Jewish Refugees vs Syrian Refugees

  • Thread starter Thread starter RunMan
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
blackforest said:
The majority are fleeing violence not just poverty, andin the long run will benefit economies.
Click to expand...
So does all of Chicago qualify as refugees? They can go to Canada maybe.

Seriously though, if the UN doesn’t qualify them as refugees, then we go with that.

Your economic comments are really unfounded. We can get all the immigrant numbers we need through legal immigration and legit refugees. Large numbers of economic migrants only depress the labor market for entry level/unskilled workers, which harms our must vulnerable population that are citizens.
 
Last edited:
Your first link is paywalled, summarize it if you want to share.

Second link is not definitive, obvious just from the title: “Refugees can be an investment, rather than a burden”
It’s also a strawman argument since I certainly haven’t suggest we accept NO REFUGEES. I’m all for a manageable number of legit refugees and economic migrants with the skills we need. The economy does better if you fill your shortage in say nurses but don’t undercut entry level construction jobs that are helping your most vulnerable get on their feet.

Even the Dalai Lama recognized the need to control immigration to a manageable level.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-are-going-to-germany/?utm_term=.303690c9d101
 
Last edited:
blackforest said:
The majority are fleeing violence not just poverty, andin the long run will benefit economies.
Click to expand...
I looked further at your link advocating for the economic benefit of refugees

While it shares relevant information, the case it makes is not universally compelling or applicable.

I concur that a manageable number of refugees can be absorbed and they can prosper and be great contributors. BUT THE NUMBER DOES MATTER The influx from vietnam etal in the late 70’s was a drop in the bucket compared to number of migrantes we are seeing in the US and Europe today. Europe has done well with refugees in the past, but the numbers were significantly less than are now arriving seeking status. They had plans for 160k across 2 dozen countries while Germany alone had 800k applications (your article). The first is manageable while the second is a flood.

The number of refugees the US can readily sustain is also impacted by illegal immigrants arriving and competing for public services and low skilled entry work. We have seen dramatic increases in illegal migration in recent decades. I would greatly prefer we focused on accepting legal refugees over illegal migrants. I think large numbers of economic migrants can displace our financial and heart room for legit refugees. As we could see in the last election, when there is pushback on immigrants, it is often expressed as a general sentiment and not just targeted to illegal migrants.

The Danish study is interesting but just correlation at best. I think it’s far more likely they chose settlement areas for their refugees that were growing and could readily sustain the influx. Isn’t that what you would do if you were placing refugees? I certainly wouldn’t send them to Detroit and hope for the best, I’d target communities that are thriving economically. When you place them in thriving communities, the data would be expected to show increasing wages over time, this is not proof the refugees were the cause rather than just along for the ride (correlation =/= causation).

Again, the issue is not whether we should accept immigrants (we should), the issue is how many and whether we should target legit refugees over low skilled economic migrants.

I work part time with ‘at risk’ Foster kids and have worked with parolees attempting to reintegrate after their time behind bars. These are the people who are lowest in desirability by employers but have the greatest need for employment. I want a tight labor market for entry work, so they can become productive contributors. It’s only with the recent tight labor market of the last couple years that we are finally seeing significant drops in black unemployment, especially among black teens.
 
Last edited:
In what universe does sharia law have the slightest chance of becoming the law of the land in this country?

We can’t manage to overturn Roe. Gay marriage is the law of the land. Christians are (sometimes rightly, sometimes wrongly) opposed for trying to write anything that smacks of religious teaching or theocracy into the law.

Yet we’re just going to roll over for a smaller, newer population of people , and specifically whichever ones among them are actually looking to institute a strict code of religious law in the U.S.?

Come on!

Nobody gets to have their own special set of criminal law in this country, and certainly not to execute anyone for violating it. Religious customs and rules that aren’t harmful may be followed voluntarily, of course, but legally anyone is free to ignore those strictures at any time and do what they like.

Now, you might get people who will punish violators on their own, just as you get some Christians who actively attack abortion clinics or whatever, but those things are crimes and the people who do them go to prison.

Any cases you may have heard about where sharia law is accepted by a Western civil government aren’t talking about the criminal codes or the various punishments for violations of religious strictures. What is accepted is an alternative form of civil conflict resolution for people who don’t want to go to a court staffed by people outside their religion and culture. Some Jewish Americans take advantage of a similar option, and if there are any Christian groups who strictly follow Jesus’ admonition to settle things within the Church rather than taking fellow believers to court, then they would likely have the same option,

Seriously, does anyone imagine that it is actually legal to mutilate or kill people for questionable crimes in Germany, or the UK, or Tennessee, or the infamous Dearborn, Michigan? And that “the liberals” who otherwise battle for the rights of women and LGBT folk, and against theocracy and the death penalty, would be okay with that if it were true?
 
Respectfully, this is paranoia. And it’s the same kind of paranoia that aided in the rejection of Jewish refugees before and during the Holocaust.
 
Usagi said:
In what universe does sharia law have the slightest chance of becoming the law of the land in this country?
Click to expand...
The US already has religious (Islamic) courts in use by members of their faith to resolve disputes. I’m not arguing it’s bad, just pointing out your error.
 
Well, this only shows that even the Dalai Lama is not perfect in his thinking and makes mistakes.
 
Have you not heard of a parallel universe? It might happen there.
 
The similarities are indeed striking. Jews, of all people, should know better; but some do not.
 
I mentioned those in my post. That is not sharia becoming the law of the land (with the beheadings and whatnot that Lara is worried about); that’s sharia as a civil option for people who prefer it.

That’s like stirring up fears of a takeover by Jewish law because we can buy kosher products. (Though people do freak out over halal options being available, so who knows?)
 
Last edited:
Similar arguments were made against the Irish and Italians (anti-Catholics), against the Japanese and Germans (concentration camps in the U.S.), against the Jews (anti-Semitism), against Mexicans (Trumpism). It’s a tired old argument against immigrants: they have strange cultures and customs; they cannot and do not want to assimilate to Western tradition and values; they will rob us of jobs; they are stupid and illiterate and will not profit from education; they are not to be trusted. Fear and ignorance are rampant in the U.S. every time a new wave of immigration takes place.
 
Last edited:
So are you implicitly saying that we as a country should capitulate to the fear and ignorance of the vocal majority of the American people, rather than trying to allay their fears?
 
Dear Meltzerboy,
Our problem w illegals, us they are illegal. We recognize, we, AMERICANS, are lazy as far as picking vegetables, etc.Our lives are packaged neatly. I buy cut watermelon slices. In the frustration of life w bad things happening, ppl’s tongues act worse than their hearts. Southern & Central Americans are being married by Americans. African Americans are married by all ethnic groups. The issues are not the color of the skin, it’s the illegality and the behavior.
We have Latinos in every place in society. Blacks are everywhere, including the Presidency.
Like, STAY IN SCHOOL, PULL UP YOUR PANTS. Get rid of gangs ( Latinos & Blacks& whites) How do we train them in manners and how to get a job. STAY IN SCHOOL! Get prayer back in school. Please, God.
In Christ’s Love
Tweedlealice
 
Silly,
I am talking about everywhere in successful society. MUSIC, LABOR, TELEVISION, LEGAL ARENA, POLOTICS, CONGRESS, PRESIDENT.
Everywhere in successful fields.
Latinos are everywhere. All ethnic groups are intermarrying. My point is prejudice is 90% gone.
It’s behavior that is dividing us.
I have a black grandson and a biracial great grandson.
God bless you
In Christ’s Love
Tweedlealice
 
meltzerboy2 said:
So are you implicitly saying that we as a country should capitulate to the fear and ignorance of the vocal majority of the American people, rather than trying to allay their fears?
Click to expand...
It’s common sense to manage fear, not ignore it.
It’s also better for the economy (real fear) if immigration is controlled.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top