Still think we shouldn't accept refugees?

Just read the WSJ article. the only mention of dental work was this:

Again, it's not him, but his sister, who was speaking of dental work, not the man himself. And there's no mention of getting the work done for free, or choosing a destination based on the availability of free dental care, or anything of the sort. Merely that he get it done in Europe, and get his family out of Turkey, which apparently isn't the idyllic, safe haven you keep trying to make it sound like.

Yes, most people will and that is why you have to keep the Welfare migrants out or the whole system breaks down. As I said, the UK isn't even as generous as many other states so the problem isn't as big there but you can bet Sweden and Germany are in for some big bills for letting welfare fraud happen on such a grand scale. The UK's government is at least trying to cap welfare payments at 27,000 pounds a year total (which would still be around $40,000 a year not counting the free council house).

Not that there's anything really wrong with that, or Democrats wouldn't be running Hillary for President. Oh wait... We have rules so that people looking to capitalize on a bad situation for personal gain do so only under certain rules so that their behavior produces a net benefit, such as driving relief supplies to a dangerous area to make a profit, because otherwise almost no relief supplies will arrive. But these people aren't driving into danger, and many are like ticks looking for the fattest dog to suck on. But if you're a tick, why wouldn't you pick the fattest dog? Why should someone doing nothing in Somalia make less than someone doing nothing in Sweden? The whole logic of welfare breaks down when you move it beyond the tribal loyalties and small-tribe human nature it's based on. The generous state can become the fat cow swimming in a river of piranha. There's nothing inherently wrong with being a fat cow or a piranha, but nature will take its course if you let them swim together.

You do realize that her e-mails indicate that Hillary constantly capitalized on bad situations for personal gain, don't you? For example, the Algerian government was lobbying Hillary for a better report on their human rights situation. About that time Haiti was hit by a devastating earthquake. So Algeria offered to give a lot of money to the Clinton Foundation for earthquake relief and Hillary illegally accepted it. Then she turned around and did some more deals, having the Haitian government grant a lucrative gold mining contract (something Haiti has never done once in 80 years) to her brother. Not surprisingly, none of the Algerian money or any other Clinton Foundation support happened to reach any poor Haitians.

It's good to be rich, powerful, and above the law because you can make an insane amount of money at it. So far she's made $2 billion dollars by gumming up the works and causing hundreds of thousands of people to suffer and die in squalor. It's a good living.

Honestly, I would rather have the European model of higher wages, higher taxes, but much better benefits. To do that though you have to keep the economic migrants out and have a local culture which values hard work (that is actually rarer than it sounds especially as the payouts get higher). There is just no other way to make the cradle to grave generous welfare state work.

That is the hard truth.

[
Again.

Damn it! Stop making me agree with you. That stuff is off topic though so can we please get back on topic?

I'm just pointing out that the elites in Europe (and a few in the US) think they're benefiting from the migration disaster. They get to go out and check off the "cares" boxes without considering that they are hurting their native welfare dependents while causing the death of foreign welfare dependents, all because the don't seem to realize that most humans seek to maximize their personal situation. It's in our genes. If we didn't we wouldn't be here.

Wise thinkers, such as the Founding Fathers, recognized how greedy and vain man is and did their best to set up a government where those traits got cancelled out, because if everyone has an inner asshole then we have to figure out how to make sure that our rulers' inner asshole is kept in check. One of the many tricks was to elevate the rule of law so it applied to everyone, even the elites.

But the rule of law also has to apply to the lowest in society, or you get the lowest exploiting the system to take stuff from the second-lowest or third lowest. Angela Merkel has put ordinary, working class Germans on the hook for feeding about a million Syrians, a people who are not German offspring, and most of whom had never met a German until they crossed the Austrian border. Now if a German wants to give their all the help and house a Syrian refugee, more power to them. But rich, powerful, connected elites in public service shouldn't be writing checks with pretty much infinite obligations on the back of German's who are also struggling.

I'll cite a story about Davy Crockett, who voted against a bill to give money to the widow of Navy officer after having been severely scolded by a constituent for voting for a bill to give money to victims of a fire in Georgetown. Having been shown the error of his ways in spending public money to make himself feel like a more generous and caring person, when that money was coming from people far poorer than the victims he was giving it to, Crockett said:

"Mr. Speaker — I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the suffering of the living, if suffering there be, as any man in this House, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living.

"I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it. We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right to so appropriate a dollar of the public money.

"Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the grounds that it is a debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I have never heard that the government was in arrears to him. This government can owe no debts but for services rendered, and at a stipulated price. If it is a debt, how much is it? Has it been audited, and the amount due ascertained? If it is a debt, this is not the place to present it for payment, or to have its merits examined. If it is a debt, we owe more than we can ever hope to pay, for we owe the widow of every soldier who fought in the War of 1812 precisely the same amount.

"There is a woman in my neighborhood, the widow of as gallant a man as ever shouldered a musket. He fell in battle. She is as good in every respect as this lady, and is as poor. She is earning her daily bread by her daily labor; and if I were to introduce a bill to appropriate five or ten thousand dollars for her benefit, I should be laughed at, and my bill would not get five votes in this House. There are thousands of widows in the country just such as the one I have spoken of, but we never hear of any of these large debts to them.

"Sir, this is no debt. The government did not owe it to the deceased when he was alive; it could not contract it after he died. I do not wish to be rude, but I must be plain. Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot, without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate it as a charity.

"Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much money of our own as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week's pay to the object, and if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks."​

Working German's didn't owe Syrians a dime before the revolt, but now they have to pay them, house them, and feed them. Germans are certainly free, as individuals, to willingly help Syrians, or collectively to help, but are they really on board with the whole thing about subsidizing, under threat of legal action, every swinging dick who can find and cross the weakest borders anywhere in Europe?

Shit, I have duel citizenship (US & UK, thank you, Scottish father) so maybe I should move to the U.K. and get a council house too! There are a couple of things holding me back. Number one is I am damn good at my job and already make a low six figure salary in the U.S. (where taxes are much lower even here in supposedly "high tax" California). While number two is I don't have a dozen kids which are necissary to truly milk the Welfare system.

Oh, well, I guess I will have to stay here owning a nice house in one of the world's best climates driving my nice car. Such a pity.

On the upside, career wise it is nice to have the legal right to work any where in the US or EU. Not that I intend to actually move there. I rather like my little patch of best in the world climate combined with a great economy and job prospects.

Not that I am bragging or anything. Heaven forbide.

Your...majesty.

That could be because he's dead. Or he's really, really good at holding his breath until mom buys him that toy he wants.

Swords or pistols?

http://mobile.news.com.au/world/eur...id-papers-appear/story-fnh81p7g-1227515922792

90% of the migrants claim they do not have any form of ID. Yet an Australian journalist looking at the side of the railroad tracks the migrants use as a highway finds hundreds of ID in just minutes. Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Ethiopian, Iranian, Iraq, Afghan.

They are pretending they are Syria so they can get refugee status but really they are just fleeing poverty, not war, and so are not actually refugees.

You should grill them some tri-tip.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-0909-goldberg-refugees-20150909-column.html

The L.A. Times starts calling it what it is. They are not refugees but economic migrants.

Are you always so free with other people's money?

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34203366

This would be hilarious if it wasn't so fucking stupid. Denmark stopped it's trains and refused to allow any migrants through until they have been registered as per EU law. The migrants have become extremely angry, threatening violence, and say they will refuse to depart the trains until they are allowed on to Sweden.

Why are these supposed refugees so adiment that they don't want to stay in Denmark and demand to go on to Sweden? I am willing to bet Denmark's recent 50% cuts to welfare for migrants plays a roll as does Sweden's most generous of all welfare in the EU. They want the Welfare goodies. You know it is true.

I guess Denmark got its money's worth when they paid television stations across the mideast to tell everyone welfare benefits for 3rd worlders were getting slashed 50%.

How much have immigrants cost your bottom line this year?

And tell us again how you're descended from royalty.

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6473/europe-migration-crisis-welfare

The Gatestone Institute is a Republican think tank out of NYC which is headed by the former Bush Administration UN Ambassador Jon Bolton. In general it is pretty neo con in its outlook and most of its website seems to be dedicated to justifying an invasion of Iran. That said, they did have one article on the migrant crisis and some of the quotes are pretty telling.

Some other interesting tidbits. Of the 12,000 who rushed across the border into Austria last weekend only 20 filed for asylum in Austria. Everyone else rushed for Germany which offers much larger welfare payouts.

The article also has a long list of demands from migrants and examples of how the mobs immediately turn violent when ever their demands aren't automatically given to them. Like in Italy where muslim mobs rioted in camps, attacked police, and demanded free wifi. Asked why they were rioting and burning the tents they were supposed to sleep in they said they wanted to post on Facebook and watch sports. Another one said his IPhone wasn't the latest model and demanded someone give him a new iphone.

The arrogance of these thieves is just breath taking.

http://www.newser.com/story/212601/us-making-move-to-help-refugees.html

And @Dinner cried bitter tears all over his tri-tip...

You've basically just told us why we shouldn't trust a word these guys say, then present what they have to say as something we should accept. Are you high?

I told people where they are coming from so they could make up their own minds. I did not tell anyone whom to trust. The quotes seem to be real as does the confessions as to why they want to be in Germany instead of the half dozen other countries they went through who would have given them safety.

At this point only fools and liars won't admit the vast majority of these people are not refugees and that welfare is the main goal they are seeking. What do you want to bet that a year from now, two years, five years... 80% - 90% of them will still be on welfare, still won't get a job, still won't have learned the national language, and yet they will be arrogantly screaming about how more should be given to them?

He should start a GoFundMe page for that reporter who was fired for kicking kids and tripping adults carrying kids so she could get a better story out of it.

At least it is only 5000 and they will actually vet them to make sure they are real Syrians who have actually been displaced. If they bias it towards the educated and people from religious minorities who are routinely attacked by muslims (Christians, Yzidi, Druze) it might not even be so bad.

What you don't want is the giant free for all Germany is getting where every savage from Bangladesh to Nigeria comes demanding free stuff. We don't have much of a welfare state so you can bet the lazy moochers will try every where else first.

A whole lot of men from that region are from a culture where they make demands and threaten violence if the government doesn't give them what they want. From Islam they get a strong sense of entitlement. That's one reason Assad had to keep a very tight lid on Syrian Sunnis, and is probably part of the reason that brutal dictatorships are so common there. It's about the only way to keep the angry young males under control. Even using tanks, fire bombs, and missiles, he failed at it and they overran most of his country. Since then the angry young males have learned that brutality and threats and violence gets them what they demand, so why would they suddenly change their approach?

So among the desperate and struggling refugees families and economic migrants comes some very, very bad boys. Their in-your-face attitude won't be winning many hearts, and as all the normal people fade into the background, the violent extremists will likely become the migration's long-term public image.

You mean what you don't want.

Be careful what you wish for. If enough educated people who can spell are allowed in, you may end up on the breadline.

I am still astounded how Norway deported 7000 of these buggers and their national violent crime rate fell by 30%. That is a lot of violent crimes for such a small group though I am sure it also had the desired knock on effect of putting the other muslims on notice that their violent ways would not be tolerated.