Amazon.com Widgets
  • Technically, I would say so.

    They're refugees. They've been forced to flee a country due to war and have very few possessions to call their own. It may seem harsh, but I think countries have a right to seize their possessions (on a temporary basis) to make sure they're not importing anything illegal or dangerous. I think once their assets have been checked and cleared, they should be given back.

  • Yes they do

    I think as part of the vetting process, countries do have a right to seize assets from incoming refugees. I don't think the assets should be seized permanently, but they should be seized until it is determined that the refugee is safe and not a terrorist. I think that is only fair to protect the citizens.

  • Countries need to help poor refugees, not rich ones!

    I believe the receiving country can audit the incoming refugee for ties with terrorist families or have several assets that they could help them get out of refugee-state without the help of government. The refugee status should not be abused by people who can afford to help themselves out of their situation.

  • Have them pay a percentage of their assets

    Having individual assets seized based on if they are more than a certain amount makes no sense. An individual or family's ability to pay to help support refugees depends on their total assets, not on the number of assets they have that cost more than $1000.

    Under these current rules a person could have millions of dollars in assets all split amongst things that individually amount to less than the cut-off amount and nothing is seized and they aren't required to pay anything. Whereas a family that has a priceless painting that happens to be appraised above the cut-off amount but precious little else has to part with the painting. One person is taxed nothing and the other is taxed 99% of their assets. That is illogical and unfair.

    Instead of seizing assets assets should be appraised and their net worth assessed, and then a certain tax should be applied, and the individual refugees should get to decide what to sell and what to keep in order to pay the tax.

    In addition costs related to caring for refugees could be reduced by allowing refugees to get jobs, and not only that making it easier for those who have professional capabilities to prove that and become certified, since then they will make higher incomes and be even more capable of paying things back. Maybe this way the entire costs could even be covered.

  • No I don't

    I think that is a very cruel thing to do. To take the little money they have while they've already lost everything is very cruel. Once they get on their feet and get jobs they should definitely be paying the countries they're staying in but don't take the little money they have now.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.