An open letter to George Soros about his advice for solving the ‘refugee crisis’

It wasn’t until “philanthropist” George Soros came out the other day with his economic plan for resettling the Middle Eastern migrants and refugees in Europe that the other shoe dropped. The other shoe is the one that goes down last in the old one-two tap dance scam – so beloved of shake-down merchants and assorted dissolute dissemblers worldwide. Some call it problem-reaction-solution: you create a problem and then stand back while everyone gets themselves into such an emotional frenzy about it that they are no longer capable of rational thought, and then you calmly come up with your solution  – one which just so happens to benefit your bank account.

(The first shoe was described in an earlier article, How The Refugee Crisis Was Rigged from Start to Finish. In this one, I’m dealing with the ‘why’).

The trouble with George

You may have heard of the multi-billionaire George Soros, because wherever there’s a crisis on the world stage, you’ll find his organisations right there at the heart of it.  Take the “Arab Spring”, for example, the aftermath of which is now fetching up on our shores or coming through the Channel Tunnel. That was one of George’s productions.  So was the “Colour Revolution”  in which the democratically-elected Ukrainian government was overturned by huge ‘flash mobs’ bussed in to Kiev by George’s organisations, which also dressed up snipers in Russian uniforms to shoot from the roofs into the crowds.

Through his organisation MoveOn,  George is currently trying to start a similar style “Democracy Spring” in the US, in which he just catapults ‘activists’ – mainly out-of-work actors and students too young to know any better – at the fort or castle that he wishes to destroy, in this case, the Donald Trump campaign.

Then there’s the Ebola crisis – George was right at the heart of that one too, in Sierra Leone, where he just happened to have a laboratory in which they were researching the Ebola virus. See how this works now?

Actually, the Ebola virus provides us with a highly pertinent metaphor for another of George’s pet projects, that of open borders. The Ebola virus destroys the walls of the cells in the human being, so that the insides of the body turn to mush. If you scale that up to countries with their national borders, then you begin to see what sort of a human battering ram that the refugee crisis has given George, to help him create open borders and one world government.

So anyway, back to George’s “solution” to settle the Syrian refugees – which would cost Europe €30 billion (US $34 billion) a year. Yes, per year! He had to wait until everyone in Europe was satisfied that they hadn’t the first clue about what to do apart from close their national borders, thus leaving Greece, who they don’t like anyway, to sort out the problem. Mrs Merkel did make a great show of going to meet that nice Mr Erdogan in Turkey, to see if something could be done to help the Greeks. If she had read her history, she’d have known that the instances of Turkey helping out Greece are not exactly thick on the ground. This time proved to be no exception, and she came back to Germany with a ‘deal’ that even the Mad Hatter’s Tea Party would have thrown out as unworkable.

(It goes something like this: for every migrant or refugee which Greece returns to Turkey, Turkey will send one Syrian refugee back to be settled in Europe. Plus Turkey gets €9 billion straight up, no questions asked! Plus all of Turkey’s 77 million Muslim citizens get free access to all EU countries. What? Run that past me again …!)

So after everyone had fallen on the floor laughing and then managed to pick themselves up again, George stepped forward with his ‘surge funding’ solution, which, he suggests, the citizens of Europe would pay off through massively hiked-up VAT into all eternity, and beyond that.

The real economics of the ‘refugee crisis’

Dear George, I hope you’re reading this because I’m about to give you some real economics* on this subject. Yes, I know you’d rather I didn’t bother my pretty little head with such boring figures and confined my efforts to knitting socks for the babies in the snow. But Stefan Molyneux has provided some very simple and brightly coloured bar charts that even the most numerically-challenged can understand.

These bar charts boil down to one key takeway message  – and that is, it costs more than 12 times as much to settle a migrant or refugee in Europe or America than if we paid for their resettlement and housing in Jordan, Turkey or Lebanon, or in any other Middle Eastern land, where they would also have the added advantages of being among their own peoples who share the same nationality and similar languages, customs, culture, climate and religion.

The figures here are in dollars, but they would be very much the same, give or take, when translated into Euros or UK Pounds, where we also have a similar welfare safety net.

stefan 2.png

So it costs US $ 12,874 to settle one Syrian refugee in the US or European country compared to just US $ 1,507 to resettle them in their own lands in the Middle East.

But US $ 12,874 is just the beginning.

As Stefan says:

“The teaching of English in public schools, the cost of social workers, the many means tested programs such as the Earned Income Tax Credit Head Start, the Additional Child Tax Credit and the usual government services like infrastructure maintenance and law enforcement are not included [in the US $12,874].”

In other words, these figures show that with what it would cost us to settle one refugee in Europe or America – George’s favourite option – the same amount of money could pay for 12 refugees to be settled closer to their own homes.

This chart shows that over five years, 10,000 migrants or refugees will cost the US taxpayer  $ 643.7 million compared to only $ 52.9 million that it would cost to settle them closer to home, in a Middle Eastern country.

Stefan 7

The reasons for such a disparity in the costs of resettlement are two-fold:

  1. The cost of living, and therefore all goods, is much lower in the Middle East.
  2. Contrary to the propaganda, a huge proportion of migrants or refugees – many of whom are barely literate in their own languages and because of inbreeding, tend to have lower IQs –  cannot make it in the Western job market and so end up almost permanently on welfare or social security.

So that’s the gist of my argument, George, if you’re still reading. But there are some other interesting stats too, which show how quickly the existing welfare systems in our countries would collapse under the waves of the proposed tsunami of mass immigration. (Now didn’t I read something about that being a form of economic warfare, something about Cloward-Piven …? Nah, I must have just imagined it).

tsunami refugees

Migrants and welfare

The following three graphs speak for themselves to show that, compared to people already living in the States (Native), the refugee or migrant is much more likely to rely on welfare support.

stefan 5

stefan 6

stefan 3

Now  George,  I know this economic rationale is not much help if your real aim is to collapse our welfare system while establishing sleeper cells of jihadis in order to terrorise us into opening up our borders, to bring in one world government, with the added plus of having all our descendants in hock to you for all eternity.  But that’s not what you’re about, is it? Is it?

So how about we settle the refugees closer to their home countries? It will only cost us a fraction of what it would in Europe and America, and so we could help many many more of them, with the added plus that the refugees themselves would feel much happier and more settled in their own part of the world!

Isn’t that what someone who really cared about the refugees would do?

The statistics came from Stefan Molyneux’s excellent video The Truth About the Syrian Refugee Crisis.