[JumpCrisscross]

> by 2020 half of them has found a job, which is way higher unemployment rate than is average in Germany though

Half of immigrants being unemployed after half a decade is bad, especially compared with America, where immigrants are more likely to find themselves employed than the native born [1].

> if they don't find jobs themselves, at the very least they have children

Sure. But I'd hate to do the math on how much each of those children cost the German taxpayer.

[1] https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=LZTRCwAAQBAJ&oi=...

[oytis]

Half of refugees, not half of immigrants. Most immigrants are employed of course, that's how you normally get in Europe.

And it's not like refugees were allowed to look for jobs immediately, getting work permit for a refugee takes awfully long in Germany.

Cost of their children is pretty much the same as for German children. And it's a necessary expenditure, otherwise the said taxpayers are going to have a pretty rough time when they retire.

[JumpCrisscross]

> Cost of their children is pretty much the same as for German children

If the principal benefit of a refugee couple is their children, the the cost of accepting and maintaining that couple is part of the cost of that child.

I believe there is a moral responsibility, on the part of rich countries, to accept some refugees. But we have to be honest that it is usually charitable work. Framing it as economically beneficial can be misleading and lead to a backlash when the promised gains don't pan out.

[j_wtf_all_taken]

> But we have to be honest that it is usually charitable work.

Funny how often people start a sentence with "we got to be honest" and finish it with something that has long been debunked.