6 ms·

>when angela merkel welcomed all refugees during the syria crisis it was the first time i felt proud to have lived there. This national delusion and inability

>when angela merkel welcomed all refugees during the syria crisis it was the first time i felt proud to have lived there. This national delusion and inability to separate the harsh reality from wishful thinking, is why Germany is going to shit and why many skilled Germans are emigrating to places like Switzerland and the US with saner policies and stricter immigration laws. My current boss is the third one I'm seeing emigrate to the US where they're happier than in Germany and get better healthcare. And I lost track on how many colleagues I saw move to CH in the last 10 years. I expect the politicians I vote for and pay half my salary every month to take care of their own citizens first and foremost and not prioritize outsiders who aren't their citizens/voters using my tax Euros. Has every homeless and starving citizen of Germany been taken care of with a roof over their head and food? No? Then where are you going to house and feed all those foreign refugees you're bringing in? With what money? If you have money for refugees you should have for the locals as well first and foremost. Has every citizen of Germany received timely healthcare in the public system and easy to find a place in kindergartens/school/Hausarzt? No, because you have a shortage of doctors and teachers? Then how is importing more unskilled foreigners gonna make these public staff shortages better for the local citizens? This is not "right wing extremism" take, it's just basic economics and survivorship common sense based on availability of limited resources by respecting democratic principles of the citizens. So politicians, please don't use my tax money to care for foreigners when you haven't yet taken care of the locals who pay your wages and fund the public systems we need. Please perform your virtue signaling on how generous and welcoming you are using your own private money and properties, not the taxpayers'. Because it's very easy to be generous with someone else's money.

em-bee 2y ago
and exactly where should these refugees have gone to instead? you think the situation is better anywhere else? the problems you mention are not unique to germany. and yes, it baffles me why no country can recognize that the only way to solve those problems is to put more resources into education. but denying refugees a save harbor is not going to improve your life one bit. those two issues are completely unrelated to each other. the question is that of a general attitude towards others. people who favor their own over refugees tend to also favor them over their neighbors, and when that happens we have a problem. let not a man glory in that he loves his country; let him rather glory in this, that he loves the world.
- Rinzler89 2y ago
  >and exactly where should these refugees have gone to instead? I don't know and I don't care since it's not a problem I created and I don't want my taxe Euros to be used on global charity, I want them used on the local citizens first and foremost. Why didn't the wealthy neighboring countries that are similar in culture like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain, etc. take them in? Why must it be always the liberal European countries far away in charge of charity? Imagine the local native American/Australian people seeing the British/European colonizers arrive on boats on their land and welcome them saying "where should these people go to instead?" instead of fighting them to kick them out. Or the Why would you ever welcome invaders? Hasn't history shown what happens over and over again? The culture with the most valance dominates the others. Why do you think random parts in the middle of Africa speak French? > but denying refugees a save harbor is not going to improve your life one bit. those two issues are completely unrelated to each other. How so? Less people coming to compete for access to limited healthcare and housing will definitely improve the life of the locals. It's just the basic economics of supply/demand. Do you think arithmetic is wrong? Denying this would be some advanced form of cope/delusion. If those refugees would be such valuable human resources like skilled doctors and teachers with a great culture of assimilation, then all their wealthy neighboring countries I mentioned above would be fighting over them to bring them over instead of rejecting them. You don't want to import the dross that nobody else wants, so then why is Europe doing it? > people who favor their own over refugees tend to also favor them over their neighbors, and when that happens we have a problem. Maybe this kind of gaslighting and guilt tripping works on some people with luxury beliefs, not on me though. I like to be realistic on the economic realities and scarcity of resources. Noting personal against anyone or any group of people. >let not a man glory in that he loves his country; let him rather glory in this, that he loves the world. Luxury beliefs and virtue signaling. Feel free to engage in them as much as you like, but on your own dime.
  - em-bee 2y ago
    it's not a problem I created but it's a problem we all have to live with, so the only way out is to do something about it. we can't just ignore it. Why didn't the wealthy neighboring countries that are similar in culture like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain, etc. take them in? most of them actually went to turkey, followed by lebanon and jordan as distant second and third. germany only took half a milion from a total of more than 5 million. the countries you mention are separated from syria by a large desert without a practical way to travel there, so it's not surprising they didn't go there. Imagine the local native American/Australian people seeing the British/European colonizers arrive sorry what? how does colonisation in any way compare with being a refugee? while it is true that at there were many escaping religious prosecution, the problem was that they overwhelmed the natives by the numbers and with greed. not to speak of what happend in africa. noone went there to escape anything. to compare colonization with refugees seeking shelter is quite frankly insulting. Luxury beliefs and virtue signaling. Feel free to engage in them as much as you like, but on your own dime. you bet i am. but it's not a luxury. it's an absolute necessity. only if we improve conditions everywhere in the world can we improve our own lives too. the worlds countries are way to interdependent for any country to be able to go on their own.

em-bee 2y ago

and exactly where should these refugees have gone to instead? you think the situation is better anywhere else? the problems you mention are not unique to germany. and yes, it baffles me why no country can recognize that the only way to solve those problems is to put more resources into education. but denying refugees a save harbor is not going to improve your life one bit. those two issues are completely unrelated to each other. the question is that of a general attitude towards others. people who favor their own over refugees tend to also favor them over their neighbors, and when that happens we have a problem. let not a man glory in that he loves his country; let him rather glory in this, that he loves the world.

Rinzler89 2y ago
>and exactly where should these refugees have gone to instead? I don't know and I don't care since it's not a problem I created and I don't want my taxe Euros to be used on global charity, I want them used on the local citizens first and foremost. Why didn't the wealthy neighboring countries that are similar in culture like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain, etc. take them in? Why must it be always the liberal European countries far away in charge of charity? Imagine the local native American/Australian people seeing the British/European colonizers arrive on boats on their land and welcome them saying "where should these people go to instead?" instead of fighting them to kick them out. Or the Why would you ever welcome invaders? Hasn't history shown what happens over and over again? The culture with the most valance dominates the others. Why do you think random parts in the middle of Africa speak French? > but denying refugees a save harbor is not going to improve your life one bit. those two issues are completely unrelated to each other. How so? Less people coming to compete for access to limited healthcare and housing will definitely improve the life of the locals. It's just the basic economics of supply/demand. Do you think arithmetic is wrong? Denying this would be some advanced form of cope/delusion. If those refugees would be such valuable human resources like skilled doctors and teachers with a great culture of assimilation, then all their wealthy neighboring countries I mentioned above would be fighting over them to bring them over instead of rejecting them. You don't want to import the dross that nobody else wants, so then why is Europe doing it? > people who favor their own over refugees tend to also favor them over their neighbors, and when that happens we have a problem. Maybe this kind of gaslighting and guilt tripping works on some people with luxury beliefs, not on me though. I like to be realistic on the economic realities and scarcity of resources. Noting personal against anyone or any group of people. >let not a man glory in that he loves his country; let him rather glory in this, that he loves the world. Luxury beliefs and virtue signaling. Feel free to engage in them as much as you like, but on your own dime.
- em-bee 2y ago
  it's not a problem I created but it's a problem we all have to live with, so the only way out is to do something about it. we can't just ignore it. Why didn't the wealthy neighboring countries that are similar in culture like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain, etc. take them in? most of them actually went to turkey, followed by lebanon and jordan as distant second and third. germany only took half a milion from a total of more than 5 million. the countries you mention are separated from syria by a large desert without a practical way to travel there, so it's not surprising they didn't go there. Imagine the local native American/Australian people seeing the British/European colonizers arrive sorry what? how does colonisation in any way compare with being a refugee? while it is true that at there were many escaping religious prosecution, the problem was that they overwhelmed the natives by the numbers and with greed. not to speak of what happend in africa. noone went there to escape anything. to compare colonization with refugees seeking shelter is quite frankly insulting. Luxury beliefs and virtue signaling. Feel free to engage in them as much as you like, but on your own dime. you bet i am. but it's not a luxury. it's an absolute necessity. only if we improve conditions everywhere in the world can we improve our own lives too. the worlds countries are way to interdependent for any country to be able to go on their own.