I am American & only American, but I know Sweden a bit. Language lessons are on offer but not required. Sweden had financial payouts to take the SFI language classes & pass certain levels. The so-called teaching of “Swedish laws” borders on being an insulting joke while fueling racist narratives.

I have not seen evidence of such a policy in either the UK or the US. Without the policy obviously it can’t happen.

It happens in the US. I have seen the refugee resettlement charity group and/or contractors involved even in rural parts of the US. I have also seen the resettlement assistance in Sweden over the years. Sweden’s is more direct government involvement; the US distributes it to non-governmental groups.

I know quite a few Somali & Syrian refugees in both these countries who have relatives in the other country. Guess who is providing more financial assistance to their aunts/uncle, siblings & cousins in the other country: the US ones help their relatives in Sweden more than the other way around.

Half my family is Swedish but like most Swedes they trust what the government tells them. But I have seen refugees in quite remote towns under the policy, which I agree with, that a national policy to take large amounts of refugees means that it should happen all over the country.

If a country cares to integrate refugees, they will help them get settled in areas with better access to jobs, schools and so on. This is where Sweden fails badly with its refugee settlement plans, but it’s really driven by a “they don’t deserve to be here, so banish them” mentality.

Remote towns in Sweden have much cheaper housing but that’s part & parcel of much worse job opportunities; and remote towns in Sweden have less conveniently located and less spare governmental service capacity for serving the rural population.

Post-1980 placement of refugees in rural areas in Sweden has long made Swedes local to the areas far more upset than has been the case for refugee placements in comparable areas in the US. Sweden is not superior for POC refugee outcomes than US or the UK. But racists make outcomes worse everywhere.

Sweden’s per capita refugee intake has been far higher than the US in the long term so of course it has had a bigger impact. Only recent idiocy by Biden sent per capita rates through the roof. It wasn’t a national transparent decision in the US as it was in Sweden.

Per capita refugee arrivals in the US skyrocketed thru the roof with the Biden Admin? That seems to be a bit of an exaggeration and not factoring in the impact of the pandemic that Trump mismanaged like crazy. Lots of Swedes think Sweden’s “refugee intake” wasn’t a national transparent decision.

Sweden is full of MAGA-adjacent characters.

Going by what I’ve seen across Sweden & the US — in urban, small town & rural areas in both countries — the US does a much better job than Sweden of having refugees get accepted & integrated than Sweden does. Some attribute the outcome difference to welfare system difference but it’s the small part.

I find that hard to believe, but have only seen in Sweden so can’t opine. Would be interesting to see rates of criminal offences by those groups in both countries.

Immigrants in the US commit less crimes per capita than native-born Americans. An Old World refugee in the 1986-2016 period would be better off landing in the US than in Sweden.

Refugees have historically been distributed across the US too. The placement of Hmong refugees in the US has involved towns about as remote as the the placement of Somalis in Sweden. Sweden has government agencies & municipalities take the lead in settlement adjustment; US has non-profits doing it.

Somalis or Afghans for that matter.