Why do people hate economic refugees ?

[Machismo]

Dunno, lots of them come from conservative countries so would probably vote conservative surely? Who knows, leftwing but I don't really want any immigration into england unless it is benefical to us on a case by case basis. A goverments first duty is to protect its people first and foremost, till that is done in every way that immigration makes harder immigration is a problem.

- - - Updated - - -



Foreign wars sort of yes make sense, the others however are about the wellbeing of a country of course tax goes towards the well being of a country and you shouldn't get to decide whether to support that or not hence the elections. But the tax being used for foreigners is not the same thing at all as tax going towards wellfare and border security, it's going to aid other people not what the intension of the tax is, people pay tax for roads, hospitals, schools for their country, not for others.

- - - Updated - - -



A great point they often seem to ignore.

I don't consider corporate welfare, private welfare, and restrictions to individual liberty and the free markets to be better for the well being of the country.

I have no desire to force people to pay for the things I want, I simply expect the same in return. It's amazing how hypocritical people can be when it comes to government expenditures.

[Narwal]

If you want to lose faith in humanity just go to any random immigration thread of mmoc.

But of all the right wing rhetoric, bias, and outright racist stuff there is one thing I don't understand. That's the dudes who go out of their way to metaphorically scream at the top of their lungs : "THOSE ARE NOT REEEFUGEEES THEY ARE ECONOMIC MIGRANTS THEY PASSED SAFE COUNTRIESSS- yadda yadda"

Okay ?

So if you're fleeing death by bombing welcome but if you're fleeing death from poverty eff you go die in a hole ? I don't understand that mindset.

Maybe this will come as a shock for some people here but most economic migrants do not want to leave their countries they just don't have a choice because there are no jobs. And it's not just third world countries, there are tens of thousands of young europeans in greece, spain, italy that are forced to leave their families to work abroad because of record unemployment levels.


TLDR economic migrants are refugees from poverty and its just as terrible

I think there is something you're missing. The United States has immigration laws to assure that our country grows at a pace that supports our economy. I'm not arguing if it's the right pace or not, but that is ONE of the intents. When you use the term "refugee", what most people will equate that too is "circumventing immigration law". Refugee is a status given to people who are fleeing immediate death, and so we give "refuge" to them without consideration to our economy. If you start counting "joblessness" as a valid reason for refugee status, then you are basically opening our borders to more than half the worlds population. Do you know how many people that is? The only way the US can "save" these refugees is to not sink ourselves in the process. If we sink ourselves, then we can no longer help anyone. The vessels carrying refugees across oceans, is a great analogy for this. The reason so many refugees die in this process, is because too many are crowded onto one boat. The result is not one of those people gets saved. The best way we can help these people, is to convince them to choose governmental systems that will work for them. That will give vibrancy to their own economies. That is something they have to choose and do on their own, but if asked, I'm sure we'll help where we can.

[Grokresh]

I don't consider corporate welfare, private welfare, and restrictions to individual liberty and the free markets to be better for the well being of the country.

I have no desire to force people to pay for the things I want, I simply expect the same in return. It's amazing how hypocritical people can be when it comes to government expenditures.

It's not hypocritical. I see some of those things as benefical to the country, regardless they are voted on in elections with campaign manfiestos as domestic issues, I do not remember any election asking us if we want our funds to go towards immigration and refugees, no party has ran as saying "We think we should pay more tax to refugees!" Hence the difference, parties are elected on domestic policies and if they win people have to pay towards things they don't nesscailry want because democracy, but no one is voting for refugees and immigration, if brexit shows anything its that we don't want it here so thats the difference, one won democratic votes, one didn't.

[Rukario]

Well, i don't really care about immigrants...we get a lot of chinese people coming here everyday, most people don't mind.
Their numbers aren't really big enough to be disruptive...there is also the fact that our country is a mixture of different races and cultures anyway.
I have also been seen a lot of people from northern european countries lately.
That being said...those people come to work and most of them already have some kind of network, life here isn't easy if you are starting from zero...the government doesn't really help anyone.
I am from Brazil btw.

[Machismo]

It's not hypocritical. I see some of those things as benefical to the country, regardless they are voted on in elections with campaign manfiestos as domestic issues, I do not remember any election asking us if we want our funds to go towards immigration and refugees, no party has ran as saying "We think we should pay more tax to refugees!" Hence the difference, parties are elected on domestic policies and if they win people have to pay towards things they don't nesscailry want because democracy, but no one is voting for refugees and immigration, if brexit shows anything its that we don't want it here so thats the difference, one won democratic votes, one didn't.

It's hypocritical to demand people pay for the things you want, then complain when they want to force you to pay for the things that they want. Then again, people simply tend to be hypocritical, as they place their wants over the desires of others. In the end, people have their priorities of what they want to spend someone else's money on.

[Grokresh]

It's hypocritical to demand people pay for the things you want, then complain when they want to force you to pay for the things that they want. Then again, people simply tend to be hypocritical, as they place their wants over the desires of others. In the end, people have their priorities of what they want to spend someone else's money on.

It's not things I want, it's things that the ruling party wants who were democratically elected on domestic policies, brexit shows that people don't want immigration. If immigration and refugees had majority support which they clearly don't then fine pay tax for it even if I disagree, do you understand? My objection is that they don't have majority support and wern't in any manifestos the goverment just does it out of the blue without it relating to any pledge or previous plans in manifestos or anything and we're expected to just be ok with it. It's undemocratic.

[Machismo]

It's not things I want, it's things that the ruling party wants who were democratically elected on domestic policies, brexit shows that people don't want immigration. If immigration and refugees had majority support which they clearly don't then fine pay tax for it even if I disagree, do you understand? My objection is that they don't have majority support and wern't in any manifestos the goverment just does it out of the blue without it relating to any pledge or previous plans in manifestos or anything and we're expected to just be ok with it. It's undemocratic.

Then if the ruling party wants to allow immigrants, there is absolutely no reason to complain... because it's for the "well being" of the people.

If you don't want immigration, fine. It is an authoritarian stance, a decidedly anti-freedom path to take. Once again, it still highlights the hypocrisy of people who want to decide how to force others to pay for the things they happen to want.

Here's the thing about democracy... it is the fastest path to oppression. All it takes is for a simple majority vote to strip away the freedoms of a minority. No thanks.

[Mafic]

Economic migrants coming from the border of Mexico is way down and yet the US economy hasn't crashed. The argument in the past was that the US economy would crash without illegal economic migrants to support US economy, but that argument has been turned on its head.

The hatred for economic migrants whether they are legal or illegal migrants stems from poor planning by governments. Prioritizing non citizens over citizens will always, always rub the tax payers the wrong way.

[Deleted]

It's not things I want, it's things that the ruling party wants who were democratically elected on domestic policies, brexit shows that people don't want immigration. If immigration and refugees had majority support which they clearly don't then fine pay tax for it even if I disagree, do you understand? My objection is that they don't have majority support and wern't in any manifestos the goverment just does it out of the blue without it relating to any pledge or previous plans in manifestos or anything and we're expected to just be ok with it. It's undemocratic.

Brexit does not show anything of the kind. It wasn't solely about immigration. Had the argument been solely about the immigration the Brexiteers would almost certainly have lost.

Additionally, you have to remember people voted to join in the first place. Were they pro-immigration then? Are they pro-immigration now as the polls have shifted in favour of remain?

[Machismo]

Economic migrants coming from the border of Mexico is way down and yet the US economy hasn't crashed. The argument in the past was that the US economy would crash without illegal economic migrants to support US economy, but that argument has been turned on its head.

The hatred for economic migrants whether they are legal or illegal migrants stems from poor planning by governments. Prioritizing non citizens over citizens will always, always rub the tax payers the wrong way.

It didn't crash because of the immigrants, either... did it? Instead, we have a bunch of people fighting against individual liberty, limited government, and the free markets, just to try and keep out people they don't happen to like. I see no reason why we don't let the free markets determine how many immigrants we should have.

[Deleted]

Because i don't feel like paying for people being here because of lies and then the majority coming never produces anything back to the society except maybe trying to make me go islam. That's why. /The lost country of Sweden

[Deleted]

The argument in the past was that the US economy would crash without illegal economic migrants to support US economy, but that argument has been turned on its head.

Literally no one said "A year after Trump has been elected the economy will crash due to a minor decrease in the number of illegal migrants going down from 13.1 million to 12.8 million". That's just some bullshit you made up.

[Mafic]

It didn't crash because of the immigrants, either... did it? Instead, we have a bunch of people fighting against individual liberty, limited government, and the free markets, just to try and keep out people they don't happen to like. I see no reason why we don't let the free markets determine how many immigrants we should have.

Free markets don't form nations or borders.

[Machismo]

Free markets don't form nations or borders.

Like I aid, you are arguing against individual liberty, limited government, and the free markets. I happen to be a big fan of those things.

[Mafic]

Literally no one said "A year after Trump has been elected the economy will crash due to a minor decrease in the number of illegal migrants going down from 13.1 million to 12.8 million". That's just some bullshit you made up.

Migrants coming from the border is down and has been down for many, many years.

The US economy has improved since then as has the Mexican economy. I would argue improving Mexico's economy is a win for US citizens and Mexican citizens. Also, it is an argument to be against mass immigration, especially illegal immigration.

[Deleted]

Migrants coming from the border is down and has been down for many, many years.

Which has no impact on the 12.8 million illegals still in the US.

[Mafic]

Like I aid, you are arguing against individual liberty, limited government, and the free markets. I happen to be a big fan of those things.

I am not arguing against liberty, limited government or free markets. One of the major responsibilities of limited government is border enforcement. Limited government doesn't mean no government.

Again you are arguing for no nations or borders. That is a globalist/neo liberal concept you are arguing for.

- - - Updated - - -

Which has no impact on the 12.8 million illegals still in the US.

It does have an impact, because jobs and financial aid isn't limitless. if the US went back to a huge influx of economic migrants it would cripple states like California, Texas, etc.

[Machismo]

I am not arguing against liberty, limited government or free markets. One of the major responsibilities of limited government is border enforcement. Limited government doesn't mean no government.

Again you are arguing for no nations or borders. That is a globalist/neo liberal concept you are arguing for.

- - - Updated - - -



It does have an impact, because jobs and financial aid isn't limitless. if the US went back to a huge influx of economic migrants it would cripple states like California, Texas, etc.

Yes, you really are. Restricting immigration is a limit to every single one of those ideals. You are arguing in favor of more-intrusive government, less individual liberty, and less free markets. Immigration represents the free movement of labor capital... something you want to stifle via government force.

[Deleted]

I don't think anyone has a problem with refugees.

But you aren't talking about refugees, you're talking about economic migrants, big difference there. Migrants come to stay, Refugees stay until they are no longer persecuted in there homeland, then return.

The issue with migrants is in the size of the wave and the inability to assimilate to the cultures of the countries to which they migrate.

Given that in practice, Refugees do not return, there is no real difference.
In any case, the most appropriate method for dealing with refugees are refugee camps in the surounding areas.

[Deleted]

A waste of ten thousand government funds a year. If the refugees are given a house without a mortgage or relevant skills they are doing more for refugees then our own.

They should do more for "our own" as you state, I have no argument with that line of reasoning.

We also have an obligation to take in a number of refugees from war torn areas of the world, as we have always done.