However, majority of these people sought / are seeking asylum is, not claiming that they want to migrate for better quality of life. The people who would be granted asylum theoretically should be persons who would be in a grave danger in the country they came from (ranging from wrongful imprisonment for e.g. political opinion we would find perfectly justifiable, to torture and death for gender identity or sexual orientation). Some people were just "regular people" in Syria (not especially persecuted bloggers or minorities), but still rather want to escape rather than be maimed or killed in a brutal war where "good sides" are hard to find.

Now, the main point in the whole migrant / refugee crisis seems to be that many people who would be economic migrants are using the asylum system to try to enter certain EU countries, but there also this thing that the-would-be-legitimate asylum seekers are also are prone to have much better economic future if they are granted in asylum in country like Finland: differentiating between those is very difficult. This is why it's difficult mess.

edit. is, not isn't.