3 ms·
It’s the reverse, the burden is definitive and ever growing. A large group of immigrants allow them to keep themselves in a cultural bubble, build a parallel ec
by tasogare 6y ago
It’s the reverse, the burden is definitive and ever growing. A large group of immigrants allow them to keep themselves in a cultural bubble, build a parallel economy (and society, actually), occupy some part of cities and setup political parties. Source: I’m French, and I quit my country in part for this reason.
- ECA_stax 6y agoJ'ai quitte mon pays... J'ai quitte ma maison.... ma ville... ma triste ville
- blocked_again 6y agoSo you emigrated to another country because people were immigrating to your country and immigration is bad? Is this sarcasm?
- champagneben 6y agoSeems to me that they immigrated to another country because of a specific type of cultural phenomenon that was happening in their country of origin resulting from immigration. Maybe the same type of phenomenon is not happening in their country of choice? Doesn't seem sarcastic at all.
- blocked_again 6y agoSure. The thread is about how immigration is beneficial to countries in long term. It was the OP who came up with the example of France to say that is not true. > It’s the reverse, the burden is definitive and ever growing. So there are two possibilities * The French example is one of the very few exceptions -> This means the point OP is trying to make is kind of useless. Exceptions are present in almost all the theories. * French example is what will happen in all most all the countries -> In that case OP's point becomes just ironic.