8 ms·

Western European countries hardly take immigrants. When you live in a homogenous, solely middle-class country like Sweden/Denmark/Norway, of course everything s

Western European countries hardly take immigrants. When you live in a homogenous, solely middle-class country like Sweden/Denmark/Norway, of course everything seems nice and comfortable. But America accepts some very poor immigrants and allows them to make money and be lifted up. Those are many of the people you saw on the bus.

svantana 8y ago
Easily disproven statement by looking at real stats [1], where most western european countries are ahead of the US. If you're suggesting those immigrants are not "poor", consider the Syrian crisis, Germany and Sweden were by far the largest takers of syrian refugees in the west, while the US hardly took any syrians at all. In fact, I read somewhere that Sweden in 2015 was the largest taker of refugees per capita from non-neighboring countries EVER. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_net_migration_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_net_migra...
- at-fates-hands 8y ago
  Which has led to massive issues within Sweden. An extraordinary 190,000 refugees are now expected to arrive in Sweden this year - double what the agency expected at the start of the year, and more people than live in Uppsala, the country's fourth largest city. If the predictions are correct, Sweden will take 20,000 asylum applications per million people in 2015, double the rate even of Germany. The strain is beginning to show everywhere from politics - where the anti-immigrant Sweden Democrats are, according to two of the country's eight main polls, now the party with the most support - to finance, where both the central government and municipalities are struggling to find savings to cover the costs. https://www.dw.com/en/sweden-hits-refugee-crisis-zero-hour/a-18863702 https://www.dw.com/en/sweden-hits-refugee-crisis-zero-hour/a...
- sol_remmy2 8y ago
  If you look at immigration rates over the past 50 years, the US comes far far ahead. The US look a majority of its immigrants in the 90s and early 2000s, while Sweden took near-zero immigrants until 10 years ago. Additionally, many Western European 'immigrants' are actually just people moving between different Western European countries.
  - tziki 8y ago
    You're so far off it's not even funny.
    - sol_remmy2 8y ago
      Sorry mate, do your research next time
- panzagl 8y ago
  That link shows that the US took in twice as many immigrants as the entire EU. Per capita doesn't mean much at this scale- the 5 million the US took the year before don't magically become middle class taxpayers just because a year has passed.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
Daishiman 8y ago
This is completely false.
moorhosj 8y ago
==solely middle-class country== Isn't it possible that the reason their middle-class is so large is due in some part on political decisions they've made? I think it is at least worth exploring before we jump to the ethnic breakdown of the country. Political choices are something we can change relatively quickly compared to demographics. The US has a higher GDP per capita than Sweden and Denmark which implies that there is more money to spread around even with a comparatively large immigrant population.
- AndrewKemendo 8y ago
  Yes however the demographic diversity in the US makes it less likely for people to want to "spread it" around. If your entire country is the population of one large US metro and everyone is the same ethnicity and culture, there are fewer cognitive impediments to being empathetic at scale.
  - sharemywin 8y ago
    Personally, I believe that rich people will find a way to justify being more rich. If not they'll hire some economists from Harvard to come up with some good excuses.
  - moorhosj 8y ago
    ==everyone is the same ethnicity and culture== I think depends on how you define ethnicity and culture. Sweden foreign-born population - 17.0% [1] US foreign-born population - 13.7% [2] [1] https://nordic.businessinsider.com/swedens-foreign-born-population-is-nearly-17-million-people---finns-are-the-biggest-group-2017-3 https://nordic.businessinsider.com/swedens-foreign-born-popu... [2] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-data/u-s-foreign-born-population-swells-to-highest-in-over-a-century-idUSKCN1LT2HZ https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-data/u-s-...
    - AndrewKemendo 8y ago
      Using just the census designated measures would be a fine start. Foreign born population wouldn't begin to address diversity in the US. In Sweden it might be the case that foreign born population is the only source of ethnic diversity. Whereas in the US, the people in northern Maine live in a completely different world than the people in Southern Florida.
swarnie_ 8y ago
> Western European countries hardly take immigrants I almost died reading this blatant lie.
lkrubner 8y ago
This is wildly incorrect. Angela Merkel got in trouble precisely because she accepted so many Syrian refugees. Germany absorbed almost a million refugees in one year, which is an incredible number. On a per capital basis, that would be like the USA accepting 4 million refugees in one year, when in fact net immigration to the USA, of all forms, tends to run at about 10% to 15% of that level.
- ummonk 8y ago
  That is the point isn't it? European countries finally start catching up to the US in the size of their immigrant population, and all of a sudden you're seeing massive social upheaval and populist movements popping up everywhere.
  - mr_overalls 8y ago
    > European countries finally start catching up to the US in the size of their immigrant population, No. Several European countries have had significant foreign-born populations for a long time. https://www.statista.com/statistics/549292/foreign-born-population-of-eu/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/549292/foreign-born-popu...
    - sol_remmy2 8y ago
      Those stats count an immigrant from any neighboring Western European country as foreign born. That makes them highly misleading compared to the US. In the US, a person from a different state does not count as an immigrant.
      - moreira 8y ago
        Of course not, but a state is not a country. Germany has 16 states, for example, and the statistics don't count people from different states as immigrants. However, a person from a neighbouring country (e.g. Mexico) would count as an immigrant in the US. Just because states are massive in the US doesn't make them equivalent to different countries in Europe, which all have their own language, ethnic background, and culture. A German person moving 350 miles to Italy (from Munich to Venice) is definitely an immigrant, with a completely different background, even though the distance itself isn't even enough to go between Austin and Houston in Texas.
dmode 8y ago
Per capita basis, I believe EU countries take on more immigrants than America
- ameister14 8y ago
  I thought that was interesting, so I just checked - the EU as a whole has about 52.5 million people living in countries they were not born in (including other EU countries) and a total population of about 512 million. So that's about 10%. The US has about 44.5 million foreign born in it, with a total population of about 328 million. So that's about 13.5%. So no, the EU does not have more immigrants than the US per capita. If you remove European citizens moving to other European countries, they don't have as many immigrants by sheer number, either.
  - dmode 8y ago
    There is also a sliding scale in EU. Western European countries like Germany, France, Sweden, Netherlands, take in far more immigrants than Poland, Hungary etc. The point that triggered this whole thread was immigration is the reason America doesn't have the same quality of life as EU. Which is clearly not true, considering Germany and NL takes in very high % of immigrants. Even with your 13 vs 10% is negligible for any meaningful policy differences. US is different not because of immigration, but due to its political bent.
    - ameister14 8y ago
      It's possible that the US is different because of the length of time that immigrants have been a part of policy, though. It's funny that the US is compared to the EU; the US is more similar to and should probably be compared to Canada, India and Australia
- ThirdFoundation 8y ago
  I'm having trouble finding a more recent source, but as of 2012 that wasn't close to true. It's actually a larger gap than I expected. I'm going to keep researching to see if I can find more recent numbers. Do you happen to have a more recent source? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_net_migration_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_net_migra... __EU__ Total net migration: 2,324,066 Net migration per 1000 inhabitants: 4.60 __US__ Total net migration: 5,007,887 Net migration per 1000 inhabitants: 15.94
pjc50 8y ago
Neither side really "accepts" poor immigrants, the availability of unskilled work visas is extremely limited.
tziki 8y ago
Wow, almost every sentence in your post is at least partially wrong.
throwaway12JpuG 8y ago
I don't know about Sweden/Denmark/Norway but this is not true of the Western European country Germany. I'm an American living in Germany. It's shockingly easy to immigrate to here. It takes 5 years to get permanent residency. The process is humane and reasonable. More than half the people I work with are immigrants from all over the world. No one I've asked even considers moving to America because of the nearly non-existent social safety net, the expense of having children, the unwelcoming rhetoric about immigrants, and universally toxic experiences with American government officials (TSA, customs, etc.). That story about things are better in Europe because Europe is culturally homogeneous is not true in Germany. It's also true that there is new conflict/friction within German society because of the heterogeneity. But the presence of immigrants has not in any way made the country less "nice and comfortable". These qualities are the product of the society's belief that everyone should have a reasonable quality of life. People here make a choice to pay more taxes towards that aim and they do this because they believe in it.

svantana 8y ago

Easily disproven statement by looking at real stats [1], where most western european countries are ahead of the US. If you're suggesting those immigrants are not "poor", consider the Syrian crisis, Germany and Sweden were by far the largest takers of syrian refugees in the west, while the US hardly took any syrians at all. In fact, I read somewhere that Sweden in 2015 was the largest taker of refugees per capita from non-neighboring countries EVER. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_net_migration_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_net_migra...

at-fates-hands 8y ago
Which has led to massive issues within Sweden. An extraordinary 190,000 refugees are now expected to arrive in Sweden this year - double what the agency expected at the start of the year, and more people than live in Uppsala, the country's fourth largest city. If the predictions are correct, Sweden will take 20,000 asylum applications per million people in 2015, double the rate even of Germany. The strain is beginning to show everywhere from politics - where the anti-immigrant Sweden Democrats are, according to two of the country's eight main polls, now the party with the most support - to finance, where both the central government and municipalities are struggling to find savings to cover the costs. https://www.dw.com/en/sweden-hits-refugee-crisis-zero-hour/a-18863702 https://www.dw.com/en/sweden-hits-refugee-crisis-zero-hour/a...
sol_remmy2 8y ago
If you look at immigration rates over the past 50 years, the US comes far far ahead. The US look a majority of its immigrants in the 90s and early 2000s, while Sweden took near-zero immigrants until 10 years ago. Additionally, many Western European 'immigrants' are actually just people moving between different Western European countries.
- tziki 8y ago
  You're so far off it's not even funny.
  - sol_remmy2 8y ago
    Sorry mate, do your research next time
panzagl 8y ago
That link shows that the US took in twice as many immigrants as the entire EU. Per capita doesn't mean much at this scale- the 5 million the US took the year before don't magically become middle class taxpayers just because a year has passed.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

Daishiman 8y ago

This is completely false.

moorhosj 8y ago

==solely middle-class country== Isn't it possible that the reason their middle-class is so large is due in some part on political decisions they've made? I think it is at least worth exploring before we jump to the ethnic breakdown of the country. Political choices are something we can change relatively quickly compared to demographics. The US has a higher GDP per capita than Sweden and Denmark which implies that there is more money to spread around even with a comparatively large immigrant population.

AndrewKemendo 8y ago
Yes however the demographic diversity in the US makes it less likely for people to want to "spread it" around. If your entire country is the population of one large US metro and everyone is the same ethnicity and culture, there are fewer cognitive impediments to being empathetic at scale.
- sharemywin 8y ago
  Personally, I believe that rich people will find a way to justify being more rich. If not they'll hire some economists from Harvard to come up with some good excuses.
- moorhosj 8y ago
  ==everyone is the same ethnicity and culture== I think depends on how you define ethnicity and culture. Sweden foreign-born population - 17.0% [1] US foreign-born population - 13.7% [2] [1] https://nordic.businessinsider.com/swedens-foreign-born-population-is-nearly-17-million-people---finns-are-the-biggest-group-2017-3 https://nordic.businessinsider.com/swedens-foreign-born-popu... [2] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-data/u-s-foreign-born-population-swells-to-highest-in-over-a-century-idUSKCN1LT2HZ https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-data/u-s-...
  - AndrewKemendo 8y ago
    Using just the census designated measures would be a fine start. Foreign born population wouldn't begin to address diversity in the US. In Sweden it might be the case that foreign born population is the only source of ethnic diversity. Whereas in the US, the people in northern Maine live in a completely different world than the people in Southern Florida.

swarnie_ 8y ago

> Western European countries hardly take immigrants I almost died reading this blatant lie.

lkrubner 8y ago

This is wildly incorrect. Angela Merkel got in trouble precisely because she accepted so many Syrian refugees. Germany absorbed almost a million refugees in one year, which is an incredible number. On a per capital basis, that would be like the USA accepting 4 million refugees in one year, when in fact net immigration to the USA, of all forms, tends to run at about 10% to 15% of that level.

ummonk 8y ago
That is the point isn't it? European countries finally start catching up to the US in the size of their immigrant population, and all of a sudden you're seeing massive social upheaval and populist movements popping up everywhere.
- mr_overalls 8y ago
  > European countries finally start catching up to the US in the size of their immigrant population, No. Several European countries have had significant foreign-born populations for a long time. https://www.statista.com/statistics/549292/foreign-born-population-of-eu/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/549292/foreign-born-popu...
  - sol_remmy2 8y ago
    Those stats count an immigrant from any neighboring Western European country as foreign born. That makes them highly misleading compared to the US. In the US, a person from a different state does not count as an immigrant.
    - moreira 8y ago
      Of course not, but a state is not a country. Germany has 16 states, for example, and the statistics don't count people from different states as immigrants. However, a person from a neighbouring country (e.g. Mexico) would count as an immigrant in the US. Just because states are massive in the US doesn't make them equivalent to different countries in Europe, which all have their own language, ethnic background, and culture. A German person moving 350 miles to Italy (from Munich to Venice) is definitely an immigrant, with a completely different background, even though the distance itself isn't even enough to go between Austin and Houston in Texas.

dmode 8y ago

Per capita basis, I believe EU countries take on more immigrants than America

ameister14 8y ago
I thought that was interesting, so I just checked - the EU as a whole has about 52.5 million people living in countries they were not born in (including other EU countries) and a total population of about 512 million. So that's about 10%. The US has about 44.5 million foreign born in it, with a total population of about 328 million. So that's about 13.5%. So no, the EU does not have more immigrants than the US per capita. If you remove European citizens moving to other European countries, they don't have as many immigrants by sheer number, either.
- dmode 8y ago
  There is also a sliding scale in EU. Western European countries like Germany, France, Sweden, Netherlands, take in far more immigrants than Poland, Hungary etc. The point that triggered this whole thread was immigration is the reason America doesn't have the same quality of life as EU. Which is clearly not true, considering Germany and NL takes in very high % of immigrants. Even with your 13 vs 10% is negligible for any meaningful policy differences. US is different not because of immigration, but due to its political bent.
  - ameister14 8y ago
    It's possible that the US is different because of the length of time that immigrants have been a part of policy, though. It's funny that the US is compared to the EU; the US is more similar to and should probably be compared to Canada, India and Australia
ThirdFoundation 8y ago
I'm having trouble finding a more recent source, but as of 2012 that wasn't close to true. It's actually a larger gap than I expected. I'm going to keep researching to see if I can find more recent numbers. Do you happen to have a more recent source? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_net_migration_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_net_migra... __EU__ Total net migration: 2,324,066 Net migration per 1000 inhabitants: 4.60 __US__ Total net migration: 5,007,887 Net migration per 1000 inhabitants: 15.94

pjc50 8y ago

Neither side really "accepts" poor immigrants, the availability of unskilled work visas is extremely limited.

tziki 8y ago

Wow, almost every sentence in your post is at least partially wrong.

throwaway12JpuG 8y ago

I don't know about Sweden/Denmark/Norway but this is not true of the Western European country Germany. I'm an American living in Germany. It's shockingly easy to immigrate to here. It takes 5 years to get permanent residency. The process is humane and reasonable. More than half the people I work with are immigrants from all over the world. No one I've asked even considers moving to America because of the nearly non-existent social safety net, the expense of having children, the unwelcoming rhetoric about immigrants, and universally toxic experiences with American government officials (TSA, customs, etc.). That story about things are better in Europe because Europe is culturally homogeneous is not true in Germany. It's also true that there is new conflict/friction within German society because of the heterogeneity. But the presence of immigrants has not in any way made the country less "nice and comfortable". These qualities are the product of the society's belief that everyone should have a reasonable quality of life. People here make a choice to pay more taxes towards that aim and they do this because they believe in it.