Comment by friedman23 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by friedman23 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

>Some of people's criticisms about refugees are totally valid.

What are the valid criticisms? I don't know of any.

>Unless a person is willing to integrate with their host country's society and accept their culture, you won't be welcomed in. I think that's a very reasonable bar to hold people to.

This argument is not convincing to me at all.

I've lived in California, New York, and Florida and if your requirement for refugees is to learn the culture of all these different places I would say it's impossible.

How does people coming to the United States, speaking a different language, eating different food, and holding different beliefs affect your life in any way?

>I haven't seen anyone seriously calling for an outright ban of all refugees, so that seems like a bit of a strawman.

I think this is dishonest. Many people are calling for an outright ban on refugees.

>Why aren't you criticizing all these other countries that barely take in refugees?

Because I'm not a citizen of other countries and I actually believe refugees and immigrants in general are good for this country.

As someone who came to the US as a refugee, the differences are far more nuanced than the food you eat or the language you speak. An insular community may legitimately feel threatened by the influx of outsiders. I've witnessed first-hand industries that have been rendered inaccessible to native-born folks through immigration (construction trades). I consider myself lucky to have had the chance to move across continents, but I also think that it's completely natural and rational to keep the door of your home shut to strangers.

>How does people coming to the United States, speaking a different language, eating different food, and holding different beliefs affect your life in any way?

Eventually it becomes South Miami where there are parts where workers don't speak English. Kind of sucks when you try to order from a butcher shop and have to point at the meat and then the grinder.

>>I haven't seen anyone seriously calling for an outright ban of all refugees, so that seems like a bit of a strawman.

>I think this is dishonest. Many people are calling for an outright ban on refugees.

Yea it's impossible to really argue this. Some do yes. Many just want increased vetting.

Language is all I really care about. I don't understand how you can mesh with a society at all if you can't even speak to them. Eat and do whatever the hell you want, at the very least know English though.

> Eventually it becomes South Miami where there are parts where workers don't speak English. Kind of sucks when you try to order from a butcher shop and have to point at the meat and then the grinder.

Yeah, that would be kinda annoying.

Leaving innocent people to die in a totalitarian hellhole ought to demand a slightly higher bar than "kinda annoying."

No. Immigration should be at the pleasure of and to the benefit of the host population. Every population should have the right to control who enters their land.

And we can't save them all, anyways. If everyone living in a totalitarian regime showed up in the US they would vastly outnumber the current Americans.

> Every population should have the right to control who enters their land.

Obviously nations have the right to do that. I don't think anyone has said otherwise. Saying "your right to not be tortured and killed by a tyrannical government is less important than my right to prompt convenience at the grocery store" is still a dick move.

Should the US rescue all of them? You seem eager to give away other people’s country.

> Should the US rescue all of them?

I never said that. See my reply to ApolloFortyNine.

> You seem eager to give away other people’s country.

It's my country too, thanks.

Just want to point out, again, that right now you are specifically arguing that convenience at the butcher's is more important than human life. Are you really making your point effectively and convincingly?

We're being realistic, you can't save everyone. There's billions of people who have a quality of life magnitudes below yours and mine. It's naive to think we can simply allow them all into our country without consequence.

In that case shouldn't the U.S allow in the vast majority of Africa?

Where do you draw the line? There's only 300 million people in the U.S. A quick search reveals that 780 million people don't have access to clean water. What do you do?

I don't know exactly where to draw the line, but we can start with not sending actual refugees back home to die.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com