Wealthy countries should accept more refugees and provide them with basic assistance, such as food and housing. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

It is commonly stated that richer nations ought to accept more asylum seekers and assist them with food and shelter, which are fundamental needs for humans.

This

essay strongly disagrees with

this

view because refugees often face difficulties with communication, which leads them to unemployment and countries should solve the problems of their own citizens

first

. A growing number of people hold the view that refugees often face language barriers as their main issue when arriving in a new

country

.

That is

to say, they are unable to communicate well with the locals and

consequently

, many of them struggle to find a job.

For example

, many Syrian refugees, who were granted their refugee visa in 2014 in Australia,

were

we are

we're

unable to find a job. To make matters worse, some of them opted to commit crimes,

such

as robberies and theft, in order to survive in the

country

. Clearly, bringing them to wealthy countries is not an ideal long-term solution for the

country

or the refugees. Another reason why

first

-world countries should reconsider helping refugees is that it is a common view even in Australia, Canada, or the UK, that homelessness is everywhere. It is argued that the government should assist their own people

first

before assisting other people from other countries.

For instance

, The Guardian reported that there are some Australian citizens who have been living in the streets for at least five years and they have never received any assistance from the state.

Thus

, I believe that it is important for a

country

to take care of its own citizens

first

. In conclusion,

this

essay has argued that developed nations should not take more refugees because they often have communication issues, resulting in unemployment, and there are local homeless people who should be prioritised

first

to receive assistance.