Why? Those people are _economic migrants_, we don't have a duty to welcome them (unlike, say refugees from Syria)
Some countries in the Middle East are already hosting as much as total EU is hosting and even more.
They just don’t complain as much as some of our politicians do to get voted.
Which is why they want to leave, but has nothing to do with the point that there are many other places for them to go.
> They just don’t complain as much as some of our politicians do to get voted.
Because they don't have redistributive social assistance systems based on assumptions about what proportion of the population are net recipients that accepting large amounts of indigent immigration would violate.
A poor and rural country can accept almost arbitrarily large numbers of refugees because they're also a labor force, so you give them jobs building housing and growing food and they support themselves.
That doesn't work in urbanized countries because there isn't any cheap land available and in a lot of places there is already an oversupply of unskilled labor, so in that environment they can't support their own weight and it limits the number you can accept.
I think most of us agree that migrants traveling long and dangerous distances to Europe don't have much to loose back home. Now the question is if their lives are not in danger anymore why should Europe host them and pay them a better life ? Is this supposed to be a solution to world's poverty? As we've seen if support is provided or better said lack of counter-measures you may experience a continuous stream of migrants(i.e millions). Even if we want, we can't welcome everybody, I fear we can't coup even with the people who really need help, let alone the economic migrants.
On the other side there is also the cultural issue. Millions of people change the landscape for sure and the natives don't want to compete with migrants(why would they?). UK is leaving EU because of european "migrants" so it's not something to ignore.
Well I don't think "anyone" in Europe wants to send these migrants to the bottom of the sea. A solution currently worked on is to pay other countries closer culturally, socially and even geographically (i.e Turkey) to host these people.
The lack of border security gives a sense of unease especially if you expect people from a war torn country or a country where crime is high so I fully support securing the borders.
However the deshumanisation of migrants and treating them as criminals (or worse) is totally wrong and has no place in a civilised country. You can have both border security and immigration. Just be honest who is allowed in and who is not, put in place agreed quotas and that's it. At least everyone knows(including the migrants) what your stance is.
https://whowhatwhy.org/2018/08/14/let-them-drown-italys-trum...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/05/09...
https://inews.co.uk/culture/radio/caller-says-let-them-sink-...
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/11/09/evidence-shows-...
Because if you're going to uproot your life, you're not going to simply go to another miserable country like Bulgaria, you'll go to a country where it's worth moving to. When you buy a new phone, do you buy last year's phone ("it's good enough!") or do you buy the damn best phone you can afford ("it'll last me a long time!")? France will "last" someone a longer time than Bulgaria.
There is also a third option, which is to send them somewhere else. There are a number of countries in Africa that are poor, but still aren't in the midst of any active war or genocide. If you're from a country that is, why not go there?
The answer is that the real reason so many want to come to the EU isn't the humanitarian crisis at home, it's for the better money. But when that's their primary motivation, and they have the same alternative as anyone from any of the other countries they could live in, then their claim is no better than anyone else's.
It's fair to not want to be in Libya right now, but when you have the option to move east, west or south, there is a lot less moral force in the argument that you have a right to move north.