The asylum seekers who aren't allowed to work and are granted a pittance to live on - those ones? How are they supposed to benefit areas economically? Are they crowding out those wealthy homeless people who are just waiting to trickle all their money down to everyone?
Wealthy homeless people? Do you mean people who have been evicted from properties because they cannot afford the rent? Single parents? The council is competing with the government. Serco leases houses from landlords that normally would be rented or owned by young people. Ask Burnham what he thinks.
Serco - the British multinational company that makes money from all of that from the government? I don't see how you're making responsibility for this come back to refugees and homeless people. There is money in this, but not for the people being punched down on.
How is it punching down on asylum seekers? It’s an explanation not an excuse for government policies.
A quote from your own post: "Asylum seekers offer no benefit economically and councils are pitted against the government for accommodation." The way you have worded it makes it seem like you're punching down. It's not their fault they're caught up in some neoliberal wet dream with no options.
I agree - it’s not their fault but it’s not the fault of local residents either. It is the fault of the last government who let this system get out of control but it is also the fault of this government who have pitted local councils against government contractors when bidding for accommodation.
That we can agree on 🍻