Comments by "Melvin Beck" (@melvinbeck5047) on "Poland, Hungary and Czech Republic face EU Migration rules and angry Ursula von der Leyen" video.

Take away the money streams. If they have a solidarity issue, we do too.
6
Because they are part of the EU and they signed up to the responsibilities accompanying EU membership. They also find it perfectly normal to receive vast amounts of money from the EU; so, why not open to burden sharing?
3
Then these countries should also be independent enough to not rely on EU funding.
2
@suprememonka8333 Those that are bereft of power get too much sympathy.
1
Márk Bányai I do not know about you, but did you read statistics on economics yet?
1
Márk Bányai What I mean: the average GDP per capita (PPP) of the EU-27 is ~ US$ 46,000, whereas that of Hungary is US$ 36,000. These figures are available online and even the datasets are available. I do have to say that the regional GDP is a far better indicator of how well a region is doing. I believe economic development happens in the region; not perse on a national level. Nevertheless, compared to the EU-27, income levels are still low in all Slavic countries. I do longitudinal analyses and lower levels of national GDP are almost always associated with economies in the east. A report from the OECD (2019) showed that a "decline of free movement of goods and labor in the EU" is one threat to Hungary. One stark finding was this: "the growth story in central Europe is substantially underpinned by EU funds and wage growth dynamics, which is not sustainable over the longer term".
1
Márk Bányai So, we can say that the economic growth in central Europe is confounded by the EU funds. You can correct for this in statistical analyses.
1
Márk Bányai So, a question: why do we have EU funds in the first place?
1
Márk Bányai You don't understand economics; none of what you said makes sense. Meanwhile, you there earn less, have shorter life expectancy and lower human development than we do here. Whatever you say; I really pay no heed to it: you do as we say or else no more money.
1
Márk Bányai Yes Mark, I do have to admit: you are feisty and bull-headed, but I have razor-sharp teeth haha. I like to talk about numbers and economics, but I feel less confident conversing about historical events and especially World War 1 and 2. I know that the British have a pastime for WW1-2 and wars in general; every time I discuss Germany, they have to squeeze in a reference to WW1-2. They never discuss the interbellum period: I do not get it: we moved on, and now we have a European Single Market and soon a European military, banking union, and universal system for tax harmonization. So, I feel quite happy about the post-WW1-2 European accomplishments. We indeed progressed and so, I like to talk about that, and I also like to talk about the historical attempts of Hungary to reform the economy.
1
Stan Watts Ok, Stan. You have a valid point there; why should we let in people that come from another country to settle in Europe? We agree that those that are fleeing war in the homeland should be able to find refuge somewhere else, where it is safe. Yet, we are witnessing masses of people plotted all over the place; displaced and roaming. This mass migration is happening in our backyard, and it enkindled those that seek a better life to tune-in to the traveling to Europe. The issue really is to decipher who is an economic immigrant and who is not: and most of the time, those that come from derelict places and seeking economic refuge, also had personal experience with some kind of conflict in the homeland. So, things quickly become rather complex. We enter a social trap: a situation in which a group of people acts to obtain short-term individual gains, which in the long run leads to a loss for the group as a whole. We should be very wary about the unraveling of this social situation and limit our solidarity to preserve ourselves. So, this is a real ethical discussion.
1
alan boardman Yes, I agree that we should espouse the principle of "selecting at the gate" and rethink our theories about nationality simultaneously. What is it that makes me Dutch and what is that makes you British? What is identity and why should it be defended?
1
@normanbutcher3495 Got it.
1
@05KAR I agree Oskar, refugees should not travel farther into Europe, and we should not oblige countries to feel responsible for the burden the refugee crisis is inflicting on one particular system. I also think that we should not be allocating refugees over countries: I understand all these concerns. However, it does not dismiss the issue that these refugees come to Europe and as Europeans, we should be solidary with other Europeans. We have a solidarity issue, and that is the worry I have: I do not recognize selfish behavior as a European trait. I know it is not a viable solution to scatter refugees all over Europe indiscriminately, and I know that not every country is getting an equal share of the highly productive Syrians for example, but you signed up to the EU and not only to benefit from it.
1
alan boardman For example, I am Dutch because I am from the Netherlands, but the Netherlands first came into existence in the 19th century, and arguably I from somewhere else when I look at my genetic make-up. Even though I have a very European heritage, it is not necessarily related to what we call the Netherlands today. Meanwhile, I enjoy my international job and my girlfriend who speaks another language.
1
alan boardman Can we choose an identity?
1
@orthodoxchristian127 Yes, that is a good point. I talked about solidarity and the refuge burden, but who in the EU decides on how we collectively appraise the burdens that accompany EU membership? I believe it are the normative beliefs emanating from the Dublin regulation for example, that are too strictly enshrined in pieces of legislation. Other than the right attached to refuge and the process of seeking it, I think it is important to evaluate whether or not a precedent exists for the stark interpretation of this piece of legislation. If we cannot discriminate between non-economic and economic migrants then we are left with legislation that is impractical. However, the issue remains: how to appraise the social crisis, and do we forgo help because we lack consensus on how to collectively respond to a proximate exodus?
1
@05KAR Ok. You and the Orthodox Christian did convince me that I ought rethink the principles encompassing refuge. However, why is it bad to be an economic migrant? The Dublin regulation only asserts that those fleeing conflict are granted asylum in the first safe country. No matter how you want to interpret this, If we choose to let go of the Dublin regulation altogether, because e.g. it has practical limitations then as a consequence we must now answer to the morality of economic refuge.
1