Leaders and governments around the world have labelled refugees as being a burden on their country either directly or indirectly. These leaders only see them as people who are trying to get into their country to escape the civil war, but fail to see that the refugees are also risking their lives in the process. At present, there are approximately 54.5 million refugees that are displaced, the largest refugee crisis the world has ever seen and they have nowhere to go. The question of doing the right thing and taking them in has been squashed due to various reasons and it appears to be that each country has adopted the ‘each man for himself’ policy by stating that it is their duty to only look after its citizens and no one else.
As many state that refugees are a burden, there is a very good reason to believe that these refugees will contribute more to the world economically than they will yield from it. Countries are refraining from taking in these people because they feel it will ruin their economy, destabilize their society, degrade the
…show more content…
Refugees don’t choose to lead this life but instead are forced to. And as stated above, there is a silver lining to accepting refugees. The least anybody can do is to show them love and kindness and help them build better lives for themselves in contrast to turning a blind eye and pretending that everything will eventually go back to normal. As it appears to be, the situation does not seem likely to decrease in the foreseeable future, and this short-term thinking of various impacts it may have on the country may lead to bigger and longer-term problems for the local economy. Keeping refugees outside the borders of the country appears to be more expensive in the long run than taking them in and thus intensifies the tab for taxpayers. In this procress, critics suggest “many countries are creating their own refugee