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

141–150 of 198 posts

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

#141

Post by dalke »

hewhowhineth wrote: post #134
jlg23 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Most people coming to Europe are economic migrantw [sic] Source for that statement? > The reasonable thing to do would've been to differentiate refugees from others This is exactly what we are doing, but this requires actual checks, not just a look at a person's face.

According to first vice-president of the European Commission, citing some internal report from the Frontex (EU border agency), 60% are economic migrants. https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/most-fleeing-to...

It's been 6 months. Have these "new, unpublished, figures" since been published, or otherwise shown to be correct?

In that news article, Timmermans also argued that border closures are not the right solution.

Edit: If https://euobserver.com/migration/132048 is correct, then the 40% refers to the people specifically from Syria. Most of the remaining 60% are from Iraq or Afghanistan. As that link says:

> almost 90 percent the people who arrived by sea in the EU in December came from countries gripped by war or emerged from a wider regional conflict.

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

#142

Post by GunboatDiplomat »

nxzero wrote: post #39
toyg wrote: post #34

Uh, regardless of your stance on the specific topic (refugee handling), isn't this simply a tactical mistake? Let's say the EU is your enemy. They offer you money. Is it tactically smarter to flatly refuse the money (you are poorer, your enemy is marginally richer, nothing has changed) or rather to accept the money and then use it to fight the donor (you are richer, your enemy is marginally poorer and you are effecti…

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

Why not? Often, addiction centers get money from health insurers, who are in effect dealers in opioids, etc.

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

#143

Post by GunboatDiplomat »

daleharvey wrote: post #64
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…

You are probably right, people are dying in their thousands to cross the med because they want some more cash ...

You say that like money is not a motivator powerful enough for people to risk their life.

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

#144

Post by madaxe_again »

hewhowhineth wrote: post #119
timtammittee wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

"More than half of those fleeing to Europe from the Middle East and Africa are economic migrants and not asylum seekers fleeing the horrors of war in Iraq or Syria, according to first vice-president of the European Commission, Frans Timmermans. Quoting what he said were new, unpublished, figures from the EU border agency, Frontex, Mr Timmermans said: “More than half of the people now coming to Europe come from countr…

Yes, but do consider that "economic reasons" can include "militias keep burning my crops, it is too unstable to make a living".

You can draw the line wherever you like, just remember that one day someone may draw a line that affects you, and you may not like it.

Me, I'm some kind of idiot that believes in being good to your fellow man.

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

#145

Post by barry-cotter »

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.

Yeah, given a choice between liberal values and democracy always pick liberal values. We know what's best, not the plebeians.

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

#146

Post by dalke »

sorenjan wrote: post #132
dalke wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Being able to move all the way to Germany, Denmark or Sweden isn't exactly being fleeing war anymore." That is because of how international travel works. Many of those people would love to hop on a plane, land in country X, and request refugee status. But the flight system is set up to prevent that. Only those with a visa (or visa waiver) are allowed on the plane. It used to be that refugees could travel by passenge…

> "Being able to move all the way to Germany, Denmark or Sweden isn't exactly being fleeing war anymore." > That is because of how international travel works. Refugees fleeing from war are forced to travel through the entire European continent to the northern countries with the most beneficial social security because of how international travel works? > "60% according to some are migrants not refugees." > Do you have…

That's one person, who in January referenced an internal report. Has that report since been published? Was he correct in that statement?

That one report has been repeated many times, but repetition isn't verification.

If I read https://euobserver.com/migration/132048 correctly, the 40% number refers specifically Syrian refugees. Quoting from it:

> Iraqis and Afghans, it says, each represent around 24 percent of the mix, or just under 50 percent together.

> In other words, almost 90 percent the people who arrived by sea in the EU in December came from countries gripped by war or emerged from a wider regional conflict.

As to your other comment, when people flee they want to move some place where they have a future. Few want a future living in a refugee camp. Few want a future living as if they are second-class citizens and subject to xenophobia.

I'm sure many would choose to go to the US even though the US does not offer "the most beneficial social security". Many have gone to Brazil.

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

#147

Post by GunboatDiplomat »

dalke wrote: post #24
manmal wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read that most refugees pouring into the EU are there for economical reasons, and states argue that as such they don't have to admit them. Cannot find that article right now.

"Many" as in absolute values like "more than 1,000"? I can believe that. Or "many" as in relative values like "more than 30%"? I have difficulties believing that. If so, it's amazing how coincidental the timing is between the start of the ongoing civil war in Syria and the start of the refugee crisis. It's also amazing how the UN "has identified 13.5 million Syrians requiring humanitarian assistance, of which 6.6 mil…

Those number seem unbelievably high, given there are less than 18 million Syrians total.

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

#148

Post by k-mcgrady »

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…

We don't have to pay for ambulance services in the UK. Charging for that is insane. That's the part that isn't fair in your scenario.

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

#149

Post by madaxe_again »

dzaragozar wrote: post #46

Why is the EU the only responsible for refugees? Why not other states? Why not Russia, the Gulf states, Japan or the United States? It is getting tiring the bashing against the EU. The EU is getting refugees at the rate it deems convenient, if some other state is worried about the situation in Syria please take refugees, but please stop labeling the EU as evil.

If you've ever been to Russia you will understand why people do not want to seek asylum there - they are as likely to be persecuted there as wherever they're coming from. Russians aren't terribly welcoming to non-Slavic peoples, and don't exactly have a wonderful human rights record, with the pogroms and the kulaks and all that.

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

#150

Post by GunboatDiplomat »

forgotpwtomain wrote: post #4
golergka wrote: post #2

> sending a message that caring for people forced from their homes is optional So, they're implying that it's mandatory? How come? Admitting foreign citizens, spending resources on them sounds like a definition of charity — how charity can not be optional?

How about Europe taking responsibility for their interventionist policies in the Middle East and their support for the US military agenda in the Middle East which created most of these problems in the first place?

How about you accept that people in the Middle East have their own agency, and are not merely pawns for other countries on a giant chess board?
Post reply on HN