Arguing that accepting a few hundred refugees from Syria is not important because it is a drop in the bucket, is an outrageous statement made by Jussi Halla-aho, Vesa-Matti Saarakkala and others. The other point they are trying to drive home, that these people will be a burden on Finland, exposes their loathing and ignorance.
How many refugees can you name in history that fled to other countries and became model members of their new home countries? One of these was Albert Einstein, who fled Nazi Germany, a racist regime that rose to power by scapegoating minorities like Jews.
The argument, that refugees are a burden, is an insult to all the refugees of the world. Only an extreme egoist, who lacks feelings for the suffering of others, can make such a point.
These types of intolerant arguments are the same as those made constantly by anti-immigration and far-right politicians to drive home their point.
If you dissect their arguments, they are nothing more than typical anti-immigration sound bites spread with the help of the Finnish media, which gives them inflated respectability and importance.
Using such arguments to influence refugee and immigration policy, we could similarly ask why did Raoul Wallenberg or Oscar Schindler save tens of thousands of Jews if millions were murdered in Nazi concentration camps?
Stating that saving lives is futile because there are so many and makes no difference is similar to a racist trying to convince you that it is useless to oppose intolerance because nothing can be done.
If you accept that ludicrous argument, you have lost the war.
Saving one person is valuable and important.
If you disagree, why not ask the victims fleeing war and death.