>friend said: everyone who is desperate enough to take on the dangerous journey from a 3rd world country should be treated as a refugee, because we profit from their misery, by selling weapons to their opressors, buying their sweatshop products and dumping our garbage there.
Do we owe them for the comfort their hard work brought us, beyond the buying price?
Easy answer,
No.
So did your friend take on a dangerous journey himself or is he just making things up?
Did they make their country comfy themselves?
>>74354381
Tell your friend that it doesn't count as generosity when she's only giving away others' homes, possessions, safety, and cultural integrity.
Then smack her upside the head and say "That's for virtue signaling."
>>74354791
No, and she didn't pretend to. We were just talking about refugees and such.
>>74354844
My point is that their countries aren't comfy at all. But ours are. Because of the business relationships in place.
>>74354997
I like how you knew it was a she
>>74354997
forget generosity. is it just?
>>74355147
Absolutely not.
>>74354381
What products that I use are manufactured in Syria? Honest question.
>>74355147
Think about. Her appleal to emotions has you flustered after a lifetime of subliminal brainwashing
>>74354381
So if I sail across the dangerous Atlantic, on a dangerous raft, I should be able to just claim American citizenship and refuge? After all, thanks to your third world pets, my home town now looks like Nigeria and we have rape gangs here, as a white girl I'm frightened and often cannot go around my city centre without being sexually harassed by these gangs of unemployable apes that somehow think we owe them for having white skin and ancestors who weren't utter shit.
>>74355249
Latakia tobacco, possibly, if you're a pipe smoker.
Otherwise... rape?
it's the corrupt government that caused their misery, not you or your friend, why the fuck are you taking the blame for someone else's fault?
>>74355340
Rape = power + sexual assault. As a white girl, you can't be eaped because you have more invisible social power, even when outnumbered 6 to 1 in a no-go neighborhood.
>>74355203
is it just as it is? producing cheaply at the cost of working conditions in foreign countries?
>>74355340
I'd shoot you if you put one foot on American soil. The last time you redcoats showed up the White House burned down and you've waited too long for me to allow it to happen again.
2008? I'd have greeted you with open arms and provided a torch. Now I can't let you fuck up the White House before trump gets in.
>>74354381
Take the smartphone that I'm sure he owns and beat him in the head with it until he can explain why he is contributing to their "misery".
>>74354381
your friend, does she have tattoos and pink hair by any chance?
>>74355249
probably none. but syrians are generally considered actual refugees. my friend was talking about migrants and that refugee status should extend to those who fled from proverty/sweatshops/etc. but aren't actually persecuted.
>>74355274
i don't think it was appeal to emotion. but i was out of arguements. i have a feeling she's wrong, but that's not an arguement. if let's say the chinese had better working conditions, our lives would be more expensive. We profit from their misfortune. that is exploitation. should we not always stop exploitation?
>>74355723
>poverty/sweatshops
Really moving the bar aren't we? I mean, actual war refugees are one thing (they should still stay there) but some poor person isn't in the same moral category.
What about dudes who can't get gfs? They experience spiritual poverty so shouldn't they have the same immigration rights as some filthy Syrian?
>>74355495
this is an international issue, not a personal one. we don't plan on paying out workers from our own money.
and i find the idea with the refugee status dumb too.
but i'm thinking maybe a trade agreement between countries, or subsidies for products from ethically unproblematic companies or something, could adress the issue adequately.
>>74354381
What if the people coming from the third world country are fucking wealthy?
>>74355598
no. rather wallflower-ish...
Here's an idea, how about we stop off shoring jobs to these shitholes and they can go back to living in mud huts. You just cant win with these people.
>>74354381
Ask her what she's done about it?
Does she have a new smartphone a cheap shirt?
If yes, she's part of the problem?
We owe them jack the corporations own them everything.
>>74354733
FPBP
>>74354381
Why are you friends with a cuck like that?
>>74355062
>she didn't pretend to
Don't get your dick in a twist. The majority of all people want to be treated nicely, and they should be treated nicely.
But think with your head, not with your dickhead.
>>74356584
then probably not...
i can't really imagine a scenario, where they are both rich not persecuteted and are forced to work under inhuman conditions...
but if there is such a situation, they would probably qualify too.
>>74356065
They would exploit us, if they could and they do exploit us, when they can. But this opinion would have no effect of her.
According to her criteria, which does not work with the concept of a real refugee, Austria would have to accept at least 2 billion people. Something Austria cannot financially or logistically overcome. What is the limit? Who decides that? Who pays for that? Austria's treasure isn't infinite.
Another point to actually attack her moral high ground:
Those people who manage to reach Europe aren't the poorest and most exploited. They are rather wealthy compared to others. Why would you let them in, but ignore the masses of those poor souls unable to come here?
>>74354381
>we
I don't sell weapons. I don't condone selling weapons. I barely buy new clothes. Don't have a smart phone. Fuck your friend. Tell him those who get them here are just wanting to exploit the refugees and get even richer. He's just an useful idiot for big capital, thinking he's some enlightened god when he has blood on his hands.
If he wants to fix the situation he has to fix himself first and the conditions in that country. The population regrowth of the third world is very much larger than every possible amount of refugees we could ever take in.
Fuck him, fuck him up the ass.
>>74354381
Increase globalisation to fix the ills of globalisation?
>>74354381
>buying their sweatshop products
Sweatshop = job. I've sweat my ass off in many a job.
>dumping our garbage there
By sending us their immigrants, they are dumping their garbage here.
>>74355517
It's their government's job to protect their workers. It's our government's job to protect ours.
>>74356981
>According to her criteria, which does not work with the concept of a real refugee
well, the discussion was if the concept of a refugee should be changed...
>Another point to actually attack her moral high ground
I'm not trying to 'win', i want to find out if this makes sense...
>>74357148
modify globalisation to fix the ills of globalisation.
>>74354381
that is typical leftist anti-capitalist bullshit.
sadly is has been pushed so hard lately that it's become trendy to just say "well you know we only live so well because we exploit the third world etc." of course that is all lies, these countries profit from trade as we do. yes they are paid very little - but do you know why? because these are unskilled/low skilled workers - if we would not trade with them "as to not exploit them" (what the leftist want) they wouldn't have a job at all and probably starve. it is their job to organize themselves, form a functioning society and drive the corrupt governments out. then they could use the money to educate the next generations - these would become skilled workers, able to produce products that are much more complex and earn much more. that is what happend in europe during the 18-19 hundreds.
don't fall for leftist propaganda, we owe them nothing
t. econ student
>>74357425
It's a pathos appeal, so the framework for whether it "makes sense" is the framework of where the moral high ground is. You either accept her knee jerk emotional reasoning or you don't.
>>74354381
>need to open our borders for mass immigration from foreign countries because we sell them shit they want to buy and buy shit they want to sell.
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooook
>>74357411
it's their (and our) governments job to run the country. Including things like import policies, subsidies and all kinds of arrangements with other countries governments.
maybe this should include not supporting the violation of human rights outside your borders, if you have signed the declaration of human rights.
>>74357518
How would you be assured that this would not lead to mass migration and a worsening of conditions in both countries?
>>74357425
The argument is: We, not only as a nation, but also every citizen, benefit from their exploitation. Therefore we have to accept economic migrants.
Let's just assume that we would not produce in those countries and we would not buy natural ressources from that countries.
That would lead to an explosion in unemployment in those countries. Will their life be better without the work in sweat shops? They'll still be in a shit hole, only without income. They might even suffer more.
Plus: It wouldn't in any way solve the overpopulation in those countries.
My 2 points from my previous post >>74356981
are still there.
Is there a limit? How do you pay for and organize this mass immigration. There is a finite number of jobs in Austria and they don't increase automatically as much as the migrants come.
If the argument is that we exploit them and profit from their misery, wouldn't it make more sense to invite the most exploited and not the one's who can afford to come here?
>>74357658
no. need to open our borders to people to whom certain criteria apply. like refugees. which is why the discussion started with "should we change the definition of refugee"
>>74358211
>should we change the definition of refugee
No
>>74358015
i'm not to keen on granting refuge to them either. my idea was more of a change of trade policies. but the details don't matter. Are we morally obligated to help?
>>74357885
>the declaration of human rights
You mean the Declaration That Everyone Is Cucked Except Muslim Countries?
>>74358211
No because refugee status is specifically for people fleeing from danger.
If you broaden the definition you will make it much harder for genuine refugees to find refuge as countries capable of taking them will be inundated with economic migrants
>>74358330
http://dfat.gov.au/aid/Pages/australias-aid-program.aspx
>>74358211
>need to open our borders to people to whom certain criteria apply. like refugees. which is why the discussion started with "should we change the definition of refugee"
When you change the definition of "refugee" like that then it stops meaning anything and neither does them being allowed into our country.
None of the "people" that came to us these last years are refugees according to the laws we signed. None of them need to be accepted by us and even IF they need be, then my objection would be with those laws first and foremost.
>>74358629
>No because refugee status is specifically for people fleeing from danger.
If you broaden the definition you will make it much harder for genuine refugees to find refuge as countries capable of taking them will be inundated with economic migrants
good point
>>74358736
>If you broaden the definition you will make it much harder for genuine refugees to find refuge as countries capable of taking them will be inundated with economic migrants
Tough shit for them.
>>74354381
>by selling their 'oppressors' guns
So is it the government that is doing that or is it the citizens that have to bear the burden of these Muslim cunts? Fuck off.
>>74354381
No. If these outsourced jobs never came our way, a lot of people would still be jobless.
>>74354381
people are worth only what they bring to your country.
desperate people are slightly more valuable but not enough to be worth accepting on that alone. they might just be reckless criminals.
>>74358330
>change in trade policy
Maybe, but it's not like they just export sweatshop shit, places like China have a domestic market too you know
Also, is it Europe's Duty to provide every desperate person in the world with a happy live? Or just the ones we somehow screwed? Am I owed by India because a flood destroyed my house because of global warming?
Do these stupid cunts think we've always been a developed country? If you keep kicking the legs out from beneath a developing industry then the whole country will just be stuck in sweatshop conditions forever.
>>74354381
>everyone who is desperate enough to take on the dangerous journey from a 3rd world country should be treated as a refugee,
Yeah let's make it harder for the ones that are truly in need of the protection that the refugee status provides by eroding the definition so that people in less severe situations can fill the the room availibe.
>because we profit from their misery, by selling weapons to their opressors, buying their sweatshop products and dumping our garbage there.
Yeah, let's abolish capitalism, one of the surest way humanity has discovered to increase the prosperity of people. And while we're at it lets forced the poorest nations into ever bigger poverity by taking away the work opportunities that sweat shops provide. After all the reason people choose to work in the harsh enviroment of a sweat shop is because it's offer a significant increase in pay in comparison to other availible jobs.
Basically your friend is a moron.
