Austrian and Danish people may freely enter Germany under the Schengen Agreement.

If you are referring to refugees who enter through those two countries, you are ignoring that these countries are also not initial ports of entry into the Schengen Area.

But I generally refuse to follow that line of argumentation: Having the initial ports of entry bear the responsibility for all new refugees is only a fair thing when you are not one of them. Neither Greece nor Italy have the capacity and as long as we are playing hardball international politics in the countries refugees come from, we have to take responsibility for the results of our actions.

Ah - so the only countries that should be expected to take refugees should be those immediately sharing a border with them, right?

Of course not. But when you have "refugees" demanding to be allocated in a safe country and not another safe country then you can't help but question their status as a refugee (i.e. someone seeking safety).

http://news.sky.com/story/1557225/refugee-its-germany-or-not...

You say "refugees" but I only saw one such refugee mentioned in your link. I certainly didn't see enough to know if it was 0.1% of the refugees or 10% or some other number.

Now, suppose you are a refugee, a mechanical engineer fluent in Arabic and professionally competent in English.

Would you have a preference for a country like Sweden or Germany where you are more likely to get a job with your skills? Or would you equally accept being told to move to some other "safe country" where there is high unemployment, little demand for mechanical engineering jobs, and few English speakers?

How do you express that preference without your refugee status being questioned?