For someone escaping a war torn country, finding a wall he cant surpass to escape death and destructive would surely be oppressive. He wants to do something that provokes no harm, and a state is telling him he can't. If you don't like that they represent a cost to the german state, you can take it up to the idea of welfare, and if you removed completely for the people that entered the country, they would still go to germany, because where they come from the situation is much worse.
The case for germany to still provide financial support is that is a huge long term benefit that is tax beneficial, especially for a country with demographic issues. My understanding is that there are reports that justify the tax investment.
> If we didn't, how many more people are we supposed to take in?
This is the point : you are not supposed to take in anyone, the state shouldnt decide whatsoever what individuals do with their lives. The state doesn't own these people and neither does it own you. If you dont want to provide foreigners with resources then don't. Foreigners cant vote for such measures even if they wanted them.
With free passage, you would not even know how many peope pass, and it would have a marginal cost to the state (and a much higher benefit!)
The case for germany to still provide financial support is that is a huge long term benefit that is tax beneficial, especially for a country with demographic issues. My understanding is that there are reports that justify the tax investment.
> If we didn't, how many more people are we supposed to take in?
This is the point : you are not supposed to take in anyone, the state shouldnt decide whatsoever what individuals do with their lives. The state doesn't own these people and neither does it own you. If you dont want to provide foreigners with resources then don't. Foreigners cant vote for such measures even if they wanted them.
With free passage, you would not even know how many peope pass, and it would have a marginal cost to the state (and a much higher benefit!)