Immigration

  • Thread starter KSaiyu
  • 1,702 comments
  • 65,312 views
Well, you should probably carry that on in the God thread, now you're talking about the effects of catholicism. I don't think you thought that theory through entirely.

Sounds like you're saying investing money in better education wouldn't help decrease birth rates, which doesn't make much sense.

Also I think the point @novcze is trying to make (although arguably not that well) is that countries have a limit on the size of population they can support before standards of living start to decrease. I could be wrong though.
 
I think the point @novcze is trying to make (although arguably not that well) is that countries have a limit on the size of population they can support before standards of living start to decrease. I could be wrong though.

I'd agree with that but I'd add that the level for each country can be very different depending on a number of factors. His "higher density is always worse" rule wouldn't hold water.

Sounds like you're saying investing money in better education wouldn't help decrease birth rates, which doesn't make much sense.

The context of catholicised education in Africa and its effect on population and epidemics is known. Putting more money into those education systems (or into attempting to create rival, overarching systems) would, in many cases, be money wasted I think. We're not talking about a perfect theoretical world.

That doesn't quite answer @novcze's point though, he's suggesting it as an answer to African emigration. My point stands that adding Euros doesn't help to stop wars or to stop discrimination. I'd say that in some areas it could actually increase it.

I believe that we should be doing much more to fight malaria in underdeveloped nations, I wonder if @novcze would like that idea given that he seemingly sees African emigration as a direct function of the number of surviving (or reproducing) Africans?
 
I'd agree with that but I'd add that the level for each country can be very different depending on a number of factors. His "higher density is always worse" rule wouldn't hold water.

Of course, I was just giving him the benefit of the doubt that he wasn't getting his point across quite as well as he wanted.

The context of catholicised education in Africa and its effect on population and epidemics is known. Putting more money into those education systems (or into attempting to create rival, overarching systems) would, in many cases, be money wasted I think. We're not talking about a perfect theoretical world.

That doesn't quite answer @novcze's point though, he's suggesting it as an answer to African emigration. My point stands that adding Euros doesn't help to stop wars or to stop discrimination. I'd say that in some areas it could actually increase it.

I believe that we should be doing much more to fight malaria in underdeveloped nations, I wonder if @novcze would like that idea given that he seemingly sees African emigration as a direct function of the number of surviving (or reproducing) Africans?

I think the general idea is that better education would lead to better standards of living which would reduce the incentive to leave, but getting that to work is probably very complicated for lots of the reasons you said.

But I agree with the principle that we should be looking to help improve their countries rather than just making it easier for them to go elsewhere.
 
It's not matter of small or large population (large population will have another problems like lower quality of life), migrants will have impact on higher expenses from the state buget which will affect economy. I want to help them, but I would like to see all those Euros invested in Africa where they are more needed

Trillions were already wasted in Africa, keep sending more and expecting different result, is literally insane. We should let China to try and make order there.

Euros are needed right here in Europe. People and children in south countries are starving because of unemployment, debt and bad economy. Only liberals actually believe that mass immigration will somehow solve all our problems. It is in fact their religion and all heretics must be silenced.
 
Just what do you mean by this?

The best case right now, would be the attacks by mainstream media on Donald Trump. They are going full broadside on him, but the people just like him more. Previous attempts failed so now they're using the Cecil the lion affair, to show his sons as safari hunters and destroy him image in this way.

Imagine someone saying the same thing for African illegal immigrants that are coming to Europe. Cameron just said something about a swarm of immigrants and media went 🤬. Instead of dealing with a crisis, they take on anyone and everyone only remotely saying something about limiting or preventing immigration, god forbid deportation.

Why do I have to spell everything out for you, is mainstream everything you read? Don't you see behind their propaganda? It's becoming really obvious.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The best case right now, would be the attacks by mainstream media on Donald Trump. They are going full broadside on him, but the people just like him more. Previous attempts failed so now they're using the Cecil the lion affair, to show his sons as safari hunters and destroy him image in this way.

Cool story, couldn't see the point though.

Imagine someone saying the same thing for African illegal immigrants that are coming to Europe. Cameron just said something about a swarm of immigrants and media went 🤬. Instead of dealing with a crisis, they take on anyone and everyone only remotely saying something about limiting or preventing immigration, god forbid deportation.

No they don't, sources required. I also think you aren't aware of a difference between a legal migrant and an illegal migrant. Perhaps you could explain it to demonstrate that you do?

Why do I have to spell everything out for you

Because you don't make much sense?

is mainstream everything you read? Don't you see behind their propaganda? It's becoming really obvious.

Congratulations on spotting how pay media works. If you've formed your own debatable opinion by taking in a number of sources then that's to your credit. Acting like you're the first person to think of it could lessen your weight in the subsequent debate though.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That wasn't what you said. And what about places like Bermuda, Singapore or Bahrain whose population densities are astronomical? I don't think you thought that theory through entirely.

I didn't said that, true. I meant population density, that's what is changing if you increase or decrease number of people in given state, which I thought was obvious from the context. I also thought that we are talking about Europe, so your examples of strong economics are not relevant.

Do you think that Europe is in situation where we can afford to take in more migrants? Do you have work for them? And what are you going to say to people of lower education who already live in your country if they have to compete for jobs with newcomers. Who is going to pay for this attempt at multicultural utopia?


Well, you should probably carry that on in the God thread, now you're talking about the effects of catholicism. I don't think you thought that theory through entirely.

I always thought they are making more children because they believe that they will take care of them in the future, without considering their environment. Education on this matter will help them and it's not directly related to immigration. See in Europe, people here know that we have more people than is needed, so birth rates are going down.
 
I always thought they are making more children because they believe that they will take care of them in the future, without considering their environment. Education on this matter will help them and it's not directly related to immigration. See in Europe, people here know that we have more people than is needed, so birth rates are going down.

No, it really isn't that simple.
 
Somewhat in line with talk of band-aid fixes for places that have all too many men that display a most disgusting brand of patriarchy.....

When the freer countries take in those that were persecuted for freer thinking and actions within their far less free former countries, are they consigning the latter countries to a position of being less likely to become freer themselves?

Isn't it taking away the best resource for potential freedom in those countries, and leaving the ones left behind all the more alone in their plight - and presumably far less able to encourage change?

Just a thought.
 
One immigrant from Sudan walked his way through the channel tunnel, only to be stopped and arrested at the British end.


Aww. So close.
 
One immigrant from Sudan walked his way through the channel tunnel, only to be stopped and arrested at the British end.


Aww. So close.
I shed a tear.

I do wonder though what happened to the agreement that refugees must seek asylum at the first country they arrive in.
 
Just what do you mean by this?

The latest Fox news debate should give a good answer. They tried to take Trump down, but it failed. People are seeing how media is taking on all who oppose the mainstream agenda. Murdoch gave them an order to take him down, but it isn't working anymore. People aren't buying their propaganda anymore.
 
I always thought they are making more children because they believe that they will take care of them in the future, without considering their environment.
Not even close. For a start, infant mortality rates are high in Africa - thanks to sub-standard health care and under-developed economies - so people have large families to try and make sure that some of their children survive.
 
The best case right now, would be the attacks by mainstream media on Donald Trump. They are going full broadside on him, but the people just like him more. Previous attempts failed so now they're using the Cecil the lion affair, to show his sons as safari hunters and destroy him image in this way.

Imagine someone saying the same thing for African illegal immigrants that are coming to Europe. Cameron just said something about a swarm of immigrants and media went 🤬. Instead of dealing with a crisis, they take on anyone and everyone only remotely saying something about limiting or preventing immigration, god forbid deportation.

Why do I have to spell everything out for you, is mainstream everything you read? Don't you see behind their propaganda? It's becoming really obvious.

The latest Fox news debate should give a good answer. They tried to take Trump down, but it failed. People are seeing how media is taking on all who oppose the mainstream agenda. Murdoch gave them an order to take him down, but it isn't working anymore. People aren't buying their propaganda anymore.

Neither of those responses even remotely answers my question. So I'll ask again: What do you mean when you say that
all heretics must be silenced.

How do you define a heretic and how would you silence them?
 
Neither of those responses even remotely answers my question. So I'll ask again: What do you mean when you say that


How do you define a heretic and how would you silence them?

OK, one last time, then I give up. IMO, heretic in modern times means a common-sense person, who doesn't share the same opinion as liberals/progressives and their upside-down, politically correct liberal logic, on just about any subject. System, with the help of media, silence them by threats, attacks, ridicule, job loss, basically anything except burning the heretic on a stake. Or beheading.

Extreme liberalism and political correctness is their religion, anyone who publicly speaks out is metaphorically executed. They were even talking about destroying historical monuments, because it offends their religion. Remind you of someone?

If you still don't get it, I'm sorry.
 
OK, one last time, then I give up.
One last time? The first two responses I got from you were you complaining that people don't like Donald Trump and claiming that I don't understand you because apparently you know exactly what media I read and that it's all propaganda.

IMO, heretic in modern times means a common-sense person, who doesn't share the same opinion as liberals/progressives and their upside-down, politically correct liberal logic, on just about any subject.
A heretic is someone with common sense who doesn't share the opinion of all liberals. Got it.

As an aside, would you like to provide some evidence for your assertion that "liberals/progressives" all share the same opinions?

System, with the help of media, silence them by threats, attacks, ridicule, job loss, basically anything except burning the heretic on a stake. Or beheading.
You're willing to threaten, attack, ridicule, and deny employment to those with whom you disagree just so that they will stop saying that they disagree with you? Are you trolling or do you actually want to attack people who don't share your opinions?

For example, if I told you that whatever your opinion on Stilton is, mine is the opposite, would you feel inclined to attack me?
Extreme liberalism and political correctness is their religion
Citation required.
anyone who publicly speaks out is metaphorically executed.
Citation required.
Remind you of someone?
No, it doesn't remind me of anyone.

If you still don't get it, I'm sorry.
I still don't get it. Mainly because you have given strange and indirect answers to a very simple question, and those answers have had no evidence to support them.

I don't have time for games. If you would like me to understand your point of view on this matter, I suggest that you state your case a little more clearly. And a little reason wouldn't go amiss.
 
Macedonia just closed the border with Greece due to getting swamped by immigrants.
 
Trillions were already wasted in Africa, keep sending more and expecting different result, is literally insane. We should let China to try and make order there.

This is true and the sad thing its the fact it has been the corruption that plagues the continent. Beyond that, people should stop blaming colonialism for Africa's current state and put the blame where it rightfully belong too much meddling in the economy by African governments and the corruption that come with it.

That said, Africa can learn deal from Asia..a region that have suffered generations of colonialism yet it is now the center of the global economy.
 
In Germany, so it seems, being opposed to Merkels asylum seekers plan, warrants you the label right wing extremist.

Because having doubts is the same as firebombing a refugee centre.
 
Most of the people fleeing seem to be single guys, if you flee your homeland, who is going to stand up and fight? I didn't know Europe had to bear all the migration of failed countries. No country became "1st world" from the get-go, they all fought and established their nations.

It's easy for Merkel to tell other EU countries to take their share, but who is she to tell other sovereign nations what to do in between their borders, in addition to not having the same amount of capital Germany has. It's a strain for the tax payers, nothing is for "free".

Why don't other rich middle eastern countries like Saudi Arabia, UAE take some of these people in, cultures might be similar as well to better accommodate them. EU citizens have a right for their concerns.
 
Send refugees to Saudi Arabia? Are you kidding?

I'd imagine a large number of people already there would love to leave Saudi Arabia if they could.
 
Back