Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sir Mo Farah reveals he was trafficked into the UK using another child’s name

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 170 posts

Re: Sir Mo Farah reveals he was trafficked into the UK using another child’s name

#111

Post by bilekas »

brigandish wrote: post #105
bilekas wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mo Farah didn't cheat the system though. He was a victim of the trafficking and so the ops point is referring to not criminalizing the victim i think. Which makes sense. He didn't break the immigration law.

He is a direct beneficiary though. Whether that is relevant in immigration law, I don't know, but it certainly is in other areas of criminal law (e.g. receiving stolen property, soliciting murder etcetera).

> receiving stolen property

Being in possession of stolen property is not necessarily a crime. If you buy something on eBay that was stolen without your knowledge you're not going to get charged. You may have to return it and be out of pocket probably, but not crime.

As for soliciting murder that's a crime. There is an intent there.

> He is a direct beneficiary though.

What if instead of his lief today he was forced into the sex slave ? Would you still consider him a beneficiary ?

Re: Sir Mo Farah reveals he was trafficked into the UK using another child’s name

#112

Post by closeparen »

brigandish wrote: post #109
closeparen wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's not, this is called the lump of labor fallacy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lump_of_labour_fallacy

Quoting from that article: > However, skilled immigrating workers can bring capabilities that are not available in the native workforce, for example in academic research or information technology. Additionally, immigrating workforces also create new jobs by expanding demand, thus creating more jobs, either directly by setting up businesses (therefore requiring local services or workers), or indirectly by raising cons…

Yes, the leverage employers can have over immigrants is a big problem. An illegal immigrant who goes to the authorities with a wage theft claim risks being arrested and deported herself. Even a highly educated tech worker at Facebook cannot switch to Google without jeopardizing his family's status in the United States.

The harsher the climate towards immigrants in laws and officialdom, the easier they are to exploit. The anti-immigration voters who demand this harshness are shooting themselves in the foot a bit, and should reconsider.

Re: Sir Mo Farah reveals he was trafficked into the UK using another child’s name

#113

Post by Gollapalli »

sangnoir wrote: post #70
Gollapalli wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wage dilution is an issue. It's the working and middle classes that are most harmed by immigration. Those who are in the position to not have their wages threatened by mass immigration policies are free to reap the rewards of cheap labor, but for those who are in the position of being outcompeted by incoming labor, immigration is a drawback not an asset. Naturally, policymakers are in the former category, and as such…

> It's the working and middle classes that are most harmed by immigration. Didn't farmers complain that British (working class?)citizens[1] weren't up for picking fruits after East Europeans hit the Brexit? The same working & middle class rely on cheap fruits, so it's not a simple equation where fewer immigrants = better jobs. 1. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-suffolk-61568286

There's a difference between a complaint and a reality. British working class citizens likely wouldn't wish to pick fruits, at the wages that British farmers wish to pay them.

Actually, that's sort of the point. British working class labour being undercut by foreign labour.

Re: Sir Mo Farah reveals he was trafficked into the UK using another child’s name

#114

Post by pppq »

thrown_22 wrote: post #73
olivermarks wrote: post #3

Illegal immigration into the UK from the third world is far greater now than it was in the era of Mo Farah's childhood. I have to wonder how the UK social construct can survive with the huge numbers of people entering given the lack of housing, water, food etc https://youtu.be/PAeRejE467g

They don't. There's a reason why right wing parties are popular for the working poor and why Brexit and anti-immigration in general is most popular in the most economically depressed areas. Liberals aren't doing themselves any favors by sweeping thins like the Rotherham child rape gangs and Manchester Arena bombing under the rug because they happened to white trash.

No post body was provided.

Re: Sir Mo Farah reveals he was trafficked into the UK using another child’s name

#115

Post by [deleted] »

cm2187 wrote: post #79
worik wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No action whatsoever will be taken against Sir Mo and to suggest otherwise is wrong,” a spokesperson said. I agree the "he law should be solidly on his side and not have to rely on the kindness of some civil servant " It is for Sir Mo Farah. Good on him, respect. But for Ahmed the minimum wage worker, they would be in detention and booked on an aeroplane to Rwanda before you could say "class ridden hell hole". Good…

Not sure I understand the point you are making. That everyone should be able to cheat the immigration system?

[deleted]

Re: Sir Mo Farah reveals he was trafficked into the UK using another child’s name

#116

Post by emsixteen »

Gollapalli wrote: post #113
sangnoir wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's the working and middle classes that are most harmed by immigration. Didn't farmers complain that British (working class?)citizens[1] weren't up for picking fruits after East Europeans hit the Brexit? The same working & middle class rely on cheap fruits, so it's not a simple equation where fewer immigrants = better jobs. 1. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-suffolk-61568286

There's a difference between a complaint and a reality. British working class citizens likely wouldn't wish to pick fruits, at the wages that British farmers wish to pay them. Actually, that's sort of the point. British working class labour being undercut by foreign labour.

"Undercut"? You're getting there.

Re: Sir Mo Farah reveals he was trafficked into the UK using another child’s name

#117

Post by lordnacho »

I have a suspicion that almost every immigrant to the west is close to a horrendous story like this one.

My family were immigrants to the west as well and also had a crossing-the-water story. Nothing happened, but friends had stories about falling into the water and having to swim. My oldest cousins still remember it.

I acquired a teenage sister after turning 20, suddenly. A friend of the family brought her as the child of a woman he'd married, and was now divorcing, forcing them to return home. Turns out, she was not the child of this woman. My parents had a couple of days to decide to keep her, as the guy had decided to leave for the old country to look for another wife.

This is not even the only terrible arrival in the West story in my own family, but I'll spare you the other one.

I suspect if you go eat at certain ethnic restaurants in the major UK cities, you will meet someone with at most 2nd hand knowledge of sitting in the back of a truck going under the channel.

When I investigated the immigration stories is friends, the most reasonable ones seem to be from parents or grandparents who came in the 60s or earlier. Sailors who happened to decide to stay in the West, that kind of thing. After that most of the stories are hairy. Escaping some regime, crossing water in a crappy boat, that type of thing. Not a whole lot of current dinghy-over-the-channel stories, but that mainly owes to my age.

Re: Sir Mo Farah reveals he was trafficked into the UK using another child’s name

#118

Post by mrtksn »

christkv wrote: post #97
mrtksn wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Leechers exist among natives too. Any particular reason to believe that it’s worse with the immigrants?

https://www.ssb.no/en/arbeid-og-lonn/artikler-og-publikasjon...

Thanks, interesting link.

In attempt to tackle the economic crisis that the Turkey is in, last December the Turkish government introduced a banking instrument indexed to one of the USD/EUR/GBP currencies where you can put your Turkish lira and earn interest of up to %17 but if the Turkish lira loses more value than your currency of choice the government will match the difference. So at the best case you earn up to %17 interest and on worst case you don't lose in terms of foreign currency.

Anyway, they made it available to foreigners too in attempt to have the Turkish diaspora in Europe and UK bring their money to Turkey. Unfortunately it failed to fetch any significant demand and BBC Turkish made a small documentary with the Turks living in the UK and talked with them on why they did not took the opportunity.

The answers were actually shocking: Turks were working illegally so that they don't pay income tax and receive state benefits and as a result they couldn't put their money in the banking system because Turkey started sharing data with EU and UK. It turns out, there are many Turks who are officially unemployed but are actually working illegally and not paying taxes.

I don't deny the existence of leeches, I wish they were caught. EU made a significant progress with the Turkish cheaters and their money is no longer in heaven in Turkey.

Re: Sir Mo Farah reveals he was trafficked into the UK using another child’s name

#120

Post by rvieira »

lsllc wrote: post #8

Gosh this is such a heartbreaking and yet fascinating story. The BBC version is has more detail including some possible immigration jeopardy for Sir Mo due to getting citizenship under an assumed name: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-62123886 In the documentary, barrister Alan Briddock tells Sir Mo his nationality was technically "obtained by fraud or misrepresentations". Legally, the government can remove a person's Bri…

Of course I wish he never has any problems ... but on human rights and fairness grounds, not because he's a famous athlete. Others in similar situations might not be celebrities.
Post reply on HN