Cost-benefit of European mass migration: mostly just crime and billions spent on welfare

Ralph Schoellhammer

Source Link

We need to redefine the term terrorism. After 9/11 a common assertion was that, while terrorism certainly is tragic, the risk of dying in a car accident was still significantly higher than in a terrorist attack. Twenty-three years have passed since Al-Qaeda attacked the United States, and despite the threats made by the late Osama bin Laden and his followers, there has been no other attack of such dimensions. Yet somehow the sense of insecurity has not disappeared, and as it turned out violent terrorism is only a symptom of a much broader issue.

The comparison with traffic accidents was always frivolous. Accidents are by nature tragic because nobody involved wants them to happen. Even reckless drivers or careless car manufacturers do not intentionally plan to kill people, and if it happens, they do not celebrate it. Therefore, most people accept the risks of traffic as an acceptable trade-off compared with all the benefits that modern transportation entails. Although accidents involving cars could be brought down to zero via banning cars, nobody would seriously entertain such a measure. The conveniences brought by the automobile far exceed our fear of the risk that also comes with it.

In Europe, a growing number of people is now asking which conveniences have been achieved by mass-immigration from non-Western countries, and what are the countervailing benefits that justify the ever-growing risks that come with it. A cost-benefit analysis of the kind of migration Europe is experiencing at the moment reveals that it is almost all cost, with hardly any benefits.