http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2016/1/26/denmark-parliament-expected-to-allow-seizure-of-valuables-from-refugees.html



Seems that there could be a better way of curbing emigrations than only discouraging individuals with assets. Governments shouldn't be taking wedding rings at least. If I were in their position, and wanted to curb emigration, I would do it in a way that discouraged the people who were likely to contribute the least. I would also set up welfare-work programs as well with a housing first policy and programs designed to lead to independence. I'm a social services guy though.

Actual rich refugees probably left their country for war or political reasons. Plenty of wealthy Syrians fled the country.

The problem lies with the 'economical refugee', those who flee from Northern Africa or the Balkans (Albania, Kosovo) in search of green pastures. Which puts a large strain on the welfare society in the EU. These people are not very likely to be educated either.

They get told sweet tales of plenty and wealth by the traffickers and then find out things aren't as rosy as presented to them. I think already thousands of refugees have left our country because of purely economical reasons. They complain the food is bad (it's what every Dutch person eats), the accomodation is bad (we're already in a housing crisis nearly everywhere, we don't have spare homes to dish out so cramped space will have to do), and other arguments that to me point out that they might as well return to their place of origin, if they prefer it there.

I have no problem with refugees due to war or political disagreements in their home country. Syrians are welcome to stay.

And all the populists in Europe are complaining about the abundance of luxury amongst refugees. Complaining that they have iphones, tablets, laptops and all sorts of luxury items. The other parties agree with these measures out of fear to lose more of their voters.

Huh?

I thought they were worried that most refugees are economical refugees instead of people who consider themselves to be in any war-related danger.

This new bill is pretty much the opposite of what I thought they were trying to achieve.

At first i thought, wow this is fucking nuts. Then i read this in your quote:



So they are acting in accordance with what Danish citizens must do, and the end goal of immigration is assimilation into the population. Not sure how you can be more integrated into Danish society than by following the same standard as Danes. The emotional gift exemption seems to cool the flames of some human rights worries. Also i'd be interested to see $ specific packages these people will receive after selling property. Is the trade off worth it?

i see nothing wrong with this though i'd add on mandatory work placement requirements along with the govt helping them get jobs

Good law. There's absolutely no reason the Danish taxpayer should be paying for people that are well to do on their own.

To be honest with you I think it would be an excellent idea for refugees/asylum seekers that are able bodied to be put into job placements. There's no reason why these masses shouldn't be contributing at least in some ways to the societies they are living off. I'm not talking about rigorous physical labor but every of age, able bodied refugee/migrant should be contributing 20-30 hours a week to compensate for all the freebies the taxpayers are providing them.

'Governments shouldn't be taking wedding rings at least'

they aren't. heirlooms handed down and wedding jewelry were exempted. funny how you left that out.

you wanna like, grab a beer or something?

Haha I totally would. I definitely need to go to Toronto pretty soon the gf keeps bothering me about it i just don't got much time off available.

This post was edited by ofthevoid on Jan 27 2016 11:34am

Good. They should talk all their shit and force them to clean up the city streets otherwise they can fuck off. Dirty scum.