|
|
|
|
|
|
by lozenge
1004 days ago
|
|
|
Isn't the Dutch language requirement, which is codified as an eligibility criteria, already intended to create an underclass of residents? I think it is morally justifiable as a residency requirement, but not justifiable to let people live there without being able to receive government support. I think it's a situation where the government want to be racist or at least xenophobic, the citizens agree, but the law prevents them. Accenture was drafted in to get around the law. |
|
|
Given the choice between accepting a small number of immigrants with government support, or a large number of immigrants without government support, the second option seems more humane to me.
By choosing the first option, you are effectively creating a privileged class based on whatever criteria your country uses to accept immigrants. The underclass might be out of your sight, but it still exists.
As long as you are using some criteria to accept immigrants, "willing to work without government support" (at least until they become fluent in the local language) seems like a perfectly reasonable criterion to me. And it is a criterion that gives your nation the capacity to accept a larger number of migrants without breaking the budget -- thereby helping more people from developing countries improve their economic situation.