Editor: If you saw my weekly roundup on Sunday, here, you know I’ve been off at jury duty this week. It lasts for a month so if you read RRW daily, there will be some days I miss (and probably some great stories too!).
Besides the disparity in their financial status at the end of a year or two, I’m guessing the privately supported Syrians integrated better into the country as well.
For the latest on Canada and the mess they have on their hands (because they brought too many Syrians too fast), go here.
Someone working on a documentary contacted me a few days ago asking me to point him to a family that is being privately sponsored in the US. I don’t know of any because that isn’t something the US does often. However, we have told you before that a group of Libertarians and Open Borders activists and resettlement contractors have been talking about getting a private sponsorship system going here too (there was one previously).
I would consider private sponsorships if we drop the entire VOLAG contractor system and go fully private.
Unfortunately, see here, what the US Open Borders people want is a system like Canada where there are both types of resettlement—privately sponsored and government-supported. I see it as a way for them to increase the numbers entering the US. Perhaps they know that as taxpayers begin to wake up to the reality of what they are paying for in the present US VOLAG system and want it abolished, they are searching for other avenues to keep the flood of refugees coming.
Here is what the Taipei Times is reporting about Canada:
New refugees to Canada are more successful breaking into the job market when sponsored by private community groups rather than by the government, a finding that takes on added importance as the nation welcomes tens of thousands of Syrian migrants.
Refugees sponsored for a year by a community organization such as a church or a group of private individuals earned C$18,300 (US$13,934) in the 2014 tax year compared with C$13,300 for those who had government support, based on the median estimate of arrivals over the prior five years, according to Statistics Canada data.
[….]
The US has considered adopting Canada’s private sponsorship model, while supporting refugees through federally contracted resettlement agencies that help the newly arrived integrate in the local economy with an early financial boost and other assistance.
So, this is my question: If refugees that are privately sponsored do better than government-supported refugees, then why have any government-supported refugees?
I know why the Open Borders Left will scream bloody murder if Congress were to consider a system where all refugees entering the US would have to have private sponsors! Do you?