| Your comment comes across as very dishonest. You provide alot of subtext without clear statements. > Taking in a large number of refugees with significant lower education and overall wealth Implies education and wealth is needed for the workforce. It is not. Just a strawman. > healthcare system that Sweden has, cost significant more than what it produce in increased taxes How profitable are swedish schools? Rhetorical question to highlight your dumb-think. Services cost money, they are not meant to produce anything else. > There is the concept of social dumping > Schools also complain about this issue Which can also be explained with regular budget pressure from neoliberal fiscal hawks. I dont know the swedish specifics. > This report however do not account for crime ... Which allows you to vaguely gesture / associate yet again. Unfortunately, you didnt link any studies. Searching for "economic contribution migration" on any scientific platform, comes out as unanimously net-positive. Here is the OECD saying the same. https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/sub-issues/economic-impact-of... > It should also be mentioned that only about 1/3 of refugees ever becomes economical self-sufficient. First generarion? And yet again you just glimpse at it without explanation. Whats the subtext here? Lazyness? Genetic inferiority? Without an explanation, this isnt an argument for anythig, yet tou yield it like it was. And that is dishonest. So understand better, i could use it as an argument myself, "see how bad systemetic discrimination is!?" The internet abuses cognitive biases around cultural self-identity and foreign disgust and in the end, people group together, thinking they are the reasonable ones, the more educated... |
In Sweden everyone must by law go through basic education as children, and all education is free, including higher education. The government get no profits from schools as there is no fees for the government to collect. It is all paid through taxes. Your are using that "dumb-think" of yours, assuming that immigration from countries that does not provide basic education for all their citizens will have the same level of education as people from countries that do.
> Which can also be explained with regular budget pressure from neoliberal fiscal hawks. I dont know the swedish specifics.
You clearly do not understand how Sweden operate or how local government functions, are clearly too lazy to look it up. The budget for municipalities primarily comes from local taxes, paid by citizens that live in that region. There are a national budget posts that get distributed between municipalities, but they only cover some parts of the local budget. Regions with a lot of high income and high tax paying citizens will have more money to spend than regions with a lot of citizens that are unemployed and on welfare.
And naturally I can give you links to Swedish articles that also direct you to the research study and the government study, in Swedish. https://frihetsnytt.se/invandringens-pris-vad-farska-studien...
1/3 of refugees never becomes economical self-sufficient. That is basic statistical fact. If you don't like the statistics you can pretend that math is racism or something dishonest like that. The plain fact is that taking in refugees has costed Sweden money, and the more refugees that comes in the higher the cost is. The math doesn't say if the cost isn't morally worth it, or if refugees children or children children will some day repay the cost, or if then it is worth to pay a cost now for a possible profit in the future that we don't know. All the math say is that there is a cost per person and year from taking in refugees that will not be repaid by those refugees.