Why do people hate economic refugees ?

[Deleted]

3) Refugees are people who are supposed to be in imminent danger of death, not seeking fatter welfare checks and a cushy new life. It takes away from people underthreat of death and danger in warzones when someone comes along saying "I want the fat welfare checks plz!"

You were SO close of offering a meaningful contribution to the debate

[S7orm]

There are people waiting for their documents to go through so they can migrate and have a better life but they'll never be able to because assholes use the asylum status as a fast way to get in, inevitably slowing the bureaucratic machine. And as it happens those assholes are the least educated of the bunch, damaging both the country accepting them and the people living in the countries they came from, becoming parasites in a country that should've never accepted them

[PC2]

Whether or not the refugee policy is reasonable or unhealthy depends on the quantity of refugees you're talking about. For example the US has been averaging around 60k per year, which is within reason. Taking in millions like Germany did a few years ago would be unhealthy.

[Underverse]

Idk about everywhere else but massive unemployment in western africa is mainly the result of free trade agreements and exploitation deals with foreign powers that bring unfair competition to local economies.
People get cheaper meat from china than the farmer next door. Fishermen in wooden sailboats compete against fleets of state-of-the-art industrial fishing ships.

It really is comparable to a war fought with different weapons. And the result is the same : people become homeless and families are displaced

It's the result of governments failing their people and politicians using positions of power to propagate corruption for their own benefit.

It's also a result of people in poverty propagating their numbers as a means of escaping poverty. Of course, this strategy often does not work and simply shunts responsibility to the next generation. If enough people do this, it's very easy to overload developed nations, and then everyone suffers. There needs to be balance, and more importantly, simply multiplying should not be the most effective method of acquiring resources. That's a fast path back to the paleolithic.

In regards to trade agreements, that's no different from, for example, automation replacing low-skill laborers in developed nations. If you can't compete you lose. That fact is true in every aspect of life - and, in fact, probably the closest thing to a natural law that anyone will ever find. Returning from that tangent, victims of trade agreements are not at all in circumstances as dire as victims of war. It's really incredible that you're even making this argument. Being unemployed in western Africa is far better than having your apartment unit bombed by a foreign power. Even the poorest nations have relatively developed infrastructures that separate a war-torn hellhole from an economically disadvantaged third world country.

[zorkuus]

You were SO close of offering a meaningful contribution to the debate

Right on point actually. Can you explain why "refugees" pass perfectly safe countries to get into welfare haven's in northern europe for example?

[Underverse]

You were SO close of offering a meaningful contribution to the debate

It sounds like you're saying that dissenting voices are not meaningful contributions.

[Deleted]

Idk about everywhere else but massive unemployment in western africa is mainly the result of free trade agreements and exploitation deals with foreign powers that bring unfair competition to local economies.
People get cheaper meat from china than the farmer next door. Fishermen in wooden sailboats compete against fleets of state-of-the-art industrial fishing ships.

It really is comparable to a war fought with different weapons. And the result is the same : people become homeless and families are displaced

No, it's not. Structural unemployment is the direct result of a lack of investment in public goods like healthcare, education and infrastructure. Free trade agreements only reduce the friction between economies; they don't bring "unfair competition". For foreign nations to be able to sell their stuff to African nations, those Africans nations must sell goods of equal value to those foreign nations. The result is more trade between both and larger taxable GDP's.

The problem that West Africa struggles with is that the growth of taxable GDP doesn't actually translates into investment in public goods because tax is notoriously hard to collect in West Africa due to rampant corruption. None of that has to do with free trade agreements. Cancelling free trade agreements would further reduce taxable GDP, which is the last thing West Africa needs.

What they need is functional public finance.

[Deleted]

Refugee: noun: a person who has been forced to leave their country in order to escape war, persecution, or natural disaster.

What your trying to do is appeal to emotion by using the term refugee instead of migrant.

[Maybach]

so you let 100 plumbers die at the border ?

also people can be retrained you know

No one is dying at any border

I've just watched some interviews with economic migrants in Serbia who simply want to get to the more affluent Germany (their words not mine)

The problem with migrant policy today is we have made it too easy for people to run away from their own country instead of making them stay there and sort their own back yard out first

What always amazes me as well is the sheer amount of money these economic migrants seem to be able to find to pay people smugglers

Tens of thousands of dollars in many cases

So much for them being poor, starving, economic migrants.........

[derpkitteh]

because i'm a bisexual woman that doesn't want sharia law to be enforced in my country.

if they become a majority, it will be.

[Maybach]

Right on point actually. Can you explain why "refugees" pass perfectly safe countries to get into welfare haven's in northern europe for example?

This, just this

Never had anyone provide a satisfactory answer to this point

- - - Updated - - -

because i'm a bisexual woman that doesn't want sharia law to be enforced in my country.

if they become a majority, it will be.

Then get together with like minded people and sort your own country out instead of considering running away

Perfect example is if the millions of people who ran away from Syria had all picked up a stick and beaten the nearest IS fighter with it, those millions would have wiped out the tens of thousands of ISIS people over night and solved the problem

Instead of which they ran away expecting the rest of the world to sort their shit out for them

[Freighter]

because i'm a bisexual woman that doesn't want sharia law to be enforced in my country.

if they become a majority, it will be.

Rofl, what? Muslims aren't going to become a majority in the US, much less muslims that support sharia.

[Elegiac]

Right on point actually. Can you explain why "refugees" pass perfectly safe countries to get into welfare haven's in northern europe for example?

Nobody wants to live in the Balkans, mate. Not even the people that live there.

[Freighter]

Nobody wants to live in the Balkans, mate. Not even the people that live there.

So why do they go to Australia instead of SK then?

[Torto]

More like, people claiming to be refugees without suffering persecution, which doesn't make them refugees in the first place. Wanting to go to another country to live a better life means you should use the existing legal paths to labor migration or such, not claim to be a refugee.

Nail hit right on the head.

They are not refugees, if people are going to discuss this then they need to get the terms right. They are economic migrants, and countries are under no obligation to accept them. Yes they are great for political parties like the Democrats because poor people always vote socialist. But for everyone else they are a drain on resources, cause social discord, and put increased pressure on government services.

[Deleted]

because theyre parasites.

[Demsi]

It usually comes at the cost of someone who is in actual danger, such as an actual refugee

[Elegiac]

So why do they go to Australia instead of SK then?

I daresay it has a lot to do with East Asian countries not being particularly welcoming of foreign residents.

[Grokresh]

because i'm a bisexual woman that doesn't want sharia law to be enforced in my country.

if they become a majority, it will be.

This will literally never happen, sharia law in any western country is a paranoid delusion if I ever did see one.

[Freighter]

I daresay it has a lot to do with East Asian countries not being particularly welcoming of foreign residents.

So it has absolutely nothing to do with them being granted humanitarian visas instead of refugee status in most cases, so they're not eligible to receive as much economic assistance? Absolutely nothing to do with that? You'd have to be naive to believe that. Degree of economic assistance is a pull factor.