Subject:
|
Re: Views on asylum seekers?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 6 Sep 2001 18:16:01 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
477 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Ross Crawford writes:
>
> > > I wouldn't. At least not particularly. I suppose it would be reasonable to
> > > donate to some organization that helped them find work. The housing market
> > > could supply a place to live.
> >
> > And where do they get housed while they're waiting for a house to become
> > available / be built.
>
> First of all, there are tons of houses in the US that are going unused because
> they don't meet the stringent safety laws that we take for granted. But they
> are a 100% improvement over what these immigrants may be used to...and not
> really dangerous. Further, there are many parts of the US (and Australia)
> where living in tents is not a bizarre notion.
I just learned that Baltimore had a homesteading project whereby people could
buy derelict houses from the city for $1 with the understanding that they would
live in them and fix them up. I think that this would be a fantastic option for
the country to offer refugees who are willing to undertake the project. No dole
involved, and it serves the public interest by creating urban renewal.
james
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Views on asylum seekers?
|
| (...) First of all, there are tons of houses in the US that are going unused because they don't meet the stringent safety laws that we take for granted. But they are a 100% improvement over what these immigrants may be used to...and not really (...) (23 years ago, 5-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
19 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
