system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: It is not immoral to refuse to help migrants/refugees (even if it is highly moral to do so)

(I am well aware of the fact that many of these migrants are economic migrants and not refugees, and that there is a blur distinguishing migrants and refugees, and that there are other complications regarding whether or not these people are refugees -- but for the sake of this CMV, let's suppose that everyone coming into Europe is a refugee and not an economic migrant. This post is about morality and not the specifics of the European migrant crisis, so let's disregard the confusion between economic migrants and refugees, and suppose we are only discussing refugees here).

When talking about the migrant crisis, people like to say that we need to help these suffering people. Are these people suffering? Yes they are.

But in my opinion, it is not immoral to refuse to help migrants. Is it morally excellent to do so? Yes. But is it immoral to not do so, to be selfish and say "I'm sorry, but I care about me and my children and my society more than I care about yours"? No.

Now when these migrants fill up schools, which, due to things like translators, resources spreading out and curriculum needing to be dumbed down to accommodated these undereducated children, when they fill up welfare, when they fill up hospitals, prisons etc. -- that has a big cost to society. Adult taxpayers are being taxed more, and the children in the schools suffer a loss in quality of education. And some people (I'm no traditionalist so this doesn't affect me) may be peeved, and rightfully so, by the risks this puts on culture.

So in my opinion, people have every right to say "Sorry, but I care more about my own children, then I do about yours". They have the right to say "This is my hard-earned money, and I'd rather keep it in my society than accommodate yours."

Again, I acknowledge moral excellence (though I think it's empathetic to a fault) to help the refugees -- but I reject the notion that it is immoral at all to not help them.

So that is my view. **It is not immoral, and not something that should be shamed, to be selfish and refuse to help refugees at you and your children's own expense.**

**EDIT**: To append, I am not saying that we shouldn't help reconstruct Syria and Iraq (but given the results of the War on Terror, we'll need to change tactics to do so). We can help the migrants abroad, we can help fund the camps in Turkey, etc.; the concerns I've outlined here about the much more serious consequences we endure by bringing them into our own countries.
gpt
The primary issue is that the reason the problem exists in the first place is due in large part to western policy and intervention in their home. Going back at least to WWI with the Sykes Picot agreement which put the nail in the coffin of the Ottoman Empire and cut up the empire  into somewhat arbitrary colonies under the control of the allies that are now the unstable nations we know and love today.

These policies extend to today. Largely at the hands of the U.S. But the UK and France certainly aren't innocent in this. 

If you burn down your neighbor's house, it is immoral to tell them to pound sand when they need help afterwards because it's not your problem. 

This doesn't necessarily apply to all nations taking in immigrants. Though most EU nations can't really claim to not have benefitted from those policies. 

That doesn't necessarily mean open borders all day. Realistically we should be looking to implement something like a Nansen passport.