Forum Posts

Thomas
Mar 27, 2019
In NSDA Novice
They said that refugees cause a lot of money to the host country, However, 1. The refugees could bring a good effect to the economy and society. a) According to UNHCR[1], the refugees may cause many money (25 million dollars in 1990-1991, this is a very small amount of money, indeed, it is almost 0.001% of the budget of US in 1990, according to Mercatus[2]), the economic impact of refugees on developed host areas, however, is not as what many Europeans think as necessarily negative. The refugees may bring an economic stimulus to host regions by giving out a bigger population to the market demands. This means, that this stimulus the refugees gave, make more jobs to the local people, which is the opposite of the worries of many Europeans. This could help the local economy by increasing the rate of employee. 2. This loss of economy does not affect the overall budget of developed countries. a) According to Fair US[3], The United States spend 1.8 billion dollars out of the $4.094 trillion US made in budget of 2018. This cost is about 0.044% of the whole budget. If they wanted to argue that this destroyed the economy of the host country. United states are just a representative example of developed countries. The amount of money is too small for influence the economy of the developed country. [1] The United Nations Refugee Agency, this agency founded in December 14th, 1950 by The United Nation. Document created in January 6th, 1997. https://www.unhcr.org/excom/standcom/3ae68d0e10/social-economic-impact-large-refugee-populations-host-developing-countries.html Argue that this is the law of land, the fact that this document has not updated since nineteen ninety-seven, prove that this is still happening in current days. [2] A non-profit association, created in 1980 by Tyler Cowen, an economist in US, https://www.mercatus.org/publication/us-federal-budget-restraint-1990s-success-story [3] Founded in 1979, non- profitable group, document created in February 5th, 2018 http://fairus.org/issue/legal-immigration/fiscal-cost-resettling-refugees-united-states
0
7
35
Thomas
Mar 23, 2019
In NSDA Novice
They said that permissible means legal and refugee restriction is legal However, 1. International law protects Human Right Law. According to United Nation’s definition of Human Right Law[1], international human rights law lays down obligations which States are bound to respect by becoming parties to international treaties, States assume obligations and duties under international law to respect, to protect and to fulfil human rights. By this concept, the UDHR (Universal declaration of human right) is making the steps of refugee restrictions in developed countries not permissible. 2. The definition of permissible could have other meanings. According to Stanford Encyclopedia of philosophy[2], permissible also have a definition of morally good. By this concept, we can tell that the topic will be refugee restrictions in developed countries is morally good. This do not make any sense. According to Independent[3], asylum seekers were suffering from wars and UN is warned. If refugee restriction became realistic, people will suffer in the wars and live in chaos. How will it be morally good if it make people suffer? [1] http://www.un.org/en/sections/universal-declaration/foundation-international-human-rights-law/index.html [2] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/morality-definition/ [3] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/calais-refugees-living-conditions-france-dunkirk-un-warning-jungle-migrant-crisis-latest-a8288516.html
0
0
11
Thomas
Mar 16, 2019
In NSDA
https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/refugees-asylum-seekers-and-migrants/?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI9aqqi9SG4QIVhURpCh09vgveEAAYASAAEgJ-HfD_BwE
0
4
33
Thomas
Mar 09, 2019
In NSDA Novice
a The refugees could bring a good effect to the economy and society. According to UNHCR[1], the refugees may cause many money (25 million dollars in 1990-1991, this is a very small amount of money, indeed, it is almost 0.001% of the budget of US in 1990, according to Mercatus[2]), the economic impact of refugees on developed host areas, however, is not as what many Europeans think as necessarily negative. The refugees may bring an economic stimulus to host regions by giving out a bigger population to the market demands. This means, that this stimulus the refugees gave, make more jobs to the local people, which is the opposite of the worries of many Europeans. This could help the local economy by increasing the rate of employee. b Also, for the social effect, UNHCR had said that many people from the developed host countries, are afraid of the refugees might have problems of theft, prostitution, alcoholism, or even murder. However, it has also told us that refugees can bring assets to the hosting area and bring skills and knowledge with them that can be utilized to the benefit of local people. The refugees give out new agricultural techniques to the host countries that they do not have. For example, refugees in Nepal have introduced new techniques of cultivating cardamom, an important cash crop in the south-east of the country. [1] The United Nations Refugee Agency, this agency created in December 14th, nineteen fifty by The United Nation. Document created in January 6th, nineteen ninety-seven. Argue that this is the law of land, the fact that this document have not updated since nineteen ninety-seven, prove that this is still happening in current days. [2] A non-profit association, created in 1980 by Tyler Cowen, an economist in US
0
2
32
Thomas
Mar 02, 2019
In NSDA
From the moment of arrival, refugees compete with the local citizens for scarce resources such as land, water, housing, food and medical services. Over time, their presence leads to more substantial demands on natural resources, education and health facilities, energy, transportation, social services and employment. 1. In some instances, they can significantly alter the flow of goods and services within the society as a whole and their presence may have implications for the host country’s balance of payment and undermine structural adjustment initiatives. One example of market disturbances would be the need to rent accommodation for office and residential purposes, not just for expatriates, but also for locally engaged staff, in response to a refugee situation. Increased construction activity results, but this is usually accompanied by increases in rent, benefiting those who are property owners, but adversely affecting the poor and those on fixed incomes, such as government officers. Purchase of large quantities of building material may make them scarce or unobtainable for local people, while also generating inflationary effects. Likewise, increased demand for food and other commodities can lead to price rises in the market which will stimulate local economic activity, although, again, not benefiting the poorest. 2. The presence of a large refugee population in rural areas inevitably also means a strain on the local administration. Host country national and regional authorities divert considerable resources and manpower from the pressing demands of their own development to the urgent task of keeping refugees alive, alleviating their sufferings and ensuring the security of the whole community. While most host governments generally have demonstrated a willingness to bear many of these costs, they are understandably reluctant to pay, as a price for giving asylum, the cost of additional infrastructure that may be needed to accommodate refugees. 3. A World Bank-sponsored study of uncompensated public expenditures arising from the refugee presence in Malawi recommended an emergency assistance programme in 1990-91 of up to $ 25 million. According to a systematic analysis of public expenditures, this was the amount, after deduction of international aid provided through UNHCR, invested in refugee related government assistance and administration during the preceding two years. Other refugee hosting countries could cite comparable experiences. 4. The economic impact of refugees on host areas, however, is not necessarily negative. An economic stimulus may be generated by the presence of refugees and can lead to the opening and development of the host regions. This stimulus takes place, inter alia, through the local purchase of food, non-food items, shelter materials by agencies supplying relief items, disbursements made by aid workers, the assets brought by refugees themselves, as well as employment and income accrued to local population, directly or indirectly, through assistance projects for refugee areas. The presence of refugees also contributes to the creation of employment benefiting the local population, directly or indirectly. Moreover, relevant line departments involved in refugee work as counterparts to UNHCR, both at central and local levels, also benefit from UNHCR assistance aimed at strengthening their coping and management capacities. Such assistance may include equipment supply, capacity building and related training components. 5. The presence of refugees, as a focus of attention, can also attract development agencies to the host areas. While infrastructure is developed in the initial stage primarily to facilitate the work of host governments, UNHCR and its implementing partners in the refugee affected regions, it can also serve as a catalyst to ‘open up’ the host region to development efforts that would otherwise never reach these ‘marginal’ areas. If want to look up more of social and economic impact of refugees, please check up the website. Block for refugees' negative impact, contention for Pro of positive impact of economy UNHCR, January 6th, 1997 https://www.unhcr.org/excom/standcom/3ae68d0e10/social-economic-impact-large-refugee-populations-host-developing-countries.html
0
0
21

Thomas

More actions