Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore

msf.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 198 posts

Re: Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore

#101

Post by ThomPete »

timtammittee wrote: post #81
jkot wrote: post #19

It is very inefficient to bring people to Germany and other western countries in order to help them. We could help one person in Germany, or another 10 people in Turkey for the same money. Most people coming to Europe are economic migrantw, not from countries affected by war. Refugees who can not afford $4000 for transport are left without help. It all started when Turkey asked for humanitarian aid. Merkel would not…

> Most people coming to Europe are economic migrantw, not from countries affected by war. Where do you get this information. If you talk about asylum seekers (The majority of the current inbound traffic), you can look up the numbers yourself they are published as datasets by the UNHCR [1] Looking at the top 5 origin states of asylum seekers for 2015 and 2016 reveals: Syrian Arab Rep. 30.5% Afghanistan 18.1% Iraq 11.9…

It's not that simple.

Fleeing to a nearby country is one thing.

Being able to move all the way to Germany, Denmark or Sweden isn't exactly being fleeing war anymore.

The irony is that it's those with most money who can afford to move the furthest away from the refugee camps and many of those who do are men, leaving their family behind hoping to be able to get them to the country they end up in.

https://www.rt.com/news/330284-economic-migrants-eu-refugees...

Re: Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore

#102

Post by DominikR »

What is constantly ignored by the media is the fact that most people coming to the EU illegally at the moment are not refugees but migrants that come because their countries economy is in bad shape.

For example in Austria only about 20% of refugees are given asylum status, the others are simply found to be illegal immigrants.

Though I can understand the motivation for these people to come we can't take in everyone from Africa or the Middle East that would like to come.

On top of that their cultural values are incompatible with ours and this leads to major issues between immigrants and the local population.

That's why I really don't care for this kind of activism by Doctors without Borders. We have borders and laws that should be enforced, our politicians can't just ignore our laws because they personally don't like them or have a different view.

EDIT: Sorry I can't reply to thesimon below in a comment, that's why I'll put my reply in here:

See my comment regarding Germany: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11928358

This data again doesn't reflect the situation. It says that we had 20.000 submitted asylum requests in 2015, even though we had 90.000 registered refugees (who didn't formally seek asylum)

Everyone is free to guess why the other 70.000 did not submit an asylum request.

Re: Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore

#103

Post by Robin_Message »

zrhtz wrote: post #95
k-mcgrady wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> "We make something good for our children and we -have- to share it with the whole world in our house?" You mean you got lucky to be born somewhere that isn't currently at war and now you feel entitled to what you were born into?

My old neighbor died some time ago. He was bedridden for several years and his wife dedicated all her time and money to provide care at home. When she had to get him to the hospital for a routine checkup, she had to call an ambulance because there was no other way to get him there. The ambulance drivers couldn't guarantee her that she wouldn't have to pay the bills for his transport. Two people who paid taxes their w…

The fact that an apparently civilised country can't work out how to provide free ambulances is completely orthogonal from whether or not we should meet our international obligations to care for and protect refugees.

Re: Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore

#104

Post by nxzero »

caoilte wrote: post #86
nxzero wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Say you are a non-profit that helps drug addicts, should you take money from drug dealers?

I think he's saying that, "Yes, you should use that money and you should use it to hire Chuck Norris."

And I'm saying that's a horrible childish responses to a situation like this.

Re: Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore

#106

Post by icebraining »

ekianjo wrote: post #15
dalke wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, of which the EU countries are signatory, gives special status to refugees. This status is not the same as simply "admitting foreign citizens." For example: > The Convention further stipulates that, subject to specific exceptions, refugees should not be penalized for their illegal entry or stay. This recognizes tha…

Why don't the countries responsible for the refugee situation take care of the consequences instead? Like, who has been destabilizing the Middle-East for like dozens of years now ?

But the British are part of the EU as well...

Re: Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore

#107

Post by madaxe_again »

They're not called refugees over here - they're "migrants". The press and our governments insist that most of them are economic migrants, here to make a quick buck, take your job, claim your benefits, rape your wife and daughter. The rest are apparently IS fighters.

In the uk we now have people so filled with hate and fear of immigration that they're murdering politicians. Many will argue that this isn't the case, mostly those who believe the above paragraph - I don't know but "death to traitors, freedom for Britain" when shooting an mp who is pro migrant rights probably means something.

If there's a future to look back from, this period will be looked upon with shame.

Or more likely just written out of history, and anyone who talks about it is called a revisionist or terror apologist.

Re: Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore

#108

Post by ThomPete »

hayao wrote: post #84

I'm fully in favour of MSF's stance, asylum seekers must have their rights recognised. These people are fleeing war and, adding to be forced to remain in overcrowded camps in dire conditions, they're even deprived of legal representation. It's a country's duty to receive refugees, according to the 1951 Refugee Convention and to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights[1]. EU's action gives the precedence for other s…

It's not that simple.

Fleeing to a nearby country is one thing.

Being able to move all the way to Germany, Denmark or Sweden isn't exactly being fleeing war anymore.

The irony is that it's those with most money who can afford to move the furthest away from the refugee camps and many of those who do are men, leaving their family behind hoping to be able to get them to the country they end up in

60% according to some are migrants not refugees.

The problem is that the outer borders doesn't work and so once you are inside it's very easy to move around as there have been practically no border control inside the EU.

This is changing now.

Re: Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore

#109

Post by megalodon »

timtammittee wrote: post #81
jkot wrote: post #19

It is very inefficient to bring people to Germany and other western countries in order to help them. We could help one person in Germany, or another 10 people in Turkey for the same money. Most people coming to Europe are economic migrantw, not from countries affected by war. Refugees who can not afford $4000 for transport are left without help. It all started when Turkey asked for humanitarian aid. Merkel would not…

> Most people coming to Europe are economic migrantw, not from countries affected by war. Where do you get this information. If you talk about asylum seekers (The majority of the current inbound traffic), you can look up the numbers yourself they are published as datasets by the UNHCR [1] Looking at the top 5 origin states of asylum seekers for 2015 and 2016 reveals: Syrian Arab Rep. 30.5% Afghanistan 18.1% Iraq 11.9…

Thank you for posting this. I am baffled at how some people just ignore reality and post (and believe in?) lies, even here on HN where most of us work with data.

It's amazing that fact checking and critical thinking is so low in this internet age where information is freely available for everyone.

Re: Doctors Without Borders doesn't take money from EU anymore

#110

Post by caoilte »

hacksonx wrote: post #79

South Africa has received a huge influx of refugees overs the years from Zimbabwe, Mozambique & Nigeria. Even though the "people" have protested this and asked for the foreigners to be deported (Legal/Illegal) the government has not done that to humans. How a 3rd (2nd?) world country is able to accommodate people of such numbers while 1st world countries in Europe complain is beyond me.

It might be because richer people can take more time out of their daily routine to complain, but I'm not actually sure it is fair to say that the situation in South Africa is stable. I've read about lots of lynchings, forced deportations and other difficulties for refugees, many of which are not officially recognised.

Syrians who make it to Western Europe and achieve refugee status can probably expect to be treated very well.

But there are also far fewer of them than South Africa has had to accommodate.

There are no easy comparisons.

Post reply on HN