USA is now agreed with Germany to take in 100,000 per year.
Hasn’t anyone realized that the only thing this accomplishes is sends message to a million more that they ought to jump on a boat and demand the same?
100,000 isn’t much for the US - we accept about a million people a year. But the process is very long and complicated – that “million more” you speculate about will have to find a place to live for a year or two before they have a shot at coming to the US.
And they can “demand” all they want – the US still decides who gets in and who doesn’t – and dictates the timetable.
Why do we do it? Because we’re a nation of immigrants – and because they contribute an estimated $10 billion a year to our economy.
Could you please provide data that refugees admitted during last 15 years added anything to US economy?
[url=<a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/21/world/asia/us-soldiers-told-to-ignore-afghan-allies-abuse-of-boys.html?action=click&contentCollection=Television&module=MostPopularFB&version=Full®ion=Marginalia&src=me&pgtype=article%5DHere’s%5B/url”>http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/21/world/asia/us-soldiers-told-to-ignore-afghan-allies-abuse-of-boys.html?action=click&contentCollection=Television&module=MostPopularFB&version=Full®ion=Marginalia&src=me&pgtype=article]Here’s[/url] a hideous bit that, well, words fail me. It’s about the “tradition” of sexually abusing boys in Afghanistan and how our soldiers have been ordered to ignore it even as they hear the screams nightly. Sexual abuse of girls is, do I need to say, also common.
I mention this not to tar all refugees/migrants/whatever but rather to note that anyone who thinks these cultures are compatible with Western values is mistaken.
Wow, that sounds like an article I will take your word for but pretty horrendous to me. 
I’m curious why the limitation of “last 15 years?”
Is it because it’s pretty obvious that previous waves of refugees admitted to the U.S. have since proven to be tremendous contributors, business and job creators, to our economy. Cuban refugees. Vietnamese refugees. Jewish refugees from the former USSR…Iranians, Lebanese, Egyptians. Etc.
Yes, there is an initial cost — some might say investment — while people who come here penniless get acclimated, learn English, find jobs. But they do, the vast majority of them do and they become economic assets. Or their children do. For example, it was a Syrian immigrant who gave us Steve Jobs.
But since you asked for specific data:
http://www.hias.org/sites/default/files/clevelandrefugeeeconomic-impact.pdf
*At the same time, in keeping with the experience of other major cities
that have accepted a significant amount of refugees, Cleveland has benefitted from the arrival of these refugees.
The arrival of these refugees has worked to bolster the county’s population, increase demand for local housing as
well as locally produced goods and services, and boost the regional economy via their employment and
entrepreneurship. All of this economic activity generates substantial taxes for the region that it would otherwise
forego. Similarly, the region benefits in untold ways from the natural increase in cultural and ethnic diversity that
accompany accepting new residents from around the world.
Despite misconceptions, the Cleveland area refugee community relies relatively little on public assistance and what
public benefits they do receive serves largely as an influx of federal funds into the Cleveland area, which without
these refugee arrivals would be diverted to other cities that welcome new refugees. **In fact, this study finds that the
annual $4.8 million of funding—predominantly funded out of federal programs—which support the refugee service
agencies effectively generates $48 million in total annual economic activity, supports 650 jobs in Cuyahoga County,
and generates nearly $2.8 million in taxes to the state and local authorities. **The foundation of these impressive
economic findings is rooted in the industriousness and entrepreneurship of the refugees’ themselves.
This is a community that quickly finds work—be it part-time, full-time, or seasonal—and works together, many times in
concert with other local refugees, to forge a new life and to establish their households in this area. The results
speak for themselves—nearly $30 million spending from refugee household earnings and refugee-started
businesses generating employment and taxes for the Greater Cleveland economy.*
If the US feels immigrants are useful, the proper approach is to pick and choose who should be let in. It’s silly to equate these “migrants” with immigrants who come here with skills that are needed. If the primary qualifications of the people is that millions of them stormed into Europe, the impact will be like how Stockholm has changed in the last few decades. It’s easy to fudge numbers when you ignore anything with a negative impact in areas like schools, healthcare, housing, and crime, and focus on just the benefits. It’s one thing to get someone like Steve Jobs’ father who was doing his PhD and came from a wealthy family, and a totally different thing to take in people who have little to offer, and say they’re both Syrians.
This study cited in #346 was done to prove that accepting refugees in the Greater Cleveland area will greatly benefit… yes, Greater Cleveland area due to Federal Funds that this area will receive. From the quote above:
" Despite misconceptions, the Cleveland area refugee community relies relatively little on public assistance and what public benefits they do receive serves largely as an influx of federal funds into the Cleveland area, which without these refugee arrivals would be diverted to other cities that welcome new refugees."
The main reason of this study is to justify existence and funding of the Refugee receiving organizations. Note that of their 2012 budget of $4.8m (provided by the Federal Government) they spent $2.5m on themselves, they employed 95 people to support 598 refugees. What they conveniently do not count at all is the cost of government payments and services - welfare, food stamps, Medicaid, subsidized housing, educational benefits, etc. These costs should be in order of magnitude larger than the $2.5m that they spend to initially support Refugees during first few months after their arrival. They do claim that their Refugee program is unusually successful comparing to analogous programs in other parts of the country.
The article present 3 case studies of Refugee families that successfully survived immigration and became self-supporting. They state that only 8.1 - 12.4% of families are on government assistance after 2 years. The legal immigrants to the US who do not come with the Refugee (or Asylee) status are not initially entitled to any government benefits while their outcomes are probably comparable or better.
They present a graph with origins of Refugees. However during the period 2000-2013 the origins of Refugees changed dramatically. The first half of this period included the tail end of Jewish immigration from Russia and Ukraine while later Refugees were mostly from Burma, Bhutan, Somalia and Iraq. It is noteworthy that their first example is a family of a doctor from Moscow who immigrated in 1994. Here we have a little cheating as Jewish Refugees from the Soviet Union had 65% college completion rate among adults . It is not obvious that the current Refugee waves will be as successful as the previous ones.
@Dadof3, what makes you think the US doesn’t choose who get in? You should do a little reading on just how hard it is – and how long it takes – to immigrate to this country.
^“hard it is – and how long it takes – to immigrate to this country” - Not for everybody.
Apparently, it is made very easy to buy a Syrian passport in Syria and with this passport, many doors will be open, if not immediately, then still would not take as long as with others. Actually, thousands who belong to a group that created the crisis, already did just that.
Yes, it is very hard and takes very long time to immigrate to this country for people who can contribute a lot. We just said goodbye to our Canadian scientist friend. He lost his job in the USA and had to go back to Canada and prospects for him to come back here are not very good at all, there is no much research going on in Canada.
RE #344
It may take awhile to receive your legal status, yes, but a large number of immigrants simply physically enter the country, then claim refugee/asylum status, and stay indefinitely.
Some food for thought, from a master of the game:
"Naturally, the common people don’t want war, neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. But the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they’re being attacked and denounce the pacifists as cowardly and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in every country. "
Herman Goering, during the Nuremberg trials.
@Bay and @MiamiDAP Please don’t spread misinformation. It will take up to 2 years for the refugees currently in Europe to be screened before they’re allowed in the US. Many won’t get clearance and will not be given entry. That’s per immigration regulations put in place after 9/11.
There are a lot of immigrant-wanna-be in our company. The company loved them - hardworking, almost never whining, and, more importantly, cost-effective and very loyal to the company for almost a decade (because it could take that long to complete their immigration process.)
Depending on their country of origin, some of them are, relatively speaking, much more financially secured than earlier generation of immigrants (or definitely more secured than the refugees.) I knew of two cases: One bought a 25K-28K brand-new car right after having been graduated from a grad school, and another even bought a condo which costs almost half a million, a year after the graduation. Both of them have not obtained their permanent immigration status yet. (It could take half a decade at least.) Many of them are indeed more prepared at least in their finance. Their financial resourcefulness amazes me. Most of them likely belong to the “elite” or “close to the elite” class from their country of origin.
All depend on what kind of immigrants we want to receive. I have a mixed feeling about this. Do we only want those immigrants who are “rich” or among the “elite” class in their country of origin?
Most of the legal immigration to the US is family based so all immigrants do not necessary belong to the elite but they have time to prepare, learn English, acquire marketable skills, learn how to drive a car, etc. They know that they are not entitled to the government benefits. And they have “Immigrant Drive”. There is also a trickle of skill-based immigration. So no surprise that immigrants may very well add 100B/year to the US economy. However when @katliamom points to this number in the discussion about Refugees - this looks disingenuous. Accepting Refugees is the most expensive way to acquire immigrants. But US can probably afford it (while disregarding our own poor citizens and 11M+ of illegals already in the country). Do you really believe that we can screen 100K people coming from the areas where people hate US and our values? And even if we screen them initially - Tsarnaev brothers example shows what may happen after.
I would rather spend this money (we are talking about billions here) on our war veterans and immigrant quota on illegal immigrants who honestly work here for years and already proved that they can be productive members of US society.
How many more people can this country sustain. Just in my lifetime the population has increased by 100 million people. Where there used to be fields and ranches there are housing developments and strip malls. Two lane roads have become superhighways. Everything seems crowded. Most of this population boom is through immigration.
My sense from talking and reading is that most people are against this unending stream of immigrants but feel that if they say something they will be branded as racists.
@CCDD14 – We don’t have an “either/or” option in this situation. Unless you’re advocating to totally turn our back on the refugees now in Europe.
And as to proper screening – sigh. Of course it’s not foolproof. Of course highly suspect people will slip in. Of course there may be a Tsarnaev among them. That’s the reality of dealing with ANY mass of people: even among native born Americans you will find criminals, terrorists-in-the-making and thieves.
Yes of course, that is what the regulations say, but it is not what happens in many cases in real life. Did you already forget about all of the women and children (which were mostly young men) who recently walked across our border from South America over the past few years? They literally crossed the Rio Grande with their hands up and surrendered to Border Patrol. They simply claimed refugee status, and if they were not from Mexico they were allowed to stay while their status is being processed and are still here. Not difficult at all. Of course most of them never showed up for their hearings and have disappeared into the general populace.