Would you pay more taxes not to bomb refugees?


#1

Seriously! WTF?

And it’s going to cost ‘a couple of billion dollars’?

I mean, I know the government’s been generally pretty good with their cost estimates in such matters. . .

But why not just raise the bar really, really high? Why not give them some good land and let them set up their own government where they can learn a bit from our own mistakes. They should have the right to really get the sort of lives they want. It’s a good bit better than ‘having cruise missiles sent your way’, isn’t it? I know I’d like it more if somebody gave me the option.

With a billion dollars they could have. Enough space and infrastructure to set up eco-communes for . . maybe 200,000 families? Or space in some more arable third world country where they can farm well as well as benefits for the country that hosts them for maybe a million families? Ten million with hydroponics? And that’s not assuming economy of scale!

We should give them some options. They’re the most motivated people in the world and they’ve been through hell.

Is there a way to throw some numbers out there and get them to stick? I don’t know about you guys, but I’d spend a lot more money not to send cruise missiles to blow other peoples things up!

Seriously. holy shit! I’ve been swearing like a sailor in my head while typing this because. . .


#2

Life outside the box is annoying and lonely.


#3

We have Picard, that’s good, right?


#4

I can’t remember how good he was at thinking outside the box; I never did that much Trek


#5

This topic was automatically closed after 1267 days. New replies are no longer allowed.