George Soros Warns Europe: Absorb 500k Refugees Costing $34Bn, Or Risk "Existential Threat"

Tyler Durden's picture

Authored by George Soros, originally posted at,

The asylum policy that emerged from last month’s EU-Turkey negotiations - and that has already resulted in the deportation of hundreds of asylum seekers from Greece to Turkey - has four fundamental flaws.

First, the policy is not truly European; it was negotiated with Turkey and imposed on the EU by German Chancellor Angela Merkel.


Second, it is severely underfunded.


Third, it is not voluntary. It imposes quotas that many member states oppose and requires refugees to take up residence in countries where they don’t want to live, while forcing others who have reached Europe to be sent back.


Finally, it transforms Greece into a de facto holding pen without sufficient facilities for the number of asylum seekers already there.

All these deficiencies can be corrected. The European Commission implicitly acknowledged some of them this week when it announced a new plan to reform Europe’s asylum system. But the Commission’s proposals still rely on compulsory quotas that serve neither refugees nor member states. That will never work.

European Commission Vice President Frans Timmermans is inviting an open debate. Here is my contribution. 

A humanitarian catastrophe is in the making in Greece. The asylum seekers are desperate. Legitimate refugees must be offered a reasonable chance to reach their destinations in Europe. It is clear that the EU must undergo a paradigm shift. EU leaders need to embrace the idea that effectively addressing the crisis will require “surge” funding, rather than scraping together insufficient funds year after year. Spending a large amount at the outset would allow the EU to respond more effectively to some of the most dangerous consequences of the refugee crisis—including anti-immigrant sentiment in its member states that has fueled support for authoritarian political parties, and despondency among those seeking refuge in Europe who now find themselves marginalized in Middle East host countries or stuck in transit in Greece.

Most of the building blocks for an effective asylum system are available; they only need to be assembled into a comprehensive and coherent policy. Critically, refugees and the countries that contain them in the Middle East must receive enough financial support to make their lives there viable, allowing them to work and to send their children to school. That would help to keep the inflow of refugees to a level that Europe can absorb. This can be accomplished by establishing a firm and reliable target for the number of refugee arrivals: between 300,000 and 500,000 per year. This number is large enough to give refugees the assurance that many of them can eventually seek refuge in Europe, yet small enough to be accommodated by European governments even in the current unfavorable political climate.

There are established techniques for the voluntary balancing of supply and demand in other fields, such as with matching students to schools and junior doctors to hospitals. In this case, people determined to go to a particular destination would have to wait longer than those who accept the destination allotted to them. The asylum seekers could then be required to await their turn where they are currently located. This would be much cheaper and less painful than the current chaos, in which the migrants are the main victims. Those who jump the line would lose their place and have to start all over again. This should be sufficient inducement to obey the rules.

At least €30 billion ($34 billion) a year will be needed for the EU to carry out such a comprehensive plan. This includes providing Turkey and other “frontline” countries with adequate funding to maintain their very large refugee populations, creating a common EU asylum agency and security force for the EU’s external borders, addressing the humanitarian chaos in Greece, and establishing common standards across the Union for receiving and integrating refugees.

Thirty billion euros might sound like an enormous sum, but it is not when viewed in proper perspective. First, we must recognize that a failure to provide the necessary funds would cost the EU even more. There is a real threat that the refugee crisis could cause the collapse of Europe’s Schengen system of open internal borders among twenty-six European states. The Bertelsmann Foundation has estimated that abandoning Schengen would cost the EU between €47 billion ($53.5 million) and €140 billion ($160 million) in lost GDP each year; the French Commissioner for Policy Planning has estimated the losses at €100 billion ($114 billion) annually.

Moreover, there is no doubt that Europe has the financial and economic capacity to raise €30 billion a year. This amount is less than one-quarter of one percent of the EU’s combined annual GDP of €14.9 trillion, and less than one-half of one percent of total spending by its twenty-eight member governments.

It is Europe’s political capacity that is lacking, at least at the moment—its ability to make effective unified decisions about such an urgent matter. Most member states are restricted by the EU’s fiscal rules from running larger deficits and financing them by issuing new debt in the capital markets. Even though German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble lifted hopes in Davos in January when he spoke of a European Marshall Plan to deal with the migration crisis, he also insisted that any spending should be financed out of revenues rather than by adding to the existing government debt.

Taking on new common European debt, backed by the joint and several guarantee of the EU’s members, would raise strong objections, particularly in Germany. Even if the debt were restricted to addressing the migration crisis, Germany and others would see it as a dangerous precedent toward creating debt backed by EU members collectively, with Germany responsible to step in if other countries fail to repay their share of the debt. Berlin has diligently avoided providing such a precedent throughout the euro crisis. That is why the question has not even been raised, let alone seriously considered. But there are other ways to raise the necessary funds using existing EU structures.

Member states could raise new tax revenue in order to fund what is needed. However, Europe does not have the political capacity to raise the necessary sums needed in time to contain the crisis. For a new tax to be perceived as fair, it would have to be imposed equitably across the EU. The proper route for such a tax increase would be for the European Commission to propose new legislation to be adopted with the unanimous support of all members. This would likely fail, since it would give every country the right to veto the tax. If a “coalition of the willing” of at least nine countries could be assembled, the Commission could opt for “enhanced cooperation,” the approach used for the proposed European financial transaction tax (FTT). If the recent experience with the FTT is any guide, this process would take months to conclude.

A more promising alternative would be to re-open the European Commission’s Multiannual Financial Framework, which establishes the EU’s broad budgetary parameters, including the maximum amounts the EU may spend in different areas. The forthcoming mid-term review of this EU budget offers an opportunity to increase the VAT contribution of member states, and designate that some of the new funds raised should go to a refugee crisis fund. This would also be difficult but offers the most realistic path forward.

It will be crucial, however, to make a large part of the funding available very quickly. Making large initial investments will help tip the economic, political, and social dynamics away from xenophobia and disaffection toward constructive outcomes that benefit refugees and countries alike. In the long run, this will reduce the total amount of money that Europe will have to spend to contain and recover from the refugee crisis. This is why I call it “surge” funding.

Where will the necessary funds come from? There is a strong case to be made for using the EU’s balance sheet itself. The EU presently enjoys a triple-A credit rating that is underused and that allows it to borrow in the capital markets on very attractive terms. And with global interest rates at near historic lows, now is a particularly favorable moment to take on such debt.

Tapping into the triple-A credit of the EU has the additional advantage of providing a much-needed economic stimulus for Europe. The amounts involved are large enough to be of macroeconomic significance, especially as they would be spent almost immediately and exercise a multiplier effect. A growing economy would make it much easier to absorb immigrants, whether they are refugees or economic migrants—a win-win initiative.

The question is: How to use the EU’s triple-A credit without arousing opposition, particularly in Germany? The first response is to recognize that the EU is already a triple-A borrower in the global bond markets, through facilities created to deal with the Eurozone crisis. Indeed, it was during the financial crisis that the EU repeatedly put its borrowing capacity on display, establishing financial instruments (such as the European Financial Stabilization Mechanism, or EFSM, and the European Stability Mechanism, or ESM) capable of borrowing tens of billions of euros on attractive terms in very short order. Once Europe’s leaders made a political decision to act, they were capable of doing so very quickly.

Some of these European financial entities, which still have considerable borrowing capacity, could be redirected to the refugee crisis. This would be far more efficient and faster than creating a new borrowing mechanism for the purpose. And such a redirection would require only a political decision—one that can be taken at short notice if the political will can be generated.

Two sources of money in particular—the EFSM and the Balance of Payments Assistance Facility—should be put to the task. These sources complement each other: the EFSM was designed for loans to euro-area members, whereas the balance of payments facility is for EU members that do not belong to the Eurozone. Both kinds of loans will be necessary for a comprehensive approach to the crisis. Both also have very similar institutional structures, and they are both backed entirely by the EU budget—and therefore do not require national guarantees or national parliamentary approval.

The combined gross borrowing capacity of the EFSM and the Balance of Payments facility is €110 billion ($125 billion), a number meant to coincide with the annual revenue ceiling of the EU budget. The amounts of each facility were set so that the EU never has more than its annual budget in debt outstanding. The Balance of Payments Assistance Facility’s €50 billion of borrowing power is almost completely unused. The EFSM has made some €46.8 billion worth of loans to Portugal and Ireland but has substantial spare capacity. They jointly have well over €60 billion of capacity, and this capacity grows each year as the loans to Portugal and Ireland are repaid.

The EFSM, the ESM, and its precursor, the EFSF, were all established in response to the euro crisis. The task back then was to provide cheap credit to countries like Ireland, Portugal, Spain, and Greece that had otherwise been frozen out of the credit markets. The expectation was that these countries would repay their loans from the EU once they had been restored to financial health.

Now the task is fundamentally different. As with the euro crisis, the refugee situation is at a critical point and requires a very quick response. But it differs from the euro crisis in that the countries to which the funds would be aimed—like Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey, and Greece—are merely on the frontlines of what must be a collective European undertaking; they are entitled to grants, rather than loans, and should not be obliged to repay the monies they receive.

If we accept this reality, how then will the surge funding get repaid? The answer is that the EU and its member states must find new sources of tax revenue, and do so in a way that spreads the repayment obligation as widely as possible. This could be done by levying special EU-wide taxes. The new tax revenue could come from a variety of sources, including the EU-wide VAT, which already provides revenue to the EU; a special tax on gasoline, as Minister Schäuble has suggested; or a new tax on travel into the EU and on visa applications, which would shift some of the burden onto non-EU citizens wishing to travel to the EU.

It was noted above that the process of levying new taxes inside the EU is one that will take a long time to complete. However, those looking after the finances of the EFSM and the Balance of Payments facility will want to know that the loans they make have a sure source of repayment. That’s why the EU must guarantee that it will find this new tax revenue by the time it is needed, even if the exact source of the new revenue has yet to be determined.

The question remains, how can the necessary political will be generated? The European Union is built on democratic principles. I believe there is a silent majority that wants to preserve the European Union even if it is currently not a well-functioning institution. The leaders will listen if this silent majority makes its voice heard.

The refugee crisis poses an existential threat to Europe. It would be irresponsible to allow the EU to disintegrate without utilizing all the resources it has at its disposal. The lack of adequate financing is the main obstacle standing in the way of successful programs in the frontline countries. Throughout history, governments have issued bonds in response to national emergencies. That is the case in Europe today. When should the triple-A credit of the EU be mobilized if not at a moment when the European Union is in mortal danger?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
NoDebt's picture

Thanks, George.  We'll take that under advisement.  You can leave now.


OK, all in favor of not doing any of what George just said?  


Motion is carried.

Haus-Targaryen's picture

So sounds like "best practices" would be

1) 500k people can stay in whichever shithole they currently reside in

2) "Europe" saves 34€ billion p.a.

3) The EU falls apart 

4) George Soros finally dies

Aaaarghh's picture

this guy needs to die already..



lol ^^ missed point 4 above, Im too slow :)


weburke's picture

the small number of royal families, hidden and out, are such a curse to the rest of us. 

philipat's picture

Actually George, it seems to me that Europe will be in mortal danger if it DOES what you want. At least you might be genuine enough to offer to fund the initiative? Please go away.

jefferson32's picture

ZH be my witness, I've been saying since the onset of this contrived "refugee" crisis that it is meant to coerce Germany to accept EU debt mutualization.

No particular insight here, as it was clearly stated, the gates will be opened and jihadis will flood Europe if Germans don't play ball with the NWO. In March 2015.

So this is now confirmed by the chief reptile officer himself, Soros.

StackShinyStuff's picture

The rapefugees will not be "absorbed" - they will fester and grow like a cancerous tumor.

Big Corked Boots's picture

The kindest execution is for George to be pushed into the deep end.

mtl4's picture

Thanks for that little socialist tug on the heartstrings George, europeans might otheriwse be upset about your trojan horse.


Dante needs to add a few more levels for this guy.

o r c k's picture

The only "plan" is to stop the invaders at sea and return them. An excercise in futility since the die is cast and Europe is lost. How sad to watch these Countries piddle around the edges as their civilizations collapse. The invaders have won the war and all that's left is to prepare for the blood and destruction. The "smart" Europeans are already planning their relocation to more civilized climes while their property still has some value--and their daughters are still alive.

Kaervek's picture

You don't seem to know all that much about europe, if shit gets out of hand there is going to be a violent backlash of unseen proportions. There are still a lot of nationalists and right-wingers that won't go down without a fight. Populism is winning polls again.

I think the situation here in the US is much worse and the media spectacle around the "refugee crisis" is indeed a welcome diversion for the muppets. Same as the presidential "debates" which serve as mere entertainment for the braindead mob. If europe took in all the refugees of the world it would still have less freeloaders, criminals and terrrists than the US currently houses.

The next crisis isn't going to hit Europe as hard as our beloved USSA, land of the free. Therefore to prevent complete and utter collapse we are going to go to war again so all can be well, fuck yeah. Hopefully they didn't choose Russia as our next target but some weaker enemy. Just guessing here, Hillary 2016, Iran 2017, they have nukular weapons after all, this is a danger to world stability and peace!

The Saint's picture
The Saint (not verified) mtl4 Apr 13, 2016 11:49 AM

Help make Europe a better place, George.  DIE ALREADY.

And, take Obama with you, please.

Weisbrot's picture

Soros is as J as the Pope, Obama, and You

Katos's picture

The thought of stopping the wars in the Middle East and allowing these people to go home, where they really want to be anyway, never crossed this PSYCHOPATHIC KILLERS MIND. They have created their own problem, and instead of doing the logical thing, they keep looking at ways to assimilate people who not only detest them for what they've done to their countries,  but won't want to assimilate in their stupid society anyway. Somebody needs to stand U0 to George SOROS and the rest of these assholes billionaires who think they have the answers to everything.  At no expense to them, of course.

HopefulCynical's picture

Your premise is false. The point of the wars is to FORCE MUSLIMS TO OVERRUN EUROPE AND (LITERALLY) FUCK IT UP.

The endgoal is the destruction of all Christians of European and West Asian descent.

OverTheHedge's picture

I thought this guy was supposed to be the arch-manipulator, subtle beyond comprehension, devious beyond belief, the great spider at the centre of an international web of corruptability and other big words.

Unfortunately, the article reads as crassly opportunistic. Even a dimwit like me can see how he is slavering over the chance to win on so many different fronts, all in one fell swoop, as it were.

Either age has finally caught up with him (blood transfusions from teenage boys no longer having the affect?), or he is so smugly convinced that he has already won, and no longer has any need to be subtle any more, that he is bringing his madness out into the open.

Or,  he  is just doing what he has done for years, and is pushing hard for a Brexit to make a killing on the currency wobbles that will ensue. God knows the UK electorate would have a collective head-fit if any of these proposals actually happen.

Whoever has ammased the most when he dies, wins.

Herd Redirection Committee's picture

There is also the idea that George is at this stage of his life just a meatbag, a meat popsicle if you will, that the other elites can hide behind.

"It was all Soros' idea!"

It was a common Rothschild strategy, to pool resources but to hide the origin of those funds.  Using a front.  A shell, if you will.  Not saying Soros is a good guy, just that his time is past, and the elites probably consider him expendable at this point, and rather than kill him off, they are just wringing every last bit of use out of him (or, in this case, his reputation).

techpriest's picture

"The kindest conclusion is that George is completely off the deep end."

When you are poor, it's called insanity and you are committed.

When you are rich, it's called "being eccentric" and "having novel ideas."

jus_lite_reading's picture

I'm not a conspiracy nut but..... the picture is looking more and more as if this whole "refugee crisis" was orchestrated to 1) break the homogeny of individual European nations, 2) weaken the political right as 99% of these refugees will be leftists and 3) wealth redistribution from middle and upper classes to the poor 3rd worlders.

It's very clear to me that Muammar Gaddafi was "taken out" by Hillary Clinton with Obama's support to flood Europe with even more 3rd worlders.

In short, Europe is done.

HopefulCynical's picture

More or less correct, but as I pointed out above: The point of the wars is to FORCE MUSLIMS TO OVERRUN EUROPE AND (LITERALLY) FUCK IT UP.

The endgoal is the destruction of all Christians of European and West Asian descent.

Not meaning to spam, but it's important that folks be shown this viewpoint, as I sincerely believe it to be the truth.

beemasters's picture

Interesting that he didn't orchestrate sending the refugees to Israel nor ask Israel to accept them. In terms of climate, culture, etc, Israel would have been more suitable for Syrian/Iraqi refugees. Besides, Israel needs to fill the apartments they are building on the occupied lands.

cornflakesdisease's picture

YES!  Eurobonds.  They are coming.  They will be to Europe what foodstamp & road repair money are from the fed gov and then too the states in the US.

Ace006's picture

Soros thinks "refugees" have an absolute right to go to Europe AND he thinks what Europe needs on top of that is to take on MORE debt. Sound advice to Europe on both accounts.

Lorca's Novena's picture

@Jefferson32 +1000


After reading through the finer points, it is all coercion to get the "member states" / EU into tremendous debt. The instrument is the so called refugee crisis IMPLEMENTED by G. Soros himself! It can not be any clearer that the damn zionist scum bags want to enslave the rest of the west via debt and or war, destroy western culture, and breed out the white race. I said it and I dont give a fuck anymore. Nuke Israel NOW.

Herd Redirection Committee's picture

$30 billion a year... For how long?  FOREVER if Soros gets his blood funnel into that flow.

30 billion a year, shit if it was a multinational corp on IPO, it would be valued at OVER 600 billion dollars market cap!

Herd Redirection Committee's picture

It strikes me as tremendously similar to a mobster asking you, nicely, with a gun to your head, to dig your own grave, before you are shot!

TeamDepends's picture

Great plan George. How many will Israel and the Saudis absorb and how deeply in debt will they go?

GoldenGoosed's picture

Soros made this mess. I guess all is going as planned huh soros?
And now it is his job to do more times two just to make more of a soros mess.

TheObsoleteMan's picture

Doesn't matter. They have someone already lined up to replace him when he dies that is allot worse.

hongdo's picture

Zuckenburg looks like he is trying to lead the pack of Soros wannabes.

vollderlerby's picture

Now we know for sure who planted Eiric in this forum.

nevertheless's picture

Syria was not a shit hole, until WE made it one, asshole!


Fucking ignorant assholes, we (as slaves to the zionists that we are) destroy great societies, and then look down upon them for the destruction we have delivered upon them!


America does not yet have the clarity that consequences of our hypocritical satanic actions will most definitely bring....But then it will be too late. 

Haus-Targaryen's picture

Counterpoint, only 33% of the "refugees" are from Syria.  


Syria was nice, and because its filled with Syrians and not Arabs it will be nice again one day.   

hongdo's picture

Twit. What difference does it make which artificial countries they come from?  European elite scatterbrains drew the borders after the war.    Syria, Libya, Iraq, northern Africa, etc will not be "nice again one day".  Neither will Europe.  There is not enough money in the world to fix it up.  I was in Turkey and saw a lot of historic ruins that could not be fixed up because of a lack of money.  The Buddist ruins in Xinjiang are under slow renovation in China but you can still see where they were used as goat pens.  My moslem guide admitted that the Moslem invaders tore most of them down just as they are doing today.

I have not visited the mid-east but met people who have prior to US/European involvement.  They said it was very beautiful.  There are a lot of before and after pictures available in the internet. Go to your building cost estimator software and calculate the rebuild cost.


Victimization, and victim blaming, is politically expedient, and always works well for politicians, and banks. Order out of chaos starts with a triple A credit rating, and historically low interest rates, eh. This NeoLiberal mantra is espoused by everyone in politics today because they are all well aware of the fact that there is next to no economic growth to stimulate growth for Gubbermint Sachs sales of moar bad loans.


Soros wants churn, and so does his colleague in GS. The EU was dead until they got flooded with refugees that all need accommodation, iPhones, bundled TV packages, Internet ISP access, cars, et cetera. Soros is just the current EU WalMart greeter. As soon as he dies he will be replaced by another.

Herd Redirection Committee's picture

Yep, the rich fucks/banksters/billionaires who own real estate in major urban areas/aka cities WANT mass immigration.  They could care less about unemployment for locals or cultural destruction or that the middle class is being destroyed.

THEIR real estate will generate rents.  Who cares if the rents originate from worker's incomes, or government coffers?

The spice must flow!

AGuy's picture

3A) Soros becomes the first trillionaire having shorted the EURO and by having engineered the collapse of Europe. What a nice guy /sarc

Soros is almost like a fictional villian in an old James bond movie, who would start WW3 just so he could become the worlds richest man.



The Chief's picture

His bunker is not JDAM proof. He knows it.

Putin knows it too.

wren's picture

Haus-Targaryen - Can you move step four to the top of the list?

Upset Your Worries's picture

"...the policy ...requires refugees to take up residence in countries where they don’t want to live..."

I can't understand just why they are deemed the right to choose an EU country of preferred residence. I might decide to go and live in Barbados or even the BVI as my chosen country of residence, but I doubt I will be allowed to do so unless I can come up with their necessary entry requirements; usually including being a High Net Worth Individual.

"...Most of the building blocks for an effective asylum system are available... This can be accomplished by establishing a firm and reliable target for the number of refugee arrivals: between 300,000 and 500,000 per year..."

What, for three years, five, ten... forever? Or until there is standing room only in Europe?

valjoux7750's picture

And what fucking threat is this asshole even talking about. And why does anyone listen to what this douche bag has to say. 

Somebody should put him down already with all the kaos he causes around the world.  

Nexus789's picture

Point 4 to 1 would be attactive and mean less people die.

fightthepower's picture

Why hasn't Soros been droned yet?

KesselRunin12Parsecs's picture
KesselRunin12Parsecs (not verified) fightthepower Apr 13, 2016 5:47 AM

Schwartzy boy ought to invite them all over to his coumpound for a tasty & nutritious gefilte fish meal.

mtl4's picture

Time for Soros to do a little hunting with Dick Cheney.

wren's picture

If someone plants some papers on him regarding a fake investigation into the Clinton's he should turn up dead...

XAU XAG's picture

there is no doubt that Europe has the financial and economic capacity to raise €30 billion a year.


there is no doubt that the people of Europe has the financial and economic capacity to pay €30 billion a year more in taxes.





there is no doubt that Europe has the financial and economic capacity to raise €1 billion a year and spend it on..............................


BORDER CONTROL including a strip of land laid with MINES

Lets see a few Bodies at the borders.........that would stop them comming


Too harsh you say..............ok to bomb and drone in another country but at the border is a step to far?


fleur de lis's picture

The Europeans are waking up to find that all those freebies weren't free at all. They came with a VERY heavy price.

The Europeans thought that their Marxist systems were so much better than anything they ever had. They threw off their centuries old traditions and identities, and went along with the EU idea of being one group with many languages in exchange for government services/welfare.

They went along with all kinds of regulations to quash those who would not comply by calling them anti- this or that. They saw the religious traditions which formed their culture and history get systematically destroyed. The saw their families get forcibly restructured, and their children get indoctrinated by the new definitions. They were okay with it and anybody who complained just wanted to wreck their fun.

They fell for it hook, line, and sinker because it was free. They really believed that .gov is our friend. Joining the EU would make them all the best of friends and they would share everything and get six weeks vacations and everybody would live happily ever after. They could be permanent carefree children and .gov would be Mom and Dad.

The lie was a smashing success.

The roads were paved, there were no restrictions on social behavior, they got fabulous benefits with or without jobs. What could go wrong?

Then the little cracks started to appear. Prices began to soar. Workplace efficiency started to fall because it was so hard to get fired for anything. The Unions demanded and got more so the people got less.

NATO employed thousands of them but wanted their sons' blood. A nation that could not control its own budget became the responsibility of another nation, further stressing the population. As people found other ways to hide money the laws became more harsh.

Then NATO decided to obliterate a few MidEast nations because their leaders were not compliant with Western demands. Europe was flooded with unassimilable refugees transported help enrich Euopeans with their new cultural changes. Anyone who complained got called anti- this or that.

Then it finally dawned on Europeans that it was a trap all along. Unable to organize thanks to complete surveillance from their friendly .gov parents, unable to control their borders because they gave them up to be friends forever, unable to protest because of speech laws, they are now taking to the streets and risking civil war. They will fight with the same people whose homes were destroyed by European .gov parents. Because they could.

And their .gov parents can do much worse if they feel threatened.

Now grampa Soros is butting in by threatening the children for defying their .gov parents. Grampa Soros will tweak their allowances to make their defiant little lives more difficult. They will come to heel or get more false flags until they do.

The only solution is for them to get out of the house. They will have to exit the EU and kick out the family bullies, NATO. Only then can they recover what independence and identities they have left.