The nation that brought us The Third Reich isn’t eager to have outsiders on their soil?! This is more shocking than discovering that allowing your teen son to sleep over at Brian Peck’s house will likely result in Jr needing a lifetime of trauma therapy
It would just be too bad if a bunch of people from, say, Africa and Asia, decided that it was about time to civilize those backward European savages and set up colonies on their land…
Nah, the capitalists just pitted them and migrating people towards tension for a smoke screen while making working class life harder overall. Immigration opposers have been and consistently keep on being wrong with their paranoia.
So propping up the housing market by keeping population artificially increasing or keeping wages low by hiring lower paid foreign workers isn’t bad for the working population? What about increasing crime or cost to the government. Both of which have been recorded in government stats (though one is Danish).
“The capitalist” if anything want immigration. You want higher wages, better jobs and cheaper housing you want less immigration.
You’re all blinded by what you wish the world was like.
Are you suggesting people culturally removed from your own are a threat to you in some way?
I can rather confidently say that there are cultures with values that are a threat to me, my society and my values, yes.
Cause damn. That’d be embarrassing.
Not in the slightest.
Or are your own police not more violent to their citizens?
No. For a very long time our police was amongst the least violent in the world. Probably still is.
What is it that allowing immigrants in doesn’t improve?
It reduces the productivity of society. Most certainly on an output/capita level, probably even on a total output level. Previously we were able to afford huge amounts of support to organizations such as the UNHCR (almost 1% of GDP) - money that could be used to make the places these people are moving away from better. That isn’t the case anymore.
The solution isn’t to move everyone to developed countries, it is to improve the situation in developing countries. We can’t help with that if our country is an unstable mess of migrant gangs attacking each other and the rest of us.
lol I’d be embarrassed to have such a narrow-minded worldview. You should be too. But go on and stay stubborn, I don’t care. I’d tell you to enjoy your life, but that won’t be possible for you. Is sad.
It’s amazing how quickly you resorted to toothless personal insults when you ran out of relevant things to say. Would be sad if it wasn’t so funny. Thanks!
You’re correct. I tagged you as “low value user” and will only respond to you as such from now on, because I don’t value your opinion in any way shape or form.
Nah, but the sinking rafts bullshit is a super dangerous ploy and needs to be addressed somehow. We cant incentivize it. Maybe just jail everyone involved so no one wants to pay just to sit in an Italian prison?
I’m sure people who accept the realistic risk of drowning - most cannot swim - will be discouraged by the threat of… being in a prison with better living conditions than their home?
No, this was the right comment to respond to - your comment lacked empathy to why people might become migrants and reminded me a lot of Ebenezer Scrooge commenting on the poor without empathy to the fact that he was contributing to their poverty.
Us first-world nations play a large role in the global warming that drives climate refugees… I think it’s extremely immoral to just put up a big wall and tell people fleeing desertification to go somewhere else after making their home uninhabitable.
It doesn’t, but we’re all humans and if some of us wreck another person’s country it feels unjust to leave that person stateless.
There might be a basic misunderstanding here… at the rate climate change is going some areas of the earth that are currently inhabitable are becoming uninhabitable. There are farms being swallowed up by desert and the people who were fed by that farm have no where to go.
There are people who live in the artic and those who live in deserts. People even farm in the desert. It might not be great, but itll be more than inhabitable.
You do know that not very many people live in those places, right? It wouldn’t be sustainable. India has over a billion people and the Himalayan glaciers they depend on for water are not getting replenished.
I’m pretty sure moving from a place that has no water to a place that has water does, in fact, fix the problem. Maybe you would prefer them to just die?
Okay, so the plan is move tye entirity of china here then? All 1.4 billion people?
Thats not a reasonable goal. Even you moved in 10 percent of china, youd overwhelm every social service and everything else for that matter. And youd be leaving 90% of china to die while destroying the west’s ability to function.
Now you’re moving the goalposts. And you’ve moved them more than once already.
First you claimed that it would be sustainable for the over a billion people in India to stay where they were because it’s possible to survive in tundras and deserts.
Then you said that moving them to a place where water exists wouldn’t fix the problem of them dying due to a lack of a water.
Then you asked why water would exist in the new place, which was just a silly question for anyone who understands basic geography.
Now you’re talking about moving all of China, when China wasn’t even discussed.
And at each step, you haven’t gone back to the previous one and acknowledged it was a silly thing to say.
I never said India, this is the first comment india was uttered. Youre the one that brought up glaciers. And China is largely watered by glaciers, its the logical next part in the discussion. And even it was India, they also have over a billion people and you face the same problem with simply too many people.
Do you know what the word sustainability means, though?
Or are you just piling us all into one stereotype and now I have to starve along with everyone else while the rich that caused the problem are the only ones that can afford to live?
This is xmunk’s secret plan for cleansing migrants and low socioeconomic majorities off the planet. Put them all in areas that can’t logistically support them until only those that could afford to survive remain. The same that ruined the climate.
Yup, I’m an evil villain. In actuality I just don’t believe in borders or nationalities - being born into a western country is an extreme advantage and it’s a matter of fucking chance. I dislike discriminating based on country of origin and I think we should strive to ensure everyone gets as equitable a chance at success as we can.
Also, our climate isn’t under pressure because we’re at the population limit for earth - climate change is happening because of greed. In theory we can fucking fix it if we work together.
Living in a stable safe country is a privilege we’re born into, much like inheriting a trust fund. It’s an ethical duty to take in people in a less fortunate position. The emphasis should not be on numbers of immigrants so much as better integration once they’re here. And also on helping less fortunate countries (yes I realise why they aren’t as fortunate) become more developed. People don’t tend to migrate if the place they live is good. Oil wars are not helpful.
I think its not ethical to just let in everyone who was born in a third world country. That doesnt even make sense, its just not sustainable, fucks a lot of things up, and doesnt solve problems for anyone. It makes their country worse, make our country worse, what is the plan here?
No clearly, but people don’t usually want to leave their home country to live. It’s usually just people who are displaced or academics. A good solution would be offering scholarships to gifted students from developing countries on the condition that they then use that education within their home country. But in the case of war /persecution, yes every country needs to do their part. Integration classes actually help.
Just look at the difference between Norway and Sweden. Norway has compulsory classes for non eea immigrants to learn about what it means to live in Norway and will actually help people get into work. Sweden sticks them in husby and puts them on benefits. Which country has more problems?
The alternative would be helping those countries most affected to prevent migrations from happening. In practice, that would look like giving them [Shitloads] of (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8694300/) money .
Like, regardless of ethics, those people will not stop existing once climate change makes their homelands unlivable. The two available plans appear to be “solve climate change as rapidly as possible and bootstrap poor countries up to developed countries pro Bono” or “shoot migrants at the border”.
We should tell right wingers that if they don’t stop climate change there’s gonna be more migrants. That will unironically work better than warning them about the world ending.
Add comment