3 ms·

Yeah, I have to imagine an expression of disbelief here. No EU country has control over immigration or trade. EU citizens can move anywhere they want in europe

Yeah, I have to imagine an expression of disbelief here. No EU country has control over immigration or trade. EU citizens can move anywhere they want in europe, EU companies can trade anywhere they want in europe. That's the point. If I were the only person of a certain view, and being told something so absurd by a group of people, in earnest, my face would drop too.

skissane 3y ago
> No EU country has control over immigration EU countries have lots of control over immigration. Each gets to decide its immigration levels from outside the EU (to be technical, outside the EEA+Switzerland), and which of those immigrants it wants under what terms The EU only controls intra-EU immigration and some aspects of asylum/refugee policy. Rest-of-world immigration remains a national competency in which the EU has very little say. Same is true for nationality and citizenship
- amadeuspagel 3y ago
  Yes, EU countries can refuse to allow someone to immigrate if every single other EU country refuses too. Lots of control.
  - skissane 3y ago
    A person who immigrates to one EU country does not immediately gain access to others. To gain EU freedom of movement rights, they have to either be naturalised as a citizen (and member states have immense freedom to decide the requirements for that–the shortest is 5 years, same as the UK, and some of those states are talking about increasing it), or else they have to apply for EU long-term residence status. EU long-term residence status requires five years legal residence in an EU member state, with exclusions for students and seasonal workers, and member states are allowed to reject applications on various grounds (such as national security). Until an immigrant acquires either citizenship or long-term residence status, their right to work in one EU country is not transferrable to any other. Also, Denmark and Ireland have opt-outs from long-term residence, and the UK did too prior to Brexit, so it does not apply to them.
    - amadeuspagel 3y ago
      This is not control. It entirely depends on the decisions of other EU members.
      - skissane 3y ago
        Indirect immigration via other EU member states has always been rather small, making this "control" of rather limited practical relevance.
        synecdoche 3y ago
        Uncontrolled immigration to Sweden in 2015 was anything but “rather small”, so that claim is in my opinion not true.
        skissane 3y ago
        That wasn’t an example of what I was calling “rather small” - people who become citizens of one EU state in order to gain the right to emigrate to another which they were refused permission to emigrate to directly. What happened in 2015 was Sweden’s own decision, not something forced on Sweden by the EU. If Sweden had chosen to take a hardline anti-refugee position - as some other member states did - the EU would have been powerless to prevent it. In fact, I think your response is a classic example of the phenomenon in which people wrongly blame the EU for the free choices of its member state governments. Sweden chose to welcome refugees even when EU law granted it the legal right to expel them instead

skissane 3y ago

> No EU country has control over immigration EU countries have lots of control over immigration. Each gets to decide its immigration levels from outside the EU (to be technical, outside the EEA+Switzerland), and which of those immigrants it wants under what terms The EU only controls intra-EU immigration and some aspects of asylum/refugee policy. Rest-of-world immigration remains a national competency in which the EU has very little say. Same is true for nationality and citizenship

amadeuspagel 3y ago
Yes, EU countries can refuse to allow someone to immigrate if every single other EU country refuses too. Lots of control.
- skissane 3y ago
  A person who immigrates to one EU country does not immediately gain access to others. To gain EU freedom of movement rights, they have to either be naturalised as a citizen (and member states have immense freedom to decide the requirements for that–the shortest is 5 years, same as the UK, and some of those states are talking about increasing it), or else they have to apply for EU long-term residence status. EU long-term residence status requires five years legal residence in an EU member state, with exclusions for students and seasonal workers, and member states are allowed to reject applications on various grounds (such as national security). Until an immigrant acquires either citizenship or long-term residence status, their right to work in one EU country is not transferrable to any other. Also, Denmark and Ireland have opt-outs from long-term residence, and the UK did too prior to Brexit, so it does not apply to them.
  - amadeuspagel 3y ago
    This is not control. It entirely depends on the decisions of other EU members.
    - skissane 3y ago
      Indirect immigration via other EU member states has always been rather small, making this "control" of rather limited practical relevance.
      - synecdoche 3y ago
        Uncontrolled immigration to Sweden in 2015 was anything but “rather small”, so that claim is in my opinion not true.
        skissane 3y ago
        That wasn’t an example of what I was calling “rather small” - people who become citizens of one EU state in order to gain the right to emigrate to another which they were refused permission to emigrate to directly. What happened in 2015 was Sweden’s own decision, not something forced on Sweden by the EU. If Sweden had chosen to take a hardline anti-refugee position - as some other member states did - the EU would have been powerless to prevent it. In fact, I think your response is a classic example of the phenomenon in which people wrongly blame the EU for the free choices of its member state governments. Sweden chose to welcome refugees even when EU law granted it the legal right to expel them instead