Not if you stayed, then it’s an investment. Money doesn’t just disappear when goes to poor people, they use it to buy things like food and stuff. It would only be a financial drain if you were sending that money back home.
The North American mind cannot comprehend the benefits of supporting the poor.
Perhaps strain would be a better word than drain - it would still be a short-mid term financial burden to take even a tiny fraction of the sane population from the US, it’s a big country. Sure would be nice if it could be arranged though…
Don’t worry, there aren’t that many sane people in the US. A lot of them are under the impression that they’re sane because they take the “balanced” position, though, which is to say that they just choose whatever’s in between fascism and barely progressive policy while they call themselves intelligent.
Frankly I’m not sure I’d want a bunch of people who cannot take accountability and who have such main-character energy they think that they would be allowed in while “bad” people wouldn’t be. We have enough problems with similar mindsets here in Canada and I really don’t want more of that except now they’re making it even harder to get away from our useless, conservative, Liberal(capital L) party.
Well that’s the thing, it wouldn’t be possible so the entire idea of “let us sane people come” is flawed from the start unless they truly believe that there should be a purity test and that they would pass it. Anyone who genuinely thinks that way should be immediately disqualified from immigrating based on their own idea of an ideological test.
“I’m different though and there should be actual, real laws to permit to do particular things!” is not the position of someone who considers their community at large to any particularly special degree. And to be clear I’m all for banning hate speech and stuff because that’s a specific banned behaviour and not a specific allowed behaviour, and we have evidence to show that it can be as harmful as any physically violent attack.
It would only be a financial drain if you were sending that money back home.
Only if you limit your view to your nation. ‘Back home’ across the border it would most likely also buy food etc. And that would be fine.
The real drain is the infinite black hole of the rich guys pockets. That is where all the money is. Don’t blame people who send money to their loved ones to help, just because there is a border.
This is correct, though the initial drain might still be too much if there was literally a big exodus all at once. Maybe if the refugees from the US distributed fairly evenly across the various countries it could work?
Not if you stayed, then it’s an investment. Money doesn’t just disappear when goes to poor people, they use it to buy things like food and stuff. It would only be a financial drain if you were sending that money back home.
The North American mind cannot comprehend the benefits of supporting the poor.
UBI should be ubiquitous.
UBI = Universal Basic Income
Amazing Americans say with their full chest this is socialism
Perhaps strain would be a better word than drain - it would still be a short-mid term financial burden to take even a tiny fraction of the sane population from the US, it’s a big country. Sure would be nice if it could be arranged though…
True.
Don’t worry, there aren’t that many sane people in the US. A lot of them are under the impression that they’re sane because they take the “balanced” position, though, which is to say that they just choose whatever’s in between fascism and barely progressive policy while they call themselves intelligent.
Frankly I’m not sure I’d want a bunch of people who cannot take accountability and who have such main-character energy they think that they would be allowed in while “bad” people wouldn’t be. We have enough problems with similar mindsets here in Canada and I really don’t want more of that except now they’re making it even harder to get away from our useless, conservative, Liberal(capital L) party.
Ah yes - subjecting ideological refugeess to arbitrary purity tests, a true classic.
Well that’s the thing, it wouldn’t be possible so the entire idea of “let us sane people come” is flawed from the start unless they truly believe that there should be a purity test and that they would pass it. Anyone who genuinely thinks that way should be immediately disqualified from immigrating based on their own idea of an ideological test.
“I’m different though and there should be actual, real laws to permit to do particular things!” is not the position of someone who considers their community at large to any particularly special degree. And to be clear I’m all for banning hate speech and stuff because that’s a specific banned behaviour and not a specific allowed behaviour, and we have evidence to show that it can be as harmful as any physically violent attack.
And a hell of a good one. Adults will have already passed through education, so we would save on that part.
I get that, the initial investment would be pretty significant.
I’m not against it of course, I just think it’s necessary to understand the risks of any gamble.
Only if you limit your view to your nation. ‘Back home’ across the border it would most likely also buy food etc. And that would be fine.
The real drain is the infinite black hole of the rich guys pockets. That is where all the money is. Don’t blame people who send money to their loved ones to help, just because there is a border.
This is correct, though the initial drain might still be too much if there was literally a big exodus all at once. Maybe if the refugees from the US distributed fairly evenly across the various countries it could work?