sgtkate Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 I was going to say what a stupid idea, then there you go agreeing wth it unless you are being ironic (am tending towards the berberis is being berberis). Quite simply you would ensure you handed over all your money or spent it before you died. In the meantime the country has an expensive administration system trying to track who owns what. I was indeed trolling. But if we expect migrants to handover everything so they can all be equal, then we must hold ourselves to the same standards. You must be able to tell my humour by now, surely? I mean, I'm not THAT insane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
999tigger Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Pointless measure that result in little gain, that might not even be enough to offset the additional domestic resources required to enforce it. But confiscating the assets of home-grown jihadis and criminally-convicted refugees/economic migrants, however... (an old suggestion of mine in another, long-closed thread ). Completely agree. They probably freeze the assets anyway. The Danish measure just sounds like gesture politics and you would need to make a business case that it would be effective before leaving on the bandwagon, unless ofc you are dumb enough to jump on the bandwagon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berberis Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Plus, I doubt very much that, before you abandon your home to flee any conflict, you would sit down and compare the pros and cons of countries when deciding which one to head for. When fleeing, no, I doubt they do, but once they have crossed the boarder in to safety in places like Turkey their attention appears to turn towards choosing the country where they will have the best life. So, in reality, yes they do, just not immediately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Arthur Posted January 13, 2016 Author Share Posted January 13, 2016 But if we expect migrants to handover everything so they can all be equal, then we must hold ourselves to the same standards. . Life's not meant to be fair and people are anything but equal. Sometimes somebody sticks an AK47 up your chuff and pulls the trigger. Sometimes they don't. It's a bitch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
999tigger Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 When fleeing, no, I doubt they do, but once they have crossed the boarder in to safety in places like Turkey their attention appears to turn towards choosing the country where they will have the best life. So, in reality, yes they do, just not immediately. Whats wrong with that? Its understandable they choose a country where they think they are going to be treated well and can fit in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sgtkate Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Whats wrong with that? Its understandable they choose a country where they think they are going to be treated well and can fit in. And surely the same decision we all make? I live and stay in the UK as I love living here and it suits my lifestyle well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
999tigger Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Life's not meant to be fair and people are anything but equal. Sometimes somebody sticks an AK47 up your chuff and pulls the trigger. Sometimes they don't. It's a bitch. How do you know such a system would be worthwhile. What if it costs far more money to administer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Totally agree with you Pete. How about everyone who is born in the UK is given a debt of £250,000 at birth. (Based on education costs, healthcare, pension, police etc. This is huge underestimate I'd say, but I can only find figures for NHS and education costs, so the rest is just made up ) As you pay tax this debt is paid down, any outstanding debt when you die is taken out of any assets you own. Easy solution to that..spend all your cash and don't leave any assets.. I suspect it'd probably cost the state more than it does now.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Arthur Posted January 13, 2016 Author Share Posted January 13, 2016 How do you know such a system would be worthwhile. What if it costs far more money to administer? Assuming you're talking about Denmark, rather than having an AK47 shoved up your chuff, I have no idea if it would be worthwhile. It's up to the Danes to work out for themselves what their parameters are for a "worthwhile" outcome. I can see how it could stop lots of economic migrants from heading there which would be very worthwhile for Denmark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berberis Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 (edited) Whats wrong with that? Its understandable they choose a country where they think they are going to be treated well and can fit in. I didn't quantify a reason for or agains, I just pointed out how Max was incorrect. However, a refugee is not someone who chooses the best place for themselves to live. You cease to be a refugee once you leave the first safe location for a better place to live. You are a economic migrant which means you are no longer entitled to the kinds of support a refugee should receive, thus, paying for your life by any means available is acceptable. This isn't about penalising refugees, its about asking economic migrants to support themselves, which is reasonable. Edited January 13, 2016 by Berberis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now