For the number of refugees that you feel should be allowed to come, how much of a tax increase are you willing to pay?

I know of a relatively small church in Rochester NY that sponsored a Somali family over 10 years ago. They had the best intentions. I think there were 2 adults and 4 kids to start but the number quickly grew as other family members showed up. Food, clothes, money were donated in addition to the public assistance offered. Their housing soon became an issue. The place was trashed and the landlord wanted them out. As a compromise, church members had to come regularly to clean up. People had to come every weekend to take care of the lawn and landscaping. One of the girls got pregnant. One of the boys got into trouble with the law – robbery. And so on….
Parishioners began to argue. People quit. It almost bled the church to death.
I do not know how it ended. I’m guessing my taxes now pay for them.

Just from what I heard it they thought it would cost $100,000 per year for a family of 4. When you add up all the expenses and time donated that number is very low.

There’s evidence that suggests that the overall economic impact of taking in these refugees is actually a net gain. Here’s a 2012 economic impact study from Cleveland that finds that following an initial expenditure of $4.8 million to get refugees settled into the area, the overall positive impact on the local economy was 10 times greater than that. From a strictly economic point of view, it’s important to consider that the Syrian refugees are largely middle class and professional.

I say this because the premise of your question is that this would be a “permanent” tax increase, and that’s not likely to be the case.

According to another user, who I trust is correct, the refugee must wait 150 days in order to work legally: http://www.fluther.com/185302/are-rufugees-considered-immigrants-in-the-country-they-seek-asylum/

In the meantime, housing, Medicaid, food, and other services will be necessary. Maybe in the future, there will be a gain. However, initially, there will be an outlay necessary.

@jca There would definitely be up-front expenses, but that doesn’t translate into a permanent tax burden.

20,000 are coming to the UK over the next few years. That is only about 0.03% of the population and I expect many of the refugees will pay taxes. No increase in taxation is required.

Good God you’re saying your parents pay $10,500 a year just because they own a home???
How can anyone afford that kind of tax burden??
What is their property worth, 2 million??
If that is the case how can anyone say the USA is the best place on earth?
Our total tax bill for our property is around $1,500 and our house is worth a bit over $300,000
right now I am even more glad to call myself a CANADIAN no offence .
There are other municipalities that have higher property taxes ,but NOTHING close to what you stated.
Now back to your question, I don’t think any tax hike should be put on the property owner because of the poor people coming in,screen them quickly and get them working.

@SQUEEKY2: It’s a very middle class home but it’s in a wealthy county. The school taxes are killer and the schools are not even good. People who live there usually either move before the child is school age, or they send the kids to private school.

I am getting the feeling from what I see we Canadians pay more in income tax than you Yankees, but you pay a far greater property tax than us Canucks.

We spent over 1.1 TRILLION (with a “T”) on the Iraq war. The US stock market lost about 1.4 TRILLION dollars after the September 11th attacks.

I think helping out some desperate people, showing humanity and compassion and overall being decent fucking human beings (especially because we are a major part of why they are in such a bad spot) is the right approach and worth every penny. It could save us trillions of dollars if we can prevent future wars/attacks. If you can show these people kindness and compassion you’ll have fewer people being recruited by extremist groups. You don’t solve this problem via an “us vs. them” approach—that’s EXACTLY what the terrorists want us to do.

GREAT answer @gorillapaws totally agree.

@gorillapaws: I was not saying it’s not worth every penny. I was asking a question about how much people might be willing to pay when it comes down to “out of their pockets, dollars and cents.”

@SQUEEKY2 NY property taxes are terrible. I pay just shy of $8000 per year and certainly don’t live in a mansion. Ranch house built in 1957. No natural gas, no sidewalks, no street lights, no sewers. We finally got municipal water in 2013. Up until then we all had our own wells.

@thorninmud Something about those numbers doesn’t make sense to me. When I look at the Somali experience I mentioned above, try as I might, so far, I can’t see a positive economic impact. It was a disaster. Fortunately the church folks bore the brunt of it. A perfect example of “No good deed goes unpunished.”

@LuckyGuy: To piggy back onto what you just wrote, directed at @thorninmud, even if someone is a professional and can make a great living eventually, in the beginning, they’re going to need all the things I listed above (Medicaid, housing, food stamps). There’s going to be an outlay of finances to cover that. If a mother comes with a bunch of kids in tow, even if she is a professional, it’s going to take her a few years to assimilate, learn the language, and be able to pay for the kids and the housing they’re going to require (multi-bedroom unit rental, etc.).

So what’s the answer @jca ?
Don’t let them in ,and as @gorillapaws said then the terrorists win?
I know make the corporations pay for it with a tax on them,instead of joe blow tax payer.

@SQUEEKY2: I don’t know what the individual is willing to pay, @SQUEEKY2 . That’s why I ask. What one person may be willing to pay may be different then what another person is willing to pay. So far, nobody on this thread has stated they are willing to pay anything.

@jca Several of us have mentioned that it would be a savings, not an expense. Also we don’t pay for stuff with taxes, we borrow to pay for stuff (like the previously mentioned war in Iraq).

@gorillapaws: I work for the government and my salary is paid for by tax dollars. The office supplies that we use, tax dollars. The building we work in, tax dollars.

@jca and @LuckyGuy It would be an oversimplification to say that taking in refugees is a guaranteed economic boon. There are many variables to consider, such as distributing the populations so that their concentrations don’t overwhelm the ability of local economies to assimilate them. The level of education of the refugees is a very important variable (and varies widely according to country of origin). Studies also indicate that most of the economic gains (in terms of increased tax revenue) accrue to the federal government, less to local government. And, as stated before, the up-front costs will take time to amortize.

I think people fail to consider being a refugee does not automatically mean they are destitute and don’t have resources of their own to fall back on. Whether it is life’s savings, family or relatives they may know here. And the vetting process they have to go through pretty much has them set up to immediately integrate into the communities that move to and why there is a fairly strict limit on the number or refugees we or most other countries will allow.

@SQUEEKY2 Property tax depends on the state. Oklahoma has no property tax, and they have the roads to prove it.

@Dutchess_III Roads in both our countries are supposed to be built and maintained via the fuel tax we all pay.

I refuse to put a monetary amount on a life. Sick.

@tinyfaery In reality we are not saving a life…they have already done that for themselves by fleeing the turmoil they faced in their country. We are tasked with providing in most cases temporary safe haven until they are able to return safely to their homeland.

Taking in refugees is far from a benevolent “we are here to save their lives” obigation and to think so is to clearly misunderstand the refugee option many in war torn countries attempt to exercise. I might suggest you do a little more homework on this issue before you make any more comments like you just did.

“U.S. government data shows that just under 2,200 Syrian refugees have been admitted into the United States since the civil war broke out in March of 2011, and the vast majority of those were in the last year.”

We spent more in the last year on putting bullets in unarmed black males.

Seriously, Ferguson cost way more than 2,200 or 20K refugees ever will.

If all West-ward leaning people are evacuated from these regions, what are the Western nations left with there?

Whatever it costs, I’m willing to pay it.

I did not know that, @SQUEEKY2. Well, then there is no excuse for Oklahoma’s shitty roads.

Where I am in Illinois, I would pay about $10,000 annual tax on a $400,000 house, @SQUEEKY2.

And keep in mind that is rural, miles from any city or city services.

Ultimately the regions these people are fleeing need to be stabilized, and the world needs for the current refugees to return. Relatively liberal, wealthy citizens willing to work with the West.

The way I understand it, the attack in Paris was formed and planned in the Belgian, Muslim ghetto of Molenbeek.
“Molenbeek is a neighborhood of nearly 100,000 people in Brussels, northwest of the city center, which has had a large Muslim population for many years. There are 22 known mosques in the district. Molenbeek shares some characteristics with the banlieues in French—densely populated, large immigrant populations, very high unemployment, complaints of inadequate government services, isolation from the central city and corridors of power.”
Source
Belgium took in many refugees 50 years ago, then allowed another influx 15–20 years later.

Germany may be taking on so many refugees that it risks creating a breeding ground for terrorists 50 years from now if it can’t assimilate then quickly and comfortably.

That is a ridiculous argument, @ibstubro. They’ll all be Germans in 50 years, and no more of a terrorist than any other German.
If the argument was valid we’d have Khmer Rouge warriors running around now, from the Vietnamese refugees we brought in by the hundreds of thousands in the mid 70’s.

The man who conceived, planned and helped execute the terror attacks in Paris was a native born Belgian, @Dutchess_III. So, by definition, I think you’d have to classify him as more of a terrorist than nearly all other Belgians.

My link works, if you care to inform yourself.

I guess I didn’t realize that the Khmer Rouge warriors were currently forcibly occupying huge swaths of land in the name of jihad.

According to the NY Times last week (before the Paris attacks),Germany will be taking in so many refugees that it will change the culture of the host country, permanently. In other words, it will no longer be a German culture, it will be an Islamic culture.

The reasons Belgium is a breeding ground for Muslim extremists should put the EU off the quota system entirely, and give Germany pause, IMO.

We’re not talking about an upstart political ideal, but 2,000yo religions.

Lebanon wants help.

This country was built by the energy of immigrants. Immigrants, including refugees, come here because they want a safe place to live and earn a living. As @thorninmud said, immigrants are net tax contributors over their lifespans. They may need help in the beginning, but that help is a fantastic investment for the future.

Think of this. Immigrants without proper papers pay taxes and get no benefits from entitlements. They are afraid to. They don’t want to be deported.

And think of this, too—this country is hemorhaging workers. It is also aging at a fantastic rate. Soon all the baby boomers will be in their seventies and eighties and they’ll need lots of home care and so on, and if we don’t let a lot of immigrants in, there won’t be anyone to do this work.

Immigrant bashing is popular these days, because of terrorism, but it is misguided. We need to throw open our borders, not build walls. Anyone who is a demographer can tell you that without immigration, our population would be decreasing very quickly, like Japan’s population. And Russia’s. And much of Europe’s. Depopulation is more of a problem than increased population. Remember demographic trends are much worse than supertankers in turning ratio. You have to plan a century into the future. We are already heading into a huge problem, and only immigration will be able to save us.