Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It seems that the US tends to get criticized the most by the global media and governments for their immigration policy,, despite taking in a million people each year. I don’t understand why though? Why does the world feel like it’s americ’s obligation to take in all of the world’s population. Why do people feel like they deserve to live here?
Where do you get your ideas about what the world thinks about the US?
Umm, the history of the Middle East did not start in 2003. There was trouble there centuries before that. And the U.S. wouldn’t have invaded Iraq if 1. Al Quaeda didn’t attack the U.S. in 2001 (and also 1993), 2. Iraq didn’t invade Kuwait in 1990.
Learn some history first before you go on a bash U.S. diatribe.
if that pile of crap is the level of understanding you have , i wouldnt be so quick to advise others to learn anything , let alone history
The United States is in the unenviable position of having a poor, drug-infested country on its southern border. Canada, Australia and most European countries are not in this situation. So, they are a lot luckier in that way.
If millions of African refugees were entering European countries, then that's when the sh*t would really hit the fan.
No country should take in more migrants than can comfortably accommodate, purely for the sake of bringing in people. This will not be of the interests to the host population and more likely result in exploitation of newcomers.
Migrants do add to GDP and can disguise to an extent a 'faulty' economy purely through their presence, with consumption costs on arrival often being considerate and all too often providing employers with 'quality cheaper labour' , not always to the benefit of those already there.
Besides adding to consultation, an important downside, sometimes attempted to be sold of as a positive, is impact on housing costs. Although of course 'direct' foreign investment with money from offshore is far more disruptive to the market as has been seen in a number of Anglo countries.
When the market claims housing price falls if foreigner are preventer from 'investing', you can be assured that country is in a considerable degree of difficulty.
The United States is in the unenviable position of having a poor, drug-infested country on its southern border.
What do you mean "drug-infested" country? The only drugs in Mexico is the export volume awaiting trans-shipment to the consumption market in the "drug-infested" USA.
The USA is in the unenviable position of BEING a drug-infested country that depends on middle men in a neighboring country.
To those saying that the US should take in refugees from nations in which it interfered it, I've got news for you. In the real worl, nobody cares about feel good, pseudo-humanitarian drivel. A country is going to take in individuals on the basis of what it considers useful.
People like irish_bob conveniently decide to ignore the fact that there are about a dozen countries who have interfered on Syria, either directly or through the use of proxies.
To answer the TC's question, the US has become the international punching bag during to it's power. You will soon find out that everything wrong in the world is because of America. People will always use the dominant power as a scapegoat to avoid responsibility. The real reason many third world countries are in the condition they currently are is because they deflect all their problems on others, while refusing to tackle them themselves.
In conclusion, countries should not be forced to take in anyone they don't want to satisfy they don't want. History has proven time and time again, that humanitarianism is entirely subjective.
If fairness is a principle that is to be followed, then we need to hold every nation responsible from the dawn of time. Either we go all in, or not at all. That's what real humanitarianism is about.
Evidently, that is not a very feasible policy to apply. In fact, one of my biggest pet peeves about humanity in general is the idea it perpetuates about fairness. Why does everyone online always talk with that principle in mind? Why does everything need to be fair?
The US is currently on top of the food chain. Why should it pursue policies that put it at a disadvantage? Expecting the US or any other major power to play fair is ridiculous, when other nations are not equal to them, plain and simple. That's why the big players will always have more leverage in the world. They are the anchors holding it together (not just the US, but a good number of large players, especially those part of the UNSC).
The best way to explain is in relation to the number of immigrants per capita. America is a generous country. Contrary to what you believe she is not put upon as much as you think really. Take heart, immigration is a world crisis not only the USA and to date Europe is taking the brunt of the influx.
Canada is seeing numbers of asylum seekers from USA crossing the Canadian border since Trump introduced policies. Who would have thought. The last time this happened was draft dodgers during the Vietnam War.
To illustrate, the total number of asylum claims made in Canada in 2017 stood at 49,775. Canada is 1/10th of the pop of USA. The equivalent would be 497,775 US. Sweden has pop of 10 million but received roughly 180,000 immigrants in 2017. You can do the math. I hope this post helps you feel better about your plight. Everywhere in the West is feeling the pinch.
You should read your own links.
180000 immigrants in 2017 is more than the peak with 163000 in 2015.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.