see in London. And that covered the majority of what I saw. Not all, but the definite majority.
I never realised life was so binary. So are you saying that there's only one house available in the entire country and there's two identical couples who deserve help in the same identical situation? Am I the only person who can help these identical people, are these identical people white, black, Asian, gay, straight, disabled, old, young, healthy or unhealthy? I suppose in this totally unrealistic and made up scenario I'd go for the couple from this country - which is the answer you want. But that is only because these are made up characters in an unrealistic scenario.
Is " charity begins at home" an out dated phrase?........ Its still quite relevant in other countries.
No, it's quite a nice phrase - but I don't think the phrase should be "charity ends at home". And what do you think will happen to all of these people starving on our streets that you deem not worthy of our help? Do you think they'll just disappear, like some of people think the refugees in Calais will disappear if we ignore them for long enough? Or do you think they'll become so desperate they'll eventually be grabbed by criminal gangs who thrive on forcing desperate people into the sex trade or to become drug mules or even slaves (human slavery is on a huge increase)
It's not judgmental at all. If you see people spark out, surrounded by empty cans of Tennants super, it's reasonable to suspect they may have an alcohol problem!...
Would you personally say that you've got preconceptions on people based on where they're from? I guess most people do whether they admit it or not. Let's say that you've got a new neighbor moving in. It's either a Scandinavian, Eastern European, Middle Eastern, African or East Asian (Japan, China, Thailand etc) Would you pick if you could or willing to give anyone a go? They might all be dicks
They might be. I know we all have preconceptions and judge people based on our own prejudices. I mean I'd be really annoyed if a Swedish woman moved in next door to me and she wasn't stunning and bisexual!
I have colleagues from Sweden and they too said things are not well in socialist utopia land. On some of the matters there, they said the media is rabid and anyone attempting to objectively providing a dissenting voice on the issues will face some sh*t-storm as a result. Other than that, from their comments it seems their daily issues are not too much different to the UK
This is a major problem with all forms of socialism. I remember, at University, the Student Union was run by a bunch of fanatical left-wingers, and we suffered some of the most outrageous cases of censorship under the so-called "no platform" policy, which basically meant that no one could speak in the University unless the speaker held politically correct extreme left-wing views. It was an horrendous time, and the entire Student Union elective ended up getting kicked out on a vote of no confidence.
A problem with all "isms" where dogma reigns supreme over pragma. "I remember, at school, the Student Union was run by a bunch of fanatical left-wingers, and we suffered some of the most outrageous cases of censorship under the so-called "no platform" policy, which basically meant that no one could speak in the University unless the speaker held politically correct extreme left-wing views. It was an horrendous time, and the entire Student Union elective ended up getting kicked out on a vote of no confidence." That has been the case in the UK in recent years. Always amusing to see the dichotomy dilemmas these Student Grants get themselves into.