If I read that correctly.

I thought, Jesus that's harsh

Just let them keep a few trinkets with sentimental value.

"Poor refugees, fleeing fighting with the shirt on their backs. How can we not help them, even if they do have $25k assets on their persons. We must make sure the international social safety net doesn't let them down."

If they have that much money, they're not leaving with just the shirt on their backs and the argument falls flat, and to continue to insist that the argument is true when it's obviously false becomes irrational. In fact, it makes economic migration into a very clear net attraction and reward--people who have wanted to immigrate for years but who couldn't get a visa suddenly get not just a visa but are subsidized, and misplaced empathy or antipathy to the West wins the say.

The local explanation is, that any kind of social benefits in Denmark is given that way. If you are in dire need, first you must sell and use all valuables, you own. When you are stripped bare from car and house etc, you might get help - because then you really need. It makes it much harder to get back on you feet again, which also will be the problem for our refugees. Some of them are now put in tents in the Danish winter.

Party back the bill." No surprise there.

No mention is made in the article about support or opposition from liberals in their parliament.