Most refugees aren't from Syria, most are young men

[brennan]

Their women and children are in refugee camps. Horrible places and frequently despised by the locals.

 

[warpus]

It needs to be noted that there is nothing wrong with migrating for economic reasons.

There isn't, but it should be noted that political refugees and economic migrants are handled differently legally speaking. They have different rights and stuff.

The reason we are taking in so many refugees is because they're literally fearing for their lives. Their homes are destroyed and their neighbourhoods are on fire. They need our help.

Economic migrants on the other hand are not fleeing violence, they just want to improve their lives. Which is fine, but they are in a completely different category and we need to prioritize refugees over migrants, as the refugees are the ones who need our help the most.

 

[brennan]

The trouble is Warpus, that some people want to classify anyone who finds a slightly less dangerous place to pitch a tent as an 'economic migrant' the instant they express a desire to move on. Basically, they don't like migrants.

 

[Wolfbeckett]

It needs to be noted that there is nothing wrong with migrating for economic reasons.

Not if the migrant is moving with the intention of working and earning his or her way. Economic migrants moving with the intention of living off the new countries welfare teat are stealing from that countries tax paying inhabitants, plain and simple.

 

[brennan]

A minority of badly behaved people should not be enough to make a civilised country forget how to be civilised.

 

[warpus]

The trouble is Warpus, that some people want to classify anyone who finds a slightly less dangerous place to pitch a tent as an 'economic migrant' the instant they express a desire to move on. Basically, they don't like migrants.

Maybe some of them "don't like migrants", but as far as I know a political refugee is only a political refugee legally speaking until a first safe country is reached. If that refugee moves on from that safe country and continues travelling towards other countries, that makes him/her an economic migrant, legally speaking.

It's how things are set up legally, as far as I know, and not just "people hating on migrants" or whatever (which of course happens, but)

 

[brennan]

First safe country laws are a disgrace. They obviously burden countries around troubled areas with disproportionate shares of a humanitarian burden that should be shared by all. They are fundamentally unfair and abused as an excuse for inaction by the selfish and the mean spirited.

 

[warpus]

My family had to put up with them when we fled communist Poland. The first safe country we reached was West Germany, we had to stay in immigration camps there for a year and then in a government-provided house for 3 years on top of that. We opted to seek asylum in an English-speaking country, which.. almost makes it seem like we were at that point economic migrants, but I really have no idea. Technically we were political refugees seeking asylum in Canada.

But anyway, the point is that people are distinguishing between migrants and refugees not necessarily out of hate. They might just be going by actual legal definitions which have been in place for a while.

 

[Borachio]

Beats me why people can't move about the surface of planet Earth as they choose.

I can't see it makes any difference what the reason for their choice is.

If Syrian tourists want to see what the UK looks like, and UK tourists want to take a peek at Syria, where's the harm in any of it?

And this particular young man seems to have been frustrated in his desire:

 

[Synobun]

Not if the migrant is moving with the intention of working and earning his or her way. Economic migrants moving with the intention of living off the new countries welfare teat are stealing from that countries tax paying inhabitants, plain and simple.

You do realize refugees and migrants aren't given a red carpet to the welfare office for permanent placement, right? I just want to make sure.

 

[NovaKart]

Their women and children are in refugee camps. Horrible places and frequently despised by the locals.

Not necessarily. There are some wealthier refugees or those who are employed that don't live in camps. However I think most of them do. I've been to some of the camps. They're not comfortable but I wouldn't say they're horrible places exactly. I wouldn't say they're despised by the locals either, sometimes you hear them saying Yazidis are dirty or something like that but I think despised is a little strong to describe it. Anyway these are the camps in Iraq don't know about in other places.

 

[Akka]

It needs to be noted that there is nothing wrong with migrating for economic reasons.

There is nothing wrong from wanting to migrate for economic reason, true.
There is also nothing wrong from refusing to accept economic migrants though. The problem is rather here, when such refusals are labeled as "racist" or the like, and people are guilt-tripped about it.

 

[warpus]

Beats me why people can't move about the surface of planet Earth as they choose.

I can't see it makes any difference what the reason for their choice is.

Well, what would happen to the English economy if all of India came over and didn't want to leave?

I don't like national borders any more than you, but if we opened all borders and let people do whatever they want, everyone would move to western countries. Everyone who could at least.. And our infrastructure just isn't set up to handle such a huge influx of new citizens. Or just passers by.

So there are definite logistical issues that prevent us from just opening up all borders. Maybe one day.. but not as long as there is so much wealth inequality around the planet.

 

[brennan]

Hate, suspicion, fear, self interest, sheer ignorance... none of these excuses impress me. Everyone should have the opportunity to live a better life, people who already do and begrudge it to those less fortunate can get stuffed.

 

[Ryika]

Well, what would happen to the English economy if all of India came over and didn't want to leave?

I don't like national borders any more than you, but if we opened all borders and let people do whatever they want, everyone would move to western countries. Everyone who could at least.. And our infrastructure just isn't set up to handle such a huge influx of new citizens. Or just passers by.

So there are definite logistical issues that prevent us from just opening up all borders. Maybe one day.. but not as long as there is so much wealth inequality around the planet.

Not only that, but it would also put the places that people are trying to get away from into even greater trouble.

Hate, suspicion, fear, self interest, sheer ignorance... none of these excuses impress me. Everyone should have the opportunity to live a better life, people who already do and begrudge it to those less fortunate can get stuffed.

That sounds nice, but it's just not realistic to handle is by allowing people to move for "no real reason" other than the grass being greener. If anything we should be working on getting the grass greener in other places.

 

[brennan]

Not necessarily. There are some wealthier refugees or those who are employed that don't live in camps. However I think most of them do. I've been to some of the camps. They're not comfortable but I wouldn't say they're horrible places exactly. I wouldn't say they're despised by the locals either, sometimes you hear them saying Yazidis are dirty or something like that but I think despised is a little strong to describe it. Anyway these are the camps in Iraq don't know about in other places.

I was thinking of Turkey, where at least some refugees are apparently denied legal status, as well as I think it was Lebanon where a camp was actually attacked iirc.

 

[Borachio]

Well, what would happen to the English economy if all of India came over and didn't want to leave?

I don't like national borders any more than you, but if we opened all borders and let people do whatever they want, everyone would move to western countries. Everyone who could at least.. And our infrastructure just isn't set up to handle such a huge influx of new citizens. Or just passers by.

So there are definite logistical issues that prevent us from just opening up all borders. Maybe one day.. but not as long as there is so much wealth inequality around the planet.

The point, as current affairs are showing us, is that it's impossible to keep people out in any case.

And if the whole of India came to the UK, the whole of the UK could go to India.

And let's not forget that this whole business with India started with the UK going there in the first place. So it's only like a herd of cats following someone home.

Moreover, without a migrant population, the NHS, a significant part of the "infrastructure", would surely collapse.

Also, migration, it seems to me, is the means whereby the future distribution of global wealth does become significantly less unequal.

 

[warpus]

Everyone should have the opportunity to live a better life

That's a nice pipe dream, but just not logistically possible. Not even close.

I mean, we're talking about a war torn country here. Meanwhile not even all American citizens are living good lives, there's a ton of people without health insurance, there is a lot of racial inequality, social mobility is pretty bad, employee rights are weak or non-existent unless you're in a middle class type job..

If America can't even solve her own problems and make all her people happy, what makes you think we can solve all of the planet's problems by opening up all borders and allowing people to settle where they want? The west would be overwhelmed and it would collapse.

The point, as current affairs are showing us, is that it's impossible to keep people out in any case.

No it isn't. It's impossible to keep out everyone. But that's much different.

 

[dutchfire]

Are there any statistics on who fled from the DDR to the BDR? I would imagine most of them were young and motivated by economy as well.

 

[warpus]

Perhaps, but I'd think that in that case a lot of them would have plenty of reason to be labelled as "political refugees" first and foremost. Unless you're talking about after the wall came down.