REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT IS IMMORAL
Nov 24, 2015 4:03:22 GMT
paisley, themotherhen, and 1 more like this
Post by Deleted on Nov 24, 2015 4:03:22 GMT
Some more food for thought on why we should not bring them here ....
The Center for Immigration Studies recently calculated that it costs twelve times as much
to resettle a refugee in the United States as it does to care for the same refugee in a
neighboring country in the Middle East. The five-year cost to American taxpayers of
resettling a single Middle Eastern refugee in the United States is conservatively
estimated to be more than $64,000, compared with U.N. figures that indicate it
costs about $5,300 to provide for that same refugee for five years in his native region.
Each refugee we bring to the United States means that eleven others are not being helped
with that money. In other words, each refugee we bring to the United States means that eleven
others are not being helped with that money. Faced with twelve drowning people, only a monster
would send them a luxurious one-man boat rather than twelve life jackets. And yet, with the best
of intentions, that is exactly what we are doing when we choose one lucky winner to resettle here.
Read more at: www.nationalreview.com/article/427153/refugee-resettlement-immoral
Some will object that we can do both — relocate some refugees here and care for others in their native region.
But money is not infinite. Every dollar the government spends is borrowed and will have to be paid back by our grandchildren.
What’s more, the U.N. estimates that there are 60 million refugees and internally displaced people around the world.
Clearly, whatever amount we allocate to refugee protection will provide for only a fraction of the people in need.
Given these limitations on resources, it is wrong — morally wrong — to use those resources to resettle one refugee
here when we could help twelve closer to their home.
The Center for Immigration Studies recently calculated that it costs twelve times as much
to resettle a refugee in the United States as it does to care for the same refugee in a
neighboring country in the Middle East. The five-year cost to American taxpayers of
resettling a single Middle Eastern refugee in the United States is conservatively
estimated to be more than $64,000, compared with U.N. figures that indicate it
costs about $5,300 to provide for that same refugee for five years in his native region.
Each refugee we bring to the United States means that eleven others are not being helped
with that money. In other words, each refugee we bring to the United States means that eleven
others are not being helped with that money. Faced with twelve drowning people, only a monster
would send them a luxurious one-man boat rather than twelve life jackets. And yet, with the best
of intentions, that is exactly what we are doing when we choose one lucky winner to resettle here.
Read more at: www.nationalreview.com/article/427153/refugee-resettlement-immoral
Some will object that we can do both — relocate some refugees here and care for others in their native region.
But money is not infinite. Every dollar the government spends is borrowed and will have to be paid back by our grandchildren.
What’s more, the U.N. estimates that there are 60 million refugees and internally displaced people around the world.
Clearly, whatever amount we allocate to refugee protection will provide for only a fraction of the people in need.
Given these limitations on resources, it is wrong — morally wrong — to use those resources to resettle one refugee
here when we could help twelve closer to their home.
