英国人均接收乌克兰难民数少于欧洲大多数国家
正文翻译
(Refugees from Ukraine queue for further transport at the Medyka border crossing in south-east Poland in March.)
（今年3月，来自乌克兰的难民在波兰东南部的梅迪卡边境检查站排队等待运送。）
新闻：
UK takes in fewer Ukrainians per capita than most of Europe
-Figure of 10 Ukrainian refugees per 10,000 population is lowest but one out of 28 European countries
英国人均接收乌克兰难民数少于欧洲大多数国家
——“每1万人接收10名乌克兰难民”的数字在28个欧洲国家中倒数第2
-Figure of 10 Ukrainian refugees per 10,000 population is lowest but one out of 28 European countries
英国人均接收乌克兰难民数少于欧洲大多数国家
——“每1万人接收10名乌克兰难民”的数字在28个欧洲国家中倒数第2
(Refugees from Ukraine queue for further transport at the Medyka border crossing in south-east Poland in March.)
（今年3月，来自乌克兰的难民在波兰东南部的梅迪卡边境检查站排队等待运送。）
新闻：
The UK has taken in fewer Ukrainian refugees per capita than all but one of 28 European countries, a Guardian analysis of official figures from across the continent has found.
英国《卫报》对欧洲大陆官方数据的分析发现，在28个欧洲国家中，英国接收的乌克兰难民人均数量排倒数第2。
英国《卫报》对欧洲大陆官方数据的分析发现，在28个欧洲国家中，英国接收的乌克兰难民人均数量排倒数第2。
Seven million people have fled Ukraine for other European countries since Russia invaded on 24 February, according to the United Nations high commissioner for refugees (UNHCR).
据联合国难民事务高级专员办事处称，自2月24日俄罗斯入侵乌克兰以来，已有700万人逃离乌克兰前往其他欧洲国家。
据联合国难民事务高级专员办事处称，自2月24日俄罗斯入侵乌克兰以来，已有700万人逃离乌克兰前往其他欧洲国家。
The Home Office put the number of Ukrainians who had arrived in the UK as of 29 May at 65,700 – equivalent to about 10 refugees per 10,000 population.
英国内政部表示，截至5月29日，抵达英国的乌克兰人数量为6.57万人，相当于每万人中约接收10名难民。
英国内政部表示，截至5月29日，抵达英国的乌克兰人数量为6.57万人，相当于每万人中约接收10名难民。
As of 11 May, 720,000 Ukrainian refugees had arrived in Germany, which has a population of similar size to the UK’s, working out at 87 per 10,000 population.
截至5月11日，已有72万乌克兰难民抵达德国，德国的人口规模与英国相当，每1万人中接收87人。
截至5月11日，已有72万乌克兰难民抵达德国，德国的人口规模与英国相当，每1万人中接收87人。
France is the only European country with a roughly equivalent per capita figure to the UK’s, with just over 57,500 arrivals as of 25 May, or nine refugees per 10,000 population – although figures from individual prefectures indicate that 93,000 have now arrived in the country, significantly more than the most recently available official figure.
法国是唯一一个人均收入与英国大致相当的欧洲国家，截至5月25日，难民人数刚刚超过57500人，即每1万人中接收9名难民——然而来自各辖区的数据显示，目前已有9.3万人抵达法国，这一数字远远超过了最新的官方数据。
法国是唯一一个人均收入与英国大致相当的欧洲国家，截至5月25日，难民人数刚刚超过57500人，即每1万人中接收9名难民——然而来自各辖区的数据显示，目前已有9.3万人抵达法国，这一数字远远超过了最新的官方数据。
Some much smaller countries by population, including Austria, the Czech Republic and Bulgaria, have admitted many more refugees in both absolute and relative terms, according to their governments. Bulgaria, for example, was the initial destination for more than 290,000 people fleeing the war, equating to 423 per 10,000 population.
一些人口规模小得多的国家，包括奥地利、捷克共和国和保加利亚，其政府表示，无论从绝对数量还是相对数量来看，都接纳了更多的难民。比如，保加利亚是29万多难民逃离战争的最初目的地，相当于每1万人中接收423人。
一些人口规模小得多的国家，包括奥地利、捷克共和国和保加利亚，其政府表示，无论从绝对数量还是相对数量来看，都接纳了更多的难民。比如，保加利亚是29万多难民逃离战争的最初目的地，相当于每1万人中接收423人。
The countries bordering Ukraine have, as would be expected, admitted many more still: UNHCR data shows that a combined 5 million refugees have entered Poland, Romania and Hungary. Poland has admitted the highest rate of Ukrainian refugees of any EU country, taking in 957 refugees per 10,000 population.
与乌克兰接壤的国家，正如预期的那样，接纳了更多的难民：联合国难民署的数据显示，总共有500万难民进入了波兰、罗马尼亚和匈牙利。波兰是接纳乌克兰难民比例最高的欧盟国家，每1万人接收了957名难民。
与乌克兰接壤的国家，正如预期的那样，接纳了更多的难民：联合国难民署的数据显示，总共有500万难民进入了波兰、罗马尼亚和匈牙利。波兰是接纳乌克兰难民比例最高的欧盟国家，每1万人接收了957名难民。
While it is the case that many refugees move on to other countries, and some return to Ukraine – an Austrian official indicated that as many as 80% of arrivals had not stayed – the figures highlight the restrictiveness of the UK’s schemes, applicants to which are directed to wait for visas to be granted before they travel.
然而事实是，许多难民前往其他国家，有些人返回乌克兰——一位奥地利官员表示，多达80%的难民没有留下来——这些数字突显了英国签证计划的限制性，即申请人必须等待签证获得批准后才能启程。
然而事实是，许多难民前往其他国家，有些人返回乌克兰——一位奥地利官员表示，多达80%的难民没有留下来——这些数字突显了英国签证计划的限制性，即申请人必须等待签证获得批准后才能启程。
The UK’s visa schemes have been widely criticised for the lengthy delays experienced by many applicants. Hundreds of Ukrainian families have chosen to withdraw their applications to come to the UK because of these delays, according to a recent Observer report.
英国的签证计划因许多申请人遭遇的长时间延误而受到广泛批评。据《观察家报》最近报道，由于这些延误，数百个乌克兰家庭选择撤回了前往英国的申请。
英国的签证计划因许多申请人遭遇的长时间延误而受到广泛批评。据《观察家报》最近报道，由于这些延误，数百个乌克兰家庭选择撤回了前往英国的申请。
Refugee charities have said the sponsorship scheme, called Homes for Ukraine, could be exploited by predatory hosts, though the government insists that all hosts are subject to “security and criminal checks”.
难民慈善机构表示，这项名为“乌克兰之家”的赞助计划可能会被贪心的房东利用，尽管英国政府坚称，所有的房东都要接受“安全和刑事检查”。
难民慈善机构表示，这项名为“乌克兰之家”的赞助计划可能会被贪心的房东利用，尽管英国政府坚称，所有的房东都要接受“安全和刑事检查”。
While the Guardian research only considers figures for refugees arriving in each country, the UK also fares poorly in comparison with countries that publish only the number of applications for protection or asylum. Denmark and Finland, for example, have received roughly twice as many applications as the UK visa schemes per capita.
虽然《卫报》的研究只考虑到了每个国家的难民人数，但与那些只公布申请保护或庇护人数的国家相比，英国的情况也很糟糕。比如，丹麦和芬兰收到的人均签证申请数量大约是英国的两倍。
虽然《卫报》的研究只考虑到了每个国家的难民人数，但与那些只公布申请保护或庇护人数的国家相比，英国的情况也很糟糕。比如，丹麦和芬兰收到的人均签证申请数量大约是英国的两倍。
The UK government’s two Ukraine visa schemes – one for Ukrainians with family in the UK, the other a sponsorship-based scheme – were launched in March. The website for the schemes shows that 144,000 applications had been received as of 30 May, and 120,000 visas issued. However, just over half that figure – 65,700 refugees – had arrived in the UK as of 29 May.
英国政府于今年3月推出了两项乌克兰签证计划——一项针对有家人在英国的乌克兰人，另一项是基于赞助的计划。该计划的网站显示，截至5月30日，已收到14.4万份申请，并签发了12万份签证。然而，截至5月29日，这个数字的一半多一点——6.57万难民——已经抵达英国。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
英国政府于今年3月推出了两项乌克兰签证计划——一项针对有家人在英国的乌克兰人，另一项是基于赞助的计划。该计划的网站显示，截至5月30日，已收到14.4万份申请，并签发了12万份签证。然而，截至5月29日，这个数字的一半多一点——6.57万难民——已经抵达英国。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
A Home Office spokesperson said: “65,700 Ukrainians have now arrived safely in the UK through our two new Ukraine visa schemes and others have arrived here on other types of visas which are not shown in these figures. Together, our uncapped Ukraine family scheme and Homes for Ukraine routes are amongst the fastest and biggest visa schemes in UK history. 120,200 visas have now been issued, showing the work we’ve done to speed up the process is working and improving daily.”
内政部发言人说：“65700名乌克兰人通过我们的两个新的乌克兰签证计划安全抵达英国，其他人则是通过其他类型的签证抵达英国，这些签证没有显示在这些数据中。我们的无上限乌克兰家庭计划和乌克兰之家路线是英国历史上最快和最大的签证计划。现在已经发放了120200个签证，这表明我们为加快这一进程所做的工作正在发挥作用，每天都在改进。”
内政部发言人说：“65700名乌克兰人通过我们的两个新的乌克兰签证计划安全抵达英国，其他人则是通过其他类型的签证抵达英国，这些签证没有显示在这些数据中。我们的无上限乌克兰家庭计划和乌克兰之家路线是英国历史上最快和最大的签证计划。现在已经发放了120200个签证，这表明我们为加快这一进程所做的工作正在发挥作用，每天都在改进。”
They added that European countries may record refugee arrivals differently and that the figures were therefore difficult to compare directly.
他们补充说，欧洲国家对难民人数的记录可能不同，因此这些数字很难直接比较。
他们补充说，欧洲国家对难民人数的记录可能不同，因此这些数字很难直接比较。
The extent to which Ukrainians have been uprooted by the conflict is catastrophic: the 6.8 million people who have fled the country, combined with the 8 million people displaced internally, constitutes more than a third – 36% – of Ukraine’s total population prior to the Russian invasion.
乌克兰人因冲突而背井离乡的程度是灾难性的：逃离该国的680万人，加上国内流离失所的800万人，构成了俄罗斯入侵前乌克兰总人口的三分之一（36%）以上。
乌克兰人因冲突而背井离乡的程度是灾难性的：逃离该国的680万人，加上国内流离失所的800万人，构成了俄罗斯入侵前乌克兰总人口的三分之一（36%）以上。
The Guardian figures represent the numbers of Ukrainian refugees arriving in the country or, where these were unavailable, the numbers who have registered as refugees or are otherwise recognised by the government as being in the country. It excludes countries that have only published figures for the number of applications by Ukrainian refugees for protection or asylum – as is the case for Denmark and Finland – and Spain, for which the only published figures date from April.
《卫报》的数字代表了抵达乌克兰的难民人数，或者已经登记为难民的人数，或者政府认可的乌克兰难民人数。它不包括那些只公布乌克兰难民申请保护或庇护人数的国家（比如丹麦和芬兰）和西班牙（其唯一公布的数字是从4月份开始的）。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
《卫报》的数字代表了抵达乌克兰的难民人数，或者已经登记为难民的人数，或者政府认可的乌克兰难民人数。它不包括那些只公布乌克兰难民申请保护或庇护人数的国家（比如丹麦和芬兰）和西班牙（其唯一公布的数字是从4月份开始的）。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
评论翻译
1951lelboy
And?
We are an appreciably smaller country than many others - with problems of our own, in excess of some other countries - too!
然后呢？
我们是一个比其他许多国家都要小得多的国家——我们自己的问题也比其他一些国家多！（译注：该评论粗体显示）
And?
We are an appreciably smaller country than many others - with problems of our own, in excess of some other countries - too!
然后呢？
我们是一个比其他许多国家都要小得多的国家——我们自己的问题也比其他一些国家多！（译注：该评论粗体显示）
passinghereSomerset
Then the government shouldn't have promised to help so many out while making it almost impossible... FFS even the Ukrainian ambassador's wife was fucked about due to the impossible requirements
Note.... using bold / shouting doesn't make you any more correct when you're actually wrong
那么政府当初就不应该承诺帮助这么多人，然后让它变得几乎不可能…就连乌克兰大使的妻子也因为这些不可能的要求而被愚弄了
注意……当你实际上是错的时候，使用粗体/咆哮并不会让你更正确
Then the government shouldn't have promised to help so many out while making it almost impossible... FFS even the Ukrainian ambassador's wife was fucked about due to the impossible requirements
Note.... using bold / shouting doesn't make you any more correct when you're actually wrong
那么政府当初就不应该承诺帮助这么多人，然后让它变得几乎不可能…就连乌克兰大使的妻子也因为这些不可能的要求而被愚弄了
注意……当你实际上是错的时候，使用粗体/咆哮并不会让你更正确
kanyewestsconscience
If is was ‘almost impossible’ there wouldn’t be over 60k Ukrainians already here.
What is totally lost on this sub and most people is that the UK made a choice to process every refugee prior to landing, which is normally standard procedure. Now you can argue that we should have suspended this processing to address the urgency of the situation, but the Home Office and intelligence services argued that scrapping processing creates too much risk.
Nearly every EU member state didn’t have any choice in this matter, their relative ‘per-capita’ success isn’t due to being more accompanying or welcoming or pro-immigrant, it’s because the border states of Ukraine had to open their borders and once they’d done so every state in Schengen was obligated to follow the same policy. To do otherwise would have meant suspending Schengen rules and all the political baggage that comes with.
The UK and Ireland aren’t in Schengen, and therefore were able to exercise discretion, either process or let in whoever comes. Ireland went with the latter and the UK the former.
Choosing processing leaves you vulnerable to the efficiency and effectiveness of your immigration system, in the case of the UK, the Home Office. Yeah, their performance has been a shambles, which isn’t really surprising given it’s structural biases and staffing issues, never mind the political oversight.
To be fair, they have acknowledged the inadequacy of the effort, and things have improved. Let’s hope that it picks up further still and many more Ukrainians are able to come here.
如果这是“几乎不可能的”，那么就不会有超过6万乌克兰人在这里了。
这个话题和大多数人完全无视的是，英国选择在每个难民登陆前为他们办理手续，这是正常的标准程序。现在你可能会说，我们应该暂停这一过程，以解决局势的紧迫性，但内政部和情报部门认为，取消这一过程会带来太多风险。
几乎每一个欧盟成员国在这件事上没有任何选择，他们相对“人均”的成功并不是因为他们更愿意陪伴、欢迎或支持移民，而是因为乌克兰的边境国家必须开放边境，一旦他们这样做了，申根的每个国家都有义务遵循相同的政策。如果不这样做，就意味着暂停申根规则以及承担随之而来的所有政治包袱。
英国和爱尔兰不在申根区，因此可以行使自由裁量权，要么办手续，要么让任何人入境。爱尔兰选择了后者，英国选择了前者。
选择办手续会让你的移民系统（比如英国内政部）的效率和效力受到影响。是的，他们的表现一塌糊涂，考虑到结构性偏见和人员配备问题，这并不奇怪，更不用说政治监督了。
公平地说，他们已经承认了努力的不足，情况已经有所改善了。让我们希望它能进一步改善，更多的乌克兰人能够来到这里。
If is was ‘almost impossible’ there wouldn’t be over 60k Ukrainians already here.
What is totally lost on this sub and most people is that the UK made a choice to process every refugee prior to landing, which is normally standard procedure. Now you can argue that we should have suspended this processing to address the urgency of the situation, but the Home Office and intelligence services argued that scrapping processing creates too much risk.
Nearly every EU member state didn’t have any choice in this matter, their relative ‘per-capita’ success isn’t due to being more accompanying or welcoming or pro-immigrant, it’s because the border states of Ukraine had to open their borders and once they’d done so every state in Schengen was obligated to follow the same policy. To do otherwise would have meant suspending Schengen rules and all the political baggage that comes with.
The UK and Ireland aren’t in Schengen, and therefore were able to exercise discretion, either process or let in whoever comes. Ireland went with the latter and the UK the former.
Choosing processing leaves you vulnerable to the efficiency and effectiveness of your immigration system, in the case of the UK, the Home Office. Yeah, their performance has been a shambles, which isn’t really surprising given it’s structural biases and staffing issues, never mind the political oversight.
To be fair, they have acknowledged the inadequacy of the effort, and things have improved. Let’s hope that it picks up further still and many more Ukrainians are able to come here.
如果这是“几乎不可能的”，那么就不会有超过6万乌克兰人在这里了。
这个话题和大多数人完全无视的是，英国选择在每个难民登陆前为他们办理手续，这是正常的标准程序。现在你可能会说，我们应该暂停这一过程，以解决局势的紧迫性，但内政部和情报部门认为，取消这一过程会带来太多风险。
几乎每一个欧盟成员国在这件事上没有任何选择，他们相对“人均”的成功并不是因为他们更愿意陪伴、欢迎或支持移民，而是因为乌克兰的边境国家必须开放边境，一旦他们这样做了，申根的每个国家都有义务遵循相同的政策。如果不这样做，就意味着暂停申根规则以及承担随之而来的所有政治包袱。
英国和爱尔兰不在申根区，因此可以行使自由裁量权，要么办手续，要么让任何人入境。爱尔兰选择了后者，英国选择了前者。
选择办手续会让你的移民系统（比如英国内政部）的效率和效力受到影响。是的，他们的表现一塌糊涂，考虑到结构性偏见和人员配备问题，这并不奇怪，更不用说政治监督了。
公平地说，他们已经承认了努力的不足，情况已经有所改善了。让我们希望它能进一步改善，更多的乌克兰人能够来到这里。
GroktheFnords
The UK has taken in fewer Ukrainian refugees per capita than all but one of 28 European countries
I get that we're not right next door to Ukraine but this is still pretty poor, especially considering that we talked such a big game about welcoming Ukrainian refugees at the start of the invasion. As the article makes clear a big part of the problem is that the government intentionally made it very difficult for people to get in when they actually attempted to.
“在28个欧洲国家中，英国接收的乌克兰难民人均数量排倒数第2”
我知道我们不是乌克兰的邻居，但这仍然很糟糕，尤其是考虑到我们在入侵开始时谈论了这么大的“欢迎乌克兰难民”的游戏。正如这篇文章明确指出的，问题的很大一部分是政府故意让难民们在真正试图进入英国时办理过程变得非常困难。
The UK has taken in fewer Ukrainian refugees per capita than all but one of 28 European countries
I get that we're not right next door to Ukraine but this is still pretty poor, especially considering that we talked such a big game about welcoming Ukrainian refugees at the start of the invasion. As the article makes clear a big part of the problem is that the government intentionally made it very difficult for people to get in when they actually attempted to.
“在28个欧洲国家中，英国接收的乌克兰难民人均数量排倒数第2”
我知道我们不是乌克兰的邻居，但这仍然很糟糕，尤其是考虑到我们在入侵开始时谈论了这么大的“欢迎乌克兰难民”的游戏。正如这篇文章明确指出的，问题的很大一部分是政府故意让难民们在真正试图进入英国时办理过程变得非常困难。
Danqazmlp0United Kingdom
Talking a big game is all we do nowadays. Even now, there is so much bullshit around taking in refugees from Ukraine, making it look like we are doing loads.
In respect though, the people are generally trying to do loads, but are hqmstrung by xenophobic government red tape.
现在我们只会说大话。即使是现在，也有很多关于接收乌克兰难民的扯淡，让我们看起来像是在做很多事情。
不过，在尊重方面，人们通常试图做大量的工作，但被排外的政府繁琐手续所束缚。
Talking a big game is all we do nowadays. Even now, there is so much bullshit around taking in refugees from Ukraine, making it look like we are doing loads.
In respect though, the people are generally trying to do loads, but are hqmstrung by xenophobic government red tape.
现在我们只会说大话。即使是现在，也有很多关于接收乌克兰难民的扯淡，让我们看起来像是在做很多事情。
不过，在尊重方面，人们通常试图做大量的工作，但被排外的政府繁琐手续所束缚。
GroktheFnords
Yeah normal people generally are very supportive of Ukrainian refugees but this government is so instinctively hostile towards all refugees that their schemes were naturally very complicated and difficult.
是的，一般人都非常支持乌克兰难民，但这个政府对所有难民都有本能的敌意，他们的计划自然非常复杂和困难。
Yeah normal people generally are very supportive of Ukrainian refugees but this government is so instinctively hostile towards all refugees that their schemes were naturally very complicated and difficult.
是的，一般人都非常支持乌克兰难民，但这个政府对所有难民都有本能的敌意，他们的计划自然非常复杂和困难。
SoggyMattress2
It's not that we aren't welcoming them, people don't want to live here.
Since brexit the UK is slowly devolving into a horrible place to live. Terrible public transport infrastructure with astronomical cost (compared to EU nations), welfare programmes being slashed, insane energy prices, university fees one of the highest in the world, shit weather and climate, country run by racist, lying buffoons.
I could go on and on, the UK sucks right now.
这并不是说我们不欢迎他们，是人们自己不想住在这里。
自英国脱欧以来，英国正在慢慢沦为一个可怕的居住地。糟糕的公共交通基础设施成本高达天文数字（与欧盟国家相比），福利计划被大幅削减，疯狂的能源价格，世界上最高的大学学费之一，糟糕的天气和气候，由种族主义和撒谎的小丑管理的国家。
我可以继续说下去，英国现在糟透了。
It's not that we aren't welcoming them, people don't want to live here.
Since brexit the UK is slowly devolving into a horrible place to live. Terrible public transport infrastructure with astronomical cost (compared to EU nations), welfare programmes being slashed, insane energy prices, university fees one of the highest in the world, shit weather and climate, country run by racist, lying buffoons.
I could go on and on, the UK sucks right now.
这并不是说我们不欢迎他们，是人们自己不想住在这里。
自英国脱欧以来，英国正在慢慢沦为一个可怕的居住地。糟糕的公共交通基础设施成本高达天文数字（与欧盟国家相比），福利计划被大幅削减，疯狂的能源价格，世界上最高的大学学费之一，糟糕的天气和气候，由种族主义和撒谎的小丑管理的国家。
我可以继续说下去，英国现在糟透了。
KimJongUnparalleled
Well, we are further from Ukr than most of Europe.
If Ireland got into trouble, we'd take in the lion's share of refugees.
好吧，我们比大多数欧洲国家都离乌克兰更远。
如果爱尔兰陷入困境，我们将接收大部分难民。
Well, we are further from Ukr than most of Europe.
If Ireland got into trouble, we'd take in the lion's share of refugees.
好吧，我们比大多数欧洲国家都离乌克兰更远。
如果爱尔兰陷入困境，我们将接收大部分难民。
Alcopath
Funny you should mention Ireland. They took in 6 times more Ukrainian refugees per capita than The UK did. Even though they're further away.
有趣的是你提到了爱尔兰。他们接收的乌克兰难民人均数量是英国的6倍。即使乌克兰离他们也很远。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Funny you should mention Ireland. They took in 6 times more Ukrainian refugees per capita than The UK did. Even though they're further away.
有趣的是你提到了爱尔兰。他们接收的乌克兰难民人均数量是英国的6倍。即使乌克兰离他们也很远。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
hiraeth555
Though in defence of the UK, we have 280 people/km squared, Ireland has 70 people/km squared.
为英国开脱——然而我们每平方公里有280人，但爱尔兰每平方公里只有70人。
Though in defence of the UK, we have 280 people/km squared, Ireland has 70 people/km squared.
为英国开脱——然而我们每平方公里有280人，但爱尔兰每平方公里只有70人。
Alcopath
That's a reasonable point, and got me curious about how much of that is undeveloped land, how many vacant properties each country has, and what the overall approach each country has taken has been.
We're not talking huge numbers of refugees. The population has increased by less than 0.1% so far with the 60,000 refugees we've taken in. There are also 48 other countries more densely populated than The UK, some of which have also taken in refugees. The UK has far more developed land, and more than triple the amount of vacant properties Ireland has at the moment. So that population density difference is largely because there are more fields in Ireland. Unless we're expecting refugees to live in tents in winter in our climates, we should probably rule that out as a major reason as to why we didn't take as many refugees.
Ireland are also building new properties solely for the sake of housing refugees, as well as giving local councils the authority to move refugees into properties which are currently sitting vacant. The UK briefly considered seizing oligarchs homes to house refugees, but that never went any further.
We have the means to house more refugees We currently have a government that recognizes they were elected by people who wanted to 'take back control' of our borders. Which is why the hostile environment policy is still in place. It's not that we can't take more refugees, it's that we mostly don't want to. Which is fine, but let's at least be honest about it.
这是一个合理的观点，这让我好奇其中有多少是未开发的土地，每个国家有多少空置的房产，以及每个国家采取的总体措施是什么。
我们说的不是大量的难民。到目前为止，我们接收了6万名难民，人口增长不到0.1%。还有48个国家的人口密度超过英国，其中一些国家也接收了难民。英国拥有发达得多的土地，空置房产数量是爱尔兰目前的三倍多。所以人口密度的差异很大程度上是因为爱尔兰有更多的农田。除非我们希望难民在我们的气候条件下冬天住在帐篷里，否则我们应该排除这是我们没有接收这么多难民的主要原因。
爱尔兰还在建造新的房产，完全是为了安置难民，并授权地方议会将难民安置到目前空置的房产中。英国曾一度考虑征用寡头的住所来安置难民，但这一想法从未进一步发展。
我们有办法收容更多难民。我们目前的政府承认，他们是由那些想要“夺回”我们边境控制权的人选举出来的。这就是为什么敌意环境政策仍然有效。并不是我们不能接收更多的难民，而是我们基本上不想接收。这没问题，但至少让我们实话实说好不好。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
That's a reasonable point, and got me curious about how much of that is undeveloped land, how many vacant properties each country has, and what the overall approach each country has taken has been.
We're not talking huge numbers of refugees. The population has increased by less than 0.1% so far with the 60,000 refugees we've taken in. There are also 48 other countries more densely populated than The UK, some of which have also taken in refugees. The UK has far more developed land, and more than triple the amount of vacant properties Ireland has at the moment. So that population density difference is largely because there are more fields in Ireland. Unless we're expecting refugees to live in tents in winter in our climates, we should probably rule that out as a major reason as to why we didn't take as many refugees.
Ireland are also building new properties solely for the sake of housing refugees, as well as giving local councils the authority to move refugees into properties which are currently sitting vacant. The UK briefly considered seizing oligarchs homes to house refugees, but that never went any further.
We have the means to house more refugees We currently have a government that recognizes they were elected by people who wanted to 'take back control' of our borders. Which is why the hostile environment policy is still in place. It's not that we can't take more refugees, it's that we mostly don't want to. Which is fine, but let's at least be honest about it.
这是一个合理的观点，这让我好奇其中有多少是未开发的土地，每个国家有多少空置的房产，以及每个国家采取的总体措施是什么。
我们说的不是大量的难民。到目前为止，我们接收了6万名难民，人口增长不到0.1%。还有48个国家的人口密度超过英国，其中一些国家也接收了难民。英国拥有发达得多的土地，空置房产数量是爱尔兰目前的三倍多。所以人口密度的差异很大程度上是因为爱尔兰有更多的农田。除非我们希望难民在我们的气候条件下冬天住在帐篷里，否则我们应该排除这是我们没有接收这么多难民的主要原因。
爱尔兰还在建造新的房产，完全是为了安置难民，并授权地方议会将难民安置到目前空置的房产中。英国曾一度考虑征用寡头的住所来安置难民，但这一想法从未进一步发展。
我们有办法收容更多难民。我们目前的政府承认，他们是由那些想要“夺回”我们边境控制权的人选举出来的。这就是为什么敌意环境政策仍然有效。并不是我们不能接收更多的难民，而是我们基本上不想接收。这没问题，但至少让我们实话实说好不好。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
hiraeth555
All good points. I completely support the UK taking more refugees btw, but I think overall as a country we have provided significant support to Ukraine.
It one of the few things I support the gov on, and we’ve done much more than Germany for example.
你说的都对。顺便说一句，我完全支持英国接收更多难民，但我认为作为一个国家，我们已经为乌克兰提供了重要的支持。
这是我支持政府的少数事情之一，我们做得比德国多得多。
All good points. I completely support the UK taking more refugees btw, but I think overall as a country we have provided significant support to Ukraine.
It one of the few things I support the gov on, and we’ve done much more than Germany for example.
你说的都对。顺便说一句，我完全支持英国接收更多难民，但我认为作为一个国家，我们已经为乌克兰提供了重要的支持。
这是我支持政府的少数事情之一，我们做得比德国多得多。
Alcopath
We've pledged more in terms of military aid than any other European country. Even if the motivation for doing so might be questionable, there's a strong argument that was the right move. But when we're talking about taking in refugees, there's very little doubt that we have the capacity to do more. Germany put us to shame in that department, as they have for a long time when it comes to refugees.
我们承诺的军事援助比任何其他欧洲国家都要多。即使这样做的动机可能值得怀疑，但有一个强有力的论点认为这是正确的举动。但当我们谈到接纳难民时，毫无疑问，我们有能力做得更多。德国在这方面让我们蒙羞，就像他们长期以来在难民问题上所做的那样。
We've pledged more in terms of military aid than any other European country. Even if the motivation for doing so might be questionable, there's a strong argument that was the right move. But when we're talking about taking in refugees, there's very little doubt that we have the capacity to do more. Germany put us to shame in that department, as they have for a long time when it comes to refugees.
我们承诺的军事援助比任何其他欧洲国家都要多。即使这样做的动机可能值得怀疑，但有一个强有力的论点认为这是正确的举动。但当我们谈到接纳难民时，毫无疑问，我们有能力做得更多。德国在这方面让我们蒙羞，就像他们长期以来在难民问题上所做的那样。
lostrandomdude
This might sound controversial but I think everyone who is talking about Britain not taking in Ukrainian refugees is being hypocritical.
For the last 20 years there have been refugees coming from Afghanistan, Myanmar, Iraq, Sudan, Libya, Syria, and a number of other countries where Muslims are refugees. They have been marginalised, kept out, abused and told to go home when their countries are still dangerous. Where is the compassion for them?
这听起来可能有争议，但我认为每个谈论英国不接受乌克兰难民的人都是虚伪的。
在过去的20年里，有来自阿富汗、缅甸、伊拉克、苏丹、利比亚、叙利亚和其他一些穆斯林成为难民的国家的难民。他们（在其他“接收难民的国家”）被边缘化，被拒之门外，被虐待，被告知在自己的国家仍然危险的时候回家。对他们的同情在哪里？
This might sound controversial but I think everyone who is talking about Britain not taking in Ukrainian refugees is being hypocritical.
For the last 20 years there have been refugees coming from Afghanistan, Myanmar, Iraq, Sudan, Libya, Syria, and a number of other countries where Muslims are refugees. They have been marginalised, kept out, abused and told to go home when their countries are still dangerous. Where is the compassion for them?
这听起来可能有争议，但我认为每个谈论英国不接受乌克兰难民的人都是虚伪的。
在过去的20年里，有来自阿富汗、缅甸、伊拉克、苏丹、利比亚、叙利亚和其他一些穆斯林成为难民的国家的难民。他们（在其他“接收难民的国家”）被边缘化，被拒之门外，被虐待，被告知在自己的国家仍然危险的时候回家。对他们的同情在哪里？
IcyConsideration7100
Well all know the reason why there is this double standard!!!
大家都知道为什么会有这种双重标准！！！
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Well all know the reason why there is this double standard!!!
大家都知道为什么会有这种双重标准！！！
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
lostrandomdude
Obviously. They're not white.
原因很明显——他们不是白人。
Obviously. They're not white.
原因很明显——他们不是白人。
NemesisRouge
BULLSHIT. Hong Kongers aren't white, how many people have you heard obxting to them getting the right to come here?
The difference is that there's no major organisation of terrorists in Ukraine or Hong Kong who want to kill us. We aren't enemies with Ukraine or Hong Kong, we have a positive relationship with them.
If loads of Russians wanted to come here, if they were walking across Europe and jumping in dinghies to cross the channel, do you really think people would say no problem, bring them over?
There was also a huge amount of anti-immigrant sentiment over the EU, which is exclusively made up of majority white countries.
扯淡。香港人也不是白人啊，你听说过有多少人反对他们获得来这里的权利的？
区别在于，在乌克兰或香港没有想要杀死我们的主要恐怖组织。我们与乌克兰或香港不是敌人，我们与他们有积极的关系。
如果大量的俄罗斯人想来这里，如果他们步行穿过欧洲，跳上小艇横渡海峡，你真的认为人们会说“没问题，把他们带过来”吗？
对白人国家占多数的欧盟的反移民情绪也非常高涨。
BULLSHIT. Hong Kongers aren't white, how many people have you heard obxting to them getting the right to come here?
The difference is that there's no major organisation of terrorists in Ukraine or Hong Kong who want to kill us. We aren't enemies with Ukraine or Hong Kong, we have a positive relationship with them.
If loads of Russians wanted to come here, if they were walking across Europe and jumping in dinghies to cross the channel, do you really think people would say no problem, bring them over?
There was also a huge amount of anti-immigrant sentiment over the EU, which is exclusively made up of majority white countries.
扯淡。香港人也不是白人啊，你听说过有多少人反对他们获得来这里的权利的？
区别在于，在乌克兰或香港没有想要杀死我们的主要恐怖组织。我们与乌克兰或香港不是敌人，我们与他们有积极的关系。
如果大量的俄罗斯人想来这里，如果他们步行穿过欧洲，跳上小艇横渡海峡，你真的认为人们会说“没问题，把他们带过来”吗？
对白人国家占多数的欧盟的反移民情绪也非常高涨。
grapevapes
We're literally an island with multiple safe countries between us and them.
我们实际上是只一个岛屿，我们和他们之间有多个安全的国家。
We're literally an island with multiple safe countries between us and them.
我们实际上是只一个岛屿，我们和他们之间有多个安全的国家。
avocadosconstant
Oh, the island issue isn’t a problem. These days we have boats and planes to mitigate that issue.
You people really go back a few millennia when justifying your bigotry.
岛屿问题不是问题。现在我们有船和飞机来缓解这个问题。
你们这些人在为自己的偏执辩护时，真的回到了几千年前。
Oh, the island issue isn’t a problem. These days we have boats and planes to mitigate that issue.
You people really go back a few millennia when justifying your bigotry.
岛屿问题不是问题。现在我们有船和飞机来缓解这个问题。
你们这些人在为自己的偏执辩护时，真的回到了几千年前。
grapevapes
They aren't leaving Ukraine, they are leaving an already safe country they have already entered that is more closely aligned with their culture
Give me one reason why any Ukrainian is leaving Poland, Slovenia, Hungary, Romania etc
他们离开的不是乌克兰，他们离开的是一个已经很安全的，与他们的文化更紧密相连的（中间）国家
给我一个乌克兰人离开波兰、斯洛文尼亚、匈牙利、罗马尼亚等国的原因
They aren't leaving Ukraine, they are leaving an already safe country they have already entered that is more closely aligned with their culture
Give me one reason why any Ukrainian is leaving Poland, Slovenia, Hungary, Romania etc
他们离开的不是乌克兰，他们离开的是一个已经很安全的，与他们的文化更紧密相连的（中间）国家
给我一个乌克兰人离开波兰、斯洛文尼亚、匈牙利、罗马尼亚等国的原因
avocadosconstant
I can give you a few reasons, although I suspect that you’ll move those goalposts again, now we’ve established that being an island is irrelevant.
English is the most commonly learned second language, and I suspect many refugees would quite like to support themselves. No, Polish, Czech are not easy to pick up for a Ukrainian or Russian speaker, and Romanian is in a completely different language group altogether. That, I thought, would have been sublimely obvious but no, I actually have to explain this to you people.
Then there’s the fact that many refugees already have family in the UK. One would suspect that they would want to be together, especially in times of war and when loved ones at home are getting killed.
Ample job opportunities is another one, in addition to the language. Why you demand that they attempt the Romanian job market is beyond me.
And that’s not even addressing the fact that the UK is one of the wealthiest countries in the world, that can absorb them with ease. Perhaps, for the sake of international relations during a time when you’re pissing your neighbours off, we can take on some of the load.
But hey, I suppose we should prioritise your ethnic sensitivities over people fleeing destruction, murder and rape. I mean, good fucking God what a miserable little country the UK has become.
我可以给你一些理由，虽然我怀疑你会再次跟我抬杠，现在我们已经确定作为一个岛屿是无关紧要的。
英语是人们最常学习的第二语言，我想很多难民都很想养活自己。不，波兰语、捷克语对说乌克兰语或俄语的人来说不容易学会，而罗马尼亚语则属于完全不同的语系。我想，这应该是非常明显的，但不，我必须给你们解释一下。
还有一个事实是，许多难民在英国已经有了家人。人们会怀疑他们想要在一起，尤其是在战争时期，当亲人在家里被杀害的时候。
除了语言，充足的工作机会是另一个原因。我不明白你为什么要求他们去罗马尼亚的就业市场。
这甚至还没有解决英国是世界上最富有的国家之一，可以轻松吸收他们的事实。也许，为了国际关系考虑在你惹毛你的邻居的时候，我们可以承担一些责任。
但我想我们应该优先考虑你的种族敏感性而不是那些逃离毁灭、谋杀和强奸的人。我的意思是，天啊，英国已经变成了一个多么可怜的小国。
I can give you a few reasons, although I suspect that you’ll move those goalposts again, now we’ve established that being an island is irrelevant.
English is the most commonly learned second language, and I suspect many refugees would quite like to support themselves. No, Polish, Czech are not easy to pick up for a Ukrainian or Russian speaker, and Romanian is in a completely different language group altogether. That, I thought, would have been sublimely obvious but no, I actually have to explain this to you people.
Then there’s the fact that many refugees already have family in the UK. One would suspect that they would want to be together, especially in times of war and when loved ones at home are getting killed.
Ample job opportunities is another one, in addition to the language. Why you demand that they attempt the Romanian job market is beyond me.
And that’s not even addressing the fact that the UK is one of the wealthiest countries in the world, that can absorb them with ease. Perhaps, for the sake of international relations during a time when you’re pissing your neighbours off, we can take on some of the load.
But hey, I suppose we should prioritise your ethnic sensitivities over people fleeing destruction, murder and rape. I mean, good fucking God what a miserable little country the UK has become.
我可以给你一些理由，虽然我怀疑你会再次跟我抬杠，现在我们已经确定作为一个岛屿是无关紧要的。
英语是人们最常学习的第二语言，我想很多难民都很想养活自己。不，波兰语、捷克语对说乌克兰语或俄语的人来说不容易学会，而罗马尼亚语则属于完全不同的语系。我想，这应该是非常明显的，但不，我必须给你们解释一下。
还有一个事实是，许多难民在英国已经有了家人。人们会怀疑他们想要在一起，尤其是在战争时期，当亲人在家里被杀害的时候。
除了语言，充足的工作机会是另一个原因。我不明白你为什么要求他们去罗马尼亚的就业市场。
这甚至还没有解决英国是世界上最富有的国家之一，可以轻松吸收他们的事实。也许，为了国际关系考虑在你惹毛你的邻居的时候，我们可以承担一些责任。
但我想我们应该优先考虑你的种族敏感性而不是那些逃离毁灭、谋杀和强奸的人。我的意思是，天啊，英国已经变成了一个多么可怜的小国。
insert_tom
Okay I get where this could be coming from and we should 100% be trying to do as much as we can to help but I don't think this stat is the right (at least surely not a complete) way to measure our response.
I'm not exactly sure what "refugees per capita" is trying to show? Does having a larger population mean you should take more refugees? Has it not more to do with your capability to house and take care of people? I know that a number of refugees have been housed through our social care system where remembers of the public have agreed to allow refugees to live with them and are offering up spare rooms etc. I am unsure what percentage of refugees to the UK have been housed this way but I am also unaware of what other methods are being utilised.
Obviously anywhere is better than a literal warzone but it's still not acceptable to put people straight onto the streets so there have to be minimum acceptable conditions to provide.
Maybe I'm missing the point here or have misunderstood somewhere...
好吧，我知道这是怎么回事了，我们应该100%地尽我们所能提供帮助，但我不认为这个数据是正确的（至少肯定不是一个完整的）方式来衡量我们的反应表现。
我不太确定“人均难民”到底想表达什么？拥有更多的人口是否意味着你就应该接收更多的难民？这不是应该与你的住房和照顾他人的能力有关吗？我知道一些难民已经通过我们的社会关怀系统得到了安置，记得公众已经同意让难民和他们住在一起，并提供空余的房间等等。我不确定英国有多少难民是用这种方式安置的，但我也不知道他们还使用了什么其他方法。
显然，任何地方都比真正的战区要好，但把人们直接带到街上仍然是不可接受的，所以必须提供最起码的可接受的条件。
也许我漏掉了重点，或者误解了什么地方……
Okay I get where this could be coming from and we should 100% be trying to do as much as we can to help but I don't think this stat is the right (at least surely not a complete) way to measure our response.
I'm not exactly sure what "refugees per capita" is trying to show? Does having a larger population mean you should take more refugees? Has it not more to do with your capability to house and take care of people? I know that a number of refugees have been housed through our social care system where remembers of the public have agreed to allow refugees to live with them and are offering up spare rooms etc. I am unsure what percentage of refugees to the UK have been housed this way but I am also unaware of what other methods are being utilised.
Obviously anywhere is better than a literal warzone but it's still not acceptable to put people straight onto the streets so there have to be minimum acceptable conditions to provide.
Maybe I'm missing the point here or have misunderstood somewhere...
好吧，我知道这是怎么回事了，我们应该100%地尽我们所能提供帮助，但我不认为这个数据是正确的（至少肯定不是一个完整的）方式来衡量我们的反应表现。
我不太确定“人均难民”到底想表达什么？拥有更多的人口是否意味着你就应该接收更多的难民？这不是应该与你的住房和照顾他人的能力有关吗？我知道一些难民已经通过我们的社会关怀系统得到了安置，记得公众已经同意让难民和他们住在一起，并提供空余的房间等等。我不确定英国有多少难民是用这种方式安置的，但我也不知道他们还使用了什么其他方法。
显然，任何地方都比真正的战区要好，但把人们直接带到街上仍然是不可接受的，所以必须提供最起码的可接受的条件。
也许我漏掉了重点，或者误解了什么地方……
nefabin
Unless Ukrainian refugees aren’t being able to find refuge in any other country I fail to see why this is an issue.
除非乌克兰难民不能在任何其他国家找到庇护，否则我不明白为什么这会是一个问题。
Unless Ukrainian refugees aren’t being able to find refuge in any other country I fail to see why this is an issue.
除非乌克兰难民不能在任何其他国家找到庇护，否则我不明白为什么这会是一个问题。
BlackCaesarNTGreater London (now Berlin)
I remember when everyone was wanking off about how UK was the best because we donated loads of Weapons and Germany offered helmets, that it was a bit simplistic to frx it that way as Germany was receiving more refugees in a day than the UK received in a year.
I still stand by that position though. Yeah the UK isn't doing much on the refugee front, but it is helping with the overall war.
Different characters play different roles in a team.
我记得当每个人都在说“英国是最好的，因为我们捐赠了大量武器，而德国提供了头盔”时，这种说法有点过度简化，因为德国一天接收的难民比英国一年接收的难民还多。
但我仍然坚持这个立场。是的，英国在难民方面做得不多，但它在整体战争中起到了帮助作用。
因为不同的角色在团队中扮演不同的角色。
I remember when everyone was wanking off about how UK was the best because we donated loads of Weapons and Germany offered helmets, that it was a bit simplistic to frx it that way as Germany was receiving more refugees in a day than the UK received in a year.
I still stand by that position though. Yeah the UK isn't doing much on the refugee front, but it is helping with the overall war.
Different characters play different roles in a team.
我记得当每个人都在说“英国是最好的，因为我们捐赠了大量武器，而德国提供了头盔”时，这种说法有点过度简化，因为德国一天接收的难民比英国一年接收的难民还多。
但我仍然坚持这个立场。是的，英国在难民方面做得不多，但它在整体战争中起到了帮助作用。
因为不同的角色在团队中扮演不同的角色。
很赞 2
收藏