5 ms·

We need immigration; the way it is done is the question. I was raised in a very mixed society and always had and have good friends of all sides but those were a

We need immigration; the way it is done is the question. I was raised in a very mixed society and always had and have good friends of all sides but those were all 2nd+ generation immigrants if from Africa, Middle East, China. Never saw the difference with myself and they for many things did not either. But a first gen I can understand is very delicate, but we do need them... so better find a way. My roommate at uni was an Iranian girl studying law and she was very smart and nice and very western; one day she went away visited her family in Iran and after a while the landlord called where the rent was. Never heard of her again... there is that...

inglor_cz 5y ago
Every society has an absorption capacity. For Germany, absorbing 1000 random people yearly is an easy task. A million that came in 2015 was already quite a challenge. Ten million coming in a year would overwhelm even Germany. (But that is a theoretical scenario; in practice, they wouldn't get there, because Germany is pretty far from the Middle East and the border countries like Greece, Turkey and Italy would sink into complete chaos if tens of millions really came.)
- tluyben2 5y ago
  Agreed, but we need a certain influx we can handle and we should handle. More is... a problem. And a problem we need to solve as a world. Most of this is very complicated and geopolitical going back a long time. We are just trying to put out the fires (and without water, literally in this case).
  - joelbluminator 5y ago
    Who says if and how many "we" need? No one seems to be asking the actual people living there (e.g European), it's all arbitrary decisions made by Germany or some E.U council. Last time we actually asked the people in a referendum what they want (Brexit) we were all surprised. Let's not assume we know what the majority wants.
    - tluyben2 5y ago
      But why would one ask the people this directly? This is more complex. Asking the people will get you populist reactions and that was not surprising. More surprising how close it was to people who were not just 'against everything' but lost. The majority does not to die in a ditch (let's assume) so the chosen gov is supposed to prevent that. I do not know of other ways, currently in the EU, than work per hour and that needs people and our workforce is declining without immigration.
      - joelbluminator 5y ago
        Why not ask the people this directly? It's a major decision with real impact on the region. Also, there is a growing resentment among people that the EU leaders don't really pay any attention to the problems the average joe is facing on his daily life. You know stuff like job security, house prices, gasoline prices and all that has really deteriorated in most places. Instead they see their bills go up because of green energy transition. Many people no longer feel like the system is working for them (see this great article https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-how-capitalism-needs-reformed-parts-1-2-ray-dalio/ https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-how-capitalism-needs-refo...) If the EU continues "not to ask" them because it is "complex" the resentment will only grow.
        tluyben2 5y ago
        Well, in most countries here so far the democracy works through elected parties. So sure you can have your vote but what follows is determined by the parties which you voted for. We can only try and see what happens but direct people voting in referenda has a strong immediate feedback response which does not take into account anything that is actually happening as most people only hear what they read only on their favorite channels online (which can be 100% fake). It is a snapshot of the now: as has been shown after that many Brits would have not voted brexit if they were fully aware of all the (mis)information. This has nothing to do with calling people stupid or ignorant; it has to do with some powers that be being very clever getting information out people act on and the EU rulers, so far as incredibly bad at this. They seem to be incapable of explaining long term benefits or what is happening at all to all the populous. This is a big problem. But even if it would be solved; the channels to reach are vast and diversified so if you just ask people to respond immediately, they will and you will get a very skewed look. And yes, agreed, there is a lot wrong but a lot of it is also miscommunication or actually no communication from the German and Brussels towers. That is wrong but asking 'Joe on the street' about immigration, I can predict their answers based on who you ask, even if this is not in their best interest. I cannot see how this will win anything; it will surely break up the EU, which could be good in some universe, but yeah, it was not great before the EU (to say it mildly) for many member states, so what data do we have things would improve? People have never experienced this prosperity: I cannot see, unless directly asked in a moment of angry 'took ma jubbbbs', how anyone besides Germany or France would benefit from leaving and they do not want to.
wisethrowaway 5y ago
"We need immigration;" No, we don't. This is a mantra that keeps being repeated without much substance. Housing affordability, job quality, public finance sustainability won't get any better with immigration. Maybe salaries keep being depressed, consumer demand increases, and that's good for profits. But I can't think of much more!
- tluyben2 5y ago
  We are not making enough babies in the EU ourselves to take care of the elderly... so yes we do. Or we need some other revolution that does not depend on work per hour. We already here are doing our best, not really successfully, to get the ultra rich to chime in and to get foreign companies to pay more than peanuts. Also the AI overlords are, in all practical ways, very far away (and mostly benefitting the very rich).
  - wisethrowaway 5y ago
    I don't think it's a major issue to take care of the elderly. If anything we need to take care of the young! Pensions are very high in Europe, salaries stagnant, the elderly are property owners while the young are not. Enough of cheap fallacies!
    - tluyben2 5y ago
      You are talking populist millennial vs baby boomer (I am not) but I am referring to existentialist issues for people over 50 now and in the future while you are talking the happy few %. When people like you or me are elderly, this will look like a shitshow if we do not fix this, is the point.
      - wisethrowaway 5y ago
        I think the only way for Europe to become a shitshow is by continuing to add immigration. In Japan 40% of population is over 65. It's extreme case of aging. Yet they are doing perfectly fine with virtually zero immigration.
geraneum 5y ago
Not trying to defend someone I don’t know, but I know a lot of students get a single entry visa and being from Iran, there’s a chance that she couldn’t either get out or was denied entry. It’s just a possibility among other possible scenarios of course. Edit: My assumption was that you’re talking about US, if that’s not the case then I could be wrong.
coldtea 5y ago
>We need immigration Who is this "we"?

inglor_cz 5y ago

Every society has an absorption capacity. For Germany, absorbing 1000 random people yearly is an easy task. A million that came in 2015 was already quite a challenge. Ten million coming in a year would overwhelm even Germany. (But that is a theoretical scenario; in practice, they wouldn't get there, because Germany is pretty far from the Middle East and the border countries like Greece, Turkey and Italy would sink into complete chaos if tens of millions really came.)

tluyben2 5y ago
Agreed, but we need a certain influx we can handle and we should handle. More is... a problem. And a problem we need to solve as a world. Most of this is very complicated and geopolitical going back a long time. We are just trying to put out the fires (and without water, literally in this case).
- joelbluminator 5y ago
  Who says if and how many "we" need? No one seems to be asking the actual people living there (e.g European), it's all arbitrary decisions made by Germany or some E.U council. Last time we actually asked the people in a referendum what they want (Brexit) we were all surprised. Let's not assume we know what the majority wants.
  - tluyben2 5y ago
    But why would one ask the people this directly? This is more complex. Asking the people will get you populist reactions and that was not surprising. More surprising how close it was to people who were not just 'against everything' but lost. The majority does not to die in a ditch (let's assume) so the chosen gov is supposed to prevent that. I do not know of other ways, currently in the EU, than work per hour and that needs people and our workforce is declining without immigration.
    - joelbluminator 5y ago
      Why not ask the people this directly? It's a major decision with real impact on the region. Also, there is a growing resentment among people that the EU leaders don't really pay any attention to the problems the average joe is facing on his daily life. You know stuff like job security, house prices, gasoline prices and all that has really deteriorated in most places. Instead they see their bills go up because of green energy transition. Many people no longer feel like the system is working for them (see this great article https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-how-capitalism-needs-reformed-parts-1-2-ray-dalio/ https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-how-capitalism-needs-refo...) If the EU continues "not to ask" them because it is "complex" the resentment will only grow.
      - tluyben2 5y ago
        Well, in most countries here so far the democracy works through elected parties. So sure you can have your vote but what follows is determined by the parties which you voted for. We can only try and see what happens but direct people voting in referenda has a strong immediate feedback response which does not take into account anything that is actually happening as most people only hear what they read only on their favorite channels online (which can be 100% fake). It is a snapshot of the now: as has been shown after that many Brits would have not voted brexit if they were fully aware of all the (mis)information. This has nothing to do with calling people stupid or ignorant; it has to do with some powers that be being very clever getting information out people act on and the EU rulers, so far as incredibly bad at this. They seem to be incapable of explaining long term benefits or what is happening at all to all the populous. This is a big problem. But even if it would be solved; the channels to reach are vast and diversified so if you just ask people to respond immediately, they will and you will get a very skewed look. And yes, agreed, there is a lot wrong but a lot of it is also miscommunication or actually no communication from the German and Brussels towers. That is wrong but asking 'Joe on the street' about immigration, I can predict their answers based on who you ask, even if this is not in their best interest. I cannot see how this will win anything; it will surely break up the EU, which could be good in some universe, but yeah, it was not great before the EU (to say it mildly) for many member states, so what data do we have things would improve? People have never experienced this prosperity: I cannot see, unless directly asked in a moment of angry 'took ma jubbbbs', how anyone besides Germany or France would benefit from leaving and they do not want to.

wisethrowaway 5y ago

"We need immigration;" No, we don't. This is a mantra that keeps being repeated without much substance. Housing affordability, job quality, public finance sustainability won't get any better with immigration. Maybe salaries keep being depressed, consumer demand increases, and that's good for profits. But I can't think of much more!

tluyben2 5y ago
We are not making enough babies in the EU ourselves to take care of the elderly... so yes we do. Or we need some other revolution that does not depend on work per hour. We already here are doing our best, not really successfully, to get the ultra rich to chime in and to get foreign companies to pay more than peanuts. Also the AI overlords are, in all practical ways, very far away (and mostly benefitting the very rich).
- wisethrowaway 5y ago
  I don't think it's a major issue to take care of the elderly. If anything we need to take care of the young! Pensions are very high in Europe, salaries stagnant, the elderly are property owners while the young are not. Enough of cheap fallacies!
  - tluyben2 5y ago
    You are talking populist millennial vs baby boomer (I am not) but I am referring to existentialist issues for people over 50 now and in the future while you are talking the happy few %. When people like you or me are elderly, this will look like a shitshow if we do not fix this, is the point.
    - wisethrowaway 5y ago
      I think the only way for Europe to become a shitshow is by continuing to add immigration. In Japan 40% of population is over 65. It's extreme case of aging. Yet they are doing perfectly fine with virtually zero immigration.

geraneum 5y ago

Not trying to defend someone I don’t know, but I know a lot of students get a single entry visa and being from Iran, there’s a chance that she couldn’t either get out or was denied entry. It’s just a possibility among other possible scenarios of course. Edit: My assumption was that you’re talking about US, if that’s not the case then I could be wrong.

coldtea 5y ago

>We need immigration Who is this "we"?